Question on colors

[GeeRome]

The Merle gene (PMEL17) is not a dilution gene in the same sense that the D locus (Melanophilin) is. True, PMEL17 dilutes SOME hairs, but since it is a codominant trait it does not dilute all hairs. So a cryptic merle dog that is dark sable, would appear just as a non-merle dark sable would. The mere presence of the merle mutation in a particular dog does not mean that every hair will be diluted.

 

[Narmowen]

I beg to differ. If she were a sable merle, even tri factored, she would be a lighter color as the merle gene is a dilution gene (the amount of merling doesn't matter) therefore if she were a cryptic tri factored sable merle, she would be much closer to a darker sable color...not the BLACK color that is pictured. Also, if she were a sable in any sense, she would not have the tan points on her face as shown in the photo that she has with the puppies.

These parents could not have produced these puppies.

I never said that they could produce the puppies. I've actually said otherwise. I've also said that she's a tri-color (or a cryptic merle) so I don't know why you're arguing that.

Here is a great photo of a dark mahogany sable showing the solid sable face (even though the coat is almost black) and the tri color with the tan points below it:

http://www.laureate.ca/sheltiecolours.html

You can also read below where they say (and show) a sable merle that is a lighter color due to the merle gene. I agree that some sables show almost no merling, however they still can't be a darker color with the dilution gene.

Why couldn't they be a darker color? Merling doesn't usually affect the whole body. If it did, then how do you explain cryptic merles? (at/at m/M but appearing tri-color.)

The merling does NOT affect the whole body, therefore it could still be a merle and NOT show any visible signs.

http://www.norcalshelties.org/SheltieColors/bluemerle.html Good picture of a cryptic merle.

http://www.cvm.tamu.edu/cgr/merle.htm

Wonderful picture of what appears to be a tri-factored sheltie (mahogony sheltie), which is actually a cryptic sable merle.

I know what colors there are and what they can produce. You'd know that if you read any of my posts. I'm very solid on my Sheltie colors-better than many that I've met.

 

[Narmowen]

The chocolate puppy is a sable and white puppy. Tri factored. The others seem to be sable merle and blue merle (all double merles, or a variation of a color headed white).

Somethings not adding up. With her and him, all you should have gotten were blue merles, bi blues or tri-colors. If she were a crytic merle, you could have gotten the double merles. She's definitely a tri-color (to me, she could still be a cryptic merle, but that wouldn't explain the sable and white.) If they're color headed white (or parti color, which is still due to the white factored gene), that would come from both parents carrying it. But that wouldn't explain why they are sable and whites. Unless she's an extremely dark tri-factored sable...which it doesn't appear to me...

I'm guessing that he's not the sire of this litter.

I beg to differ. If she were a sable merle, even tri factored, she would be a lighter color as the merle gene is a dilution gene (the amount of merling doesn't matter) therefore if she were a cryptic tri factored sable merle, she would be much closer to a darker sable color...not the BLACK color that is pictured. Also, if she were a sable in any sense, she would not have the tan points on her face as shown in the photo that she has with the puppies.

These parents could not have produced these puppies.

Here is a great photo of a dark mahogany sable showing the solid sable face (even though the coat is almost black) and the tri color with the tan points below it:

http://www.laureate.ca/sheltiecolours.html

You can also read below where they say (and show) a sable merle that is a lighter color due to the merle gene. I agree that some sables show almost no merling, however they still can't be a darker color with the dilution gene.

There, now you can see that I said that she was a tri-color (or cryptic merle). The first couple of posts were before the picture was up, and the rest of my posts are theory, what-if's, and just plain questioning things.

 

[Narmowen]

N you are too too good with this. When I ever buy another pup (I mean this) I am going to have you go to the site where this pup is. Tris are easy, pure sables are easy, but the rest of this is like to me.

