.com Forum · Alpha Dog Forum

I've read the detailed posts about color in the American Cocker Spaniel forum and I'm afraid I simply don't understand it.

Specifically, I was wondering if someone might answer a question I have about Field Spaniel colors. Is it possible to breed Liver Tri, Black Tri, Liver Bi, or Black Tri with a sire who is not one of those colors?

https://www.showdog.com/breeds/genetics.aspx?breed=Field+Spaniel

Field spaniels: Yes, both genes are recessive to solid. So for partis, you want each parent to carry parti (best way to get is to breed parti to solid to parti to solid, etc.) For tris, you want both parti and tanpoint carried.

American Cocker color genes were crafted by Silhouette Poms (might be Hazygate, don't remember what she went by here) and she was very into dog color genes. The genes allow for both recessive and dominant black, which is the screwiest part of it, though all modern SOP cockers are likely recessive black.

So the black ones and black partis must be aakk, where K > k, and AY > at > a.

-----
Last edited by residential on 9/9/2020 2:30:12 PM

"American Cocker color genes were crafted by Silhouette Poms (might be Hazygate, don't remember what she went by here) and she was very into dog color genes."

Did she do a lot of the colors for different breeds? I'm really curious as to who decided what colors to add to a breed. In my breed, Bostons, there are colors that do not and never have been in the breed(unless mixed with a different breed for designer dogs). Now our breed is all f***** up because of these weird colors and pigments.

I mean, why the heck not just add Black to Golden Retrievers and Silver to Labradors?

The people active in the breed at the time genes were added got to pick the colors in the breeds.

Some breeds wanted the "disqualified colors" in the breed because they have historically been in the breed. Dilute and liver German Shepherds, for example. Other breeds wanted to distinguish between the "legal" versions of a color and the non-legal (such as double merle). Others had no choice but to include many DQ colors in order to make the genes work right (Great Danes.) For the most part, disqualified colors were added so the breed had some variety, especially since many breeds were adding 50+ color combinations.

I know Liz (Silhouette) did Pomeranians and Chinese Cresteds as well.

Edit: I looked at Bostons, and from what I've read about the breed, all of those genes have historically popped up in the breed on occasion, even in well-bred lines. They have dominant black, which can cover up many different genes, and all of those genes are recessive.

-----
Last edited by residential on 9/9/2020 8:26:43 PM

-----
Last edited by residential on 9/9/2020 8:27:28 PM

I've been dabbling a bit with Bostons (my second time) and also find it a bit "annoying" that the illegal colours have been dominating the breed. They may appear in the real life breed but main stream breeders would consider them as off-colour and would select against them thus making them rare.

Now based on observations I have made in numerous breeds on ShowDog, as well as in ShowHorse, there seems to be a bias in the breeding engine that favours the higher trait values with more recessive colours. I don't think it is on purpose but where the breeders in general have disregarded colour and selected only on traits, the recessive colours have gradually tended to dominate the breed. The judging pays no attention to colour either so there is no stigma to illegal colours.

Now this is just speculation on my part. I suspect that there is a numeric base to the colour genetics as well as the traits and the breeding engine favours an overall median value so that if the numeric traits come out a little on the higher side, the colour traits tend to come out a little lower (i.e. recessive) to maintain the median, or vice versa.

I'm not sure if I worded that well or if I am completely off-base with that analysis but that's what I think is sort of happening. Unless the breeders make a point of considering colour, the recessive colours will float to the top as we select for higher trait values.

You posted to the American cocker forum too and I have answered your question there in more specific terms.

The blacks in real life American Cockers in my experience seem to be of the dominant K type. This also appears to be generally true on SD but apart from my own I've never really checked.

In real life, I'd guess that most dogs are actually at/at - except for the sable lines. The blacks are at/at,K/?, the black&tans are at/at,ky/ky. The sables would be ay/?,ky/ky.

In my limited experience (two black dogs, 4 black and tan, 1 red-gold) the apparent blacks, as they age start to show tan hairs under the ears and between the toes, sometimes under the tail and sometimes a few tan hairs in the eyebrow spots. It's interesting to see it happening, starting perhaps around 5 or 6 years the tan points start asserting themselves - lol. It's not obvious but you see those tan hairs when you are grooming them.

When colors were introduced, we had been breeding for several years without. What Admin did was assign a percentage to each color, and then populate colors randomly on all starters, and perform the breedings down the line. For some breeds, this meant that a very popular stud in generation 4 or 5 was visible for a disqualified gene, and as a result the trait became locked in.

Putting recessive black in cockers only kind of makes sense, I’m not sure it exists in the breed but I do have anecdotal (pre dna testing) evidence of it existing in other sporting breeds.

I do agree that the recessive black probably does exist in the Am Cocker breed - it was possibly the more prevalent back in the 20's and 30's - and so it is reasonable that it be included.

I have some that by test breeding are known to be a/a blacks but they are not very good.
eg.: https://www.showdog.com/dog.aspx?id=17092274

Most black sporting breeds are tanpoint in the A locus. We know all of the retrievers are. I think sable exists in Labs and Goldens as well because I've heard several stories of rare blacks in yellow litters, and they always seem to be fox red or dark gold parents (which sable would make sense).

Some of the color genetics are off in some breeds. Perhaps it was done by someone who didn't know how they worked in the breed. For example, a "red" dog in one breed might be a clear red with black pigment, but might actually be liver in another. I don't think Jeff would be up to changing any of them at this point.

Yes and poor Weimeraners only got one colour!

They actually have two - they are all d/d but can be B/? or b/b.

The d/d,B/? makes them them a "blue-grey" similar to a blue Dane or Dobie. When d/d,b/b they are a paler kind of Taupe colour.

Colour may not be a big deal to some but having limited colours does seem to impact popularity.

Some breeds may have had few if any players so they may have been assigned colours by a "volunteer" who had not vested interest in the breed and/or in depth colour knowledge. It would be nice to be able to have a re-do for some breeds but but probably won't happen.