Leg marking placement in foals?
A friend of mine wants a horse that looks like Trigger (deep palomino, wide blaze, four stockings). She has a palomino mare, mind you she is not quite "deep" palomino, but she's definitely palomino. A friend of mine has a deep gold palomino stud with 2 white stockings on his hind legs and a wide blaze. A recent foal of his (out of a palomino mare with no stockings and a thin blaze) has markings just like his. 2 white stockings on the hind legs, a wide blaze... Here's my question. Is the placement of the stockings/socks on the stud/dam hereditary? For example; a stud with one white stocking on his front left leg producing a foal with the same marking in the same place? What would be the chances of a stud with 2 stockings producing a foal with 4 when the mare has none?
No, white markings are not hereditary. One example is the clone of some famous jumper or something, that had white leg markings, and in the cloned foal, the leg markings were not the same. Obviously you have a better chance of getting white if you breed to a horse that has extensive white, high white stockings, big blaze ect., but even then, you can often get a foal with no white. Sometimes you will find a stallion or mare, and they will have an offspring that is almost an identical copy, but it is still a random occurance. I would highly recommend that you read "Horse Color Explained" by Jeanette Grower. Great book, good explanations on hereditary color.
^yes that was Gem Twist! But the only thing with him is that he is grey so the foal greyed out anyway so you cant see the markings!
Smart Little Lena was also cloned (him at the top, clones at the bottom)
Really, the only way to get certain markings in a baby is to buy one that is already born with those markings.
Cool, couldn't remember the name, just know that they had cloned a couple of horses, and the leg markings and facial markings were different. So thanks for reminding me of the name.
Not to mention, getting a palomino isn't even certain. You could end up with a cremello, sorrel/chestnut, or palomino.
Just.. gah. Breeding for color only is a huge, huge pet peeve of mine. The goal of breeding should ALWAYS be to produce quality.
I honestly have to say that one of the things I like about the horse color book is that she does stress about breeding for quality first, color secondary. But it does give you a lot of cool information about colors and coat patterns.
Yes, tell her to buy a horse that matches her requirements. It's not guarenteed the foal will be born the way she wants it too look. Agreed with Haley, never breed for color.
White markings aren't hereditary? These are pictures of some of my gelding Scotch's ancestors:
Their markings are all so similar, I just assumed that markings could be passed down from parent to offspring. When I worked at the TB breeding farm, many of the foals had similar markings to the sire and dam. How could this be if it is not hereditary?
I think it's very cool to learn about genetics and coat colors but actually doing it in the real world seems so silly to me to even consider.
If you want particular traits, buy a baby on the ground who is has not only already arrived healthy and safe but you can realistically be more "picky"
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:02 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.