I just saw this! Thank you! It's taken me many years, and much studying (lately thanks to GeeRome, for explaining exactly how the genes are laid out!) to get me this far! (That and an understanding of equine coat colors, which are related-the horse color of Silver is produced by the same gene that produces Merle in dogs!)

 

[Crestlynn]

The Merle gene (PMEL17) is not a dilution gene in the same sense that the D locus (Melanophilin) is. True, PMEL17 dilutes SOME hairs, but since it is a codominant trait it does not dilute all hairs. So a cryptic merle dog that is dark sable, would appear just as a non-merle dark sable would. The mere presence of the merle mutation in a particular dog does not mean that every hair will be diluted.

Yes, not every hair would be diluted but since a true cryptic merle (where it is totally hidden, only proven by DNA) is very rare, most of what we think of cryptics are actually what should be known as a self-colored with not enough merling.

However, with the particular dog in question, not only is she a true black color, she has a black face with tan points indicative of a tri color. Even the darkest sable, cryptic or not, would still have the well known sable face

 

[Crestlynn]

I know what colors there are and what they can produce. You'd know that if you read any of my posts. I'm very solid on my Sheltie colors-better than many that I've met.

I'm not arguing with you per se, just saying that the original poster couldn't have had these puppies with these parents (isn't that was this post was about???). So, in a sense, was agreeing with you.

And, yes, had the dog been a cryptic sable merle COULD produce the pups but since she is clearly a tri could not have. That is the only point I was trying to make!

 

[Narmowen]

Yes, not every hair would be diluted but since a true cryptic merle (where it is totally hidden, only proven by DNA) is very rare, most of what we think of cryptics are actually what should be known as a self-colored with not enough merling.

However, with the particular dog in question, not only is she a true black color, she has a black face with tan points indicative of a tri color. Even the darkest sable, cryptic or not, would still have the well known sable face

Then we're on the same page, and good! I do think that she's a cryptic merle, though. GeeRome pointed out (in a PM, I believe) that she could be merled underneath her natural white, so it wouldn't show. Just a possibility!

I'm not arguing with you per se, just saying that the original poster couldn't have had these puppies with these parents (isn't that was this post was about???). So, in a sense, was agreeing with you.

And, yes, had the dog been a cryptic sable merle COULD produce the pups but since she is clearly a tri could not have. That is the only point I was trying to make!

And a new theory:

The female and male ARE the real parents. What's going on is that one of them is a chimera (basically, two separate sets of DNA in one dog). If it's the bitch (or dog), one side of the reproductive organs could be from a sable merle. The other side could be from the other color.

If that's what's happened, (say it's the female), the eggs that were released were from the sable merle side, the puppies could be sable merles, double sable merles etc.

It wouldn't show on the outside of the dog if just one (or even several) organs were involved. The outside of the dog would appear to be normal, while the inside would be a mish-mash of two dogs.

If that's what it is (and if tested, the puppies wouldn't match one of the parents, because the testing is from hair or saliva), then here's the color combinations:

If the female is a tri color (bi factored): at/a = can produce bi's & tri's and (being the chimeric organ) sable merle: ay/a M/m = can produce sables, merles or bi's
And the sire is a bi-blue: a/a M/m = can produce bi's & merles

Then you could get all of the puppies colors. The sables would be a result of the ay/a and M/m or M/M. The first litter would have been a result of the other organ (which has the DNA of the tri-color) releasing eggs.

Not very usual-very unusual, actually. But it happens in people, and horses (that's where part of the brindle horses happen.)

 

[mcguiregirl2248]

OMG, I'm so confused! I read the thread when there are new posts and everytime I think that I'm so glad that I'm not a breeder! I'm glad you guys know about these things!

 

[Lahree]

OMG, I'm so confused! I read the thread when there are new posts and everytime I think that I'm so glad that I'm not a breeder! I'm glad you guys know about these things!

Yeah, this is me: "I'll take the pretty one." I don't know how it got to be the color it is, I just like it.

 

[jazzyfizzle]

I thought Deb had bought a sable male, or was planning to. Deb?