Kind of white/ish

[Nazarach]

I formerly discussed her dam and got her explained as Classic Champagne Pearl w/ Blanket and Snowflakes
(E_ a/a Ch/n prl/prl Lp/lp t/N?)
Shizuka


Now she threw a foal

Dark Snow

that seems nearly her copy, but it can't be double pearl as well, is she likely to be Smoky Classic Champagne Pearl w/ Snowflakes (E_ a/a Ch/n Cr/prl Lp/lp t/t?) or something else?

I really like this color as it is a more realistic "white" in my opinion than those pure whites with double cream something, so knowing her correct gen-coding will help getting others I hope ^^

[BlackOak2]

I formerly discussed her dam and got her explained as Classic Champagne Pearl w/ Blanket and Snowflakes
(E_ a/a Ch/n prl/prl Lp/lp t/N?)

Now she threw a foal

that seems nearly her copy, but it can't be double pearl as well, is she likely to be Smoky Classic Champagne Pearl w/ Snowflakes (E_ a/a Ch/n Cr/prl Lp/lp t/t?) or something else?

I really like this color as it is a more realistic "white" in my opinion than those pure whites with double cream something, so knowing her correct gen-coding will help getting others I hope ^^

I agree that Shizuka does appear to be a double pearl and may in fact also carry a single tiger eye. The problem is the sire. A buckskin cannot hide a pearl, so Dark Snow can have inherited only one pearl. The reason she looks like an 'exact' copy is because cream & pearl does look like pearl & pearl except that double pearl usually offers dark eyes. But it looks like you already know all this, so all I'm doing is voicing what you just said.

I agree with your decision of her genes, but I'd probably attribute only one tiger eye on her. Two would have made her eyes very brilliant green. I'd roll the dice and even call her double black EE.
She and her mother will varnish with age, but it does look like you have a medium or slow varnish, so her color won't change too much.

[Nazarach]

I agree that Shizuka does appear to be a double pearl and may in fact also carry a single tiger eye. The problem is the sire. A buckskin cannot hide a pearl, so Dark Snow can have inherited only one pearl. The reason she looks like an 'exact' copy is because cream & pearl does look like pearl & pearl except that double pearl usually offers dark eyes. But it looks like you already know all this, so all I'm doing is voicing what you just said.

I agree with your decision of her genes, but I'd probably attribute only one tiger eye on her. Two would have made her eyes very brilliant green. I'd roll the dice and even call her double black EE.
She and her mother will varnish with age, but it does look like you have a medium or slow varnish, so her color won't change too much.

Well I wasn't exactly fully sure regarding her coding so asking for confirmation seemed more resonable ^^' I wasn't sure because she has one cream and tiger eyes on cream often seem to be the blue version - at least on blacks.
When can I be somewhat sure it's EE (or why do you thinks it is possible)?
Many thanks for clearing up my doubts

[BlackOak2]

Well I wasn't exactly fully sure regarding her coding so asking for confirmation seemed more resonable ^^' I wasn't sure because she has one cream and tiger eyes on cream often seem to be the blue version - at least on blacks.
When can I be somewhat sure it's EE (or why do you thinks it is possible)?
Many thanks for clearing up my doubts

We all need confirmation at times.
You'll have to wait until she grows up to ensure she has the tiger eye gene, for me it's really just a guess, but her eye color is just a little more hazel than her daughter when they were both newborns. The way you have her code t/t was for two tiger eye genes, so t/N would be for just one. There certainly is a chance she didn't inherit either single tiger genes from either parent. Still, it's a 50 chance she got one or the other.

Now for the EE. Her mother is black and since both of her parents were also black, there's a 50/50 chance she inherited both E genes from both parents.
So she had to throw one E from her mother (unless on the off chance her mother did have an e - red).
Dark Snow's father is a buckskin, so that force's him to have at least one E (because two ee would have disguised the bay behind chestnut and made him palomino instead). Plus, he has one bay mother and a black father, so it increases his chance also of having two EE and not just Ee.

From there it really is more of a roll of chances and percentages.
Dark Snow's parents could have a 50/50 of being double E, but since both of them have to at least be Ee, that gives her at the very base level a 25% chance of being EE. Now with another 50/50 of either of her parents being EE, that could possibly increase her chance of being EE up to 75% chance.
Since neither of her parents have thrown a chestnut (yet) and none of their parents threw a chestnut (yet or that was kept), it's likely, or even most likely that they can only throw black or agouti (depending on if they where bay or brown).
So it's highly likely Dark Snow is a double black.
You can test out the likelihood and breed her to a chestnut. If she has only one E, then she'll have a 50/50 chance of throwing a chestnut foal, however, you'll want a chestnut that's agouti negative, otherwise the single e can still hide under bay and brown.

[Nazarach]

Well I wasn't exactly fully sure regarding her coding so asking for confirmation seemed more resonable ^^' I wasn't sure because she has one cream and tiger eyes on cream often seem to be the blue version - at least on blacks.
When can I be somewhat sure it's EE (or why do you thinks it is possible)?
Many thanks for clearing up my doubts

We all need confirmation at times.
You'll have to wait until she grows up to ensure she has the tiger eye gene, for me it's really just a guess, but her eye color is just a little more hazel than her daughter when they were both newborns. The way you have her code t/t was for two tiger eye genes, so t/N would be for just one. There certainly is a chance she didn't inherit either single tiger genes from either parent. Still, it's a 50 chance she got one or the other.

Now for the EE. Her mother is black and since both of her parents were also black, there's a 50/50 chance she inherited both E genes from both parents.
So she had to throw one E from her mother (unless on the off chance her mother did have an e - red).
Dark Snow's father is a buckskin, so that force's him to have at least one E (because two ee would have disguised the bay behind chestnut and made him palomino instead). Plus, he has one bay mother and a black father, so it increases his chance also of having two EE and not just Ee.

From there it really is more of a roll of chances and percentages.
Dark Snow's parents could have a 50/50 of being double E, but since both of them have to at least be Ee, that gives her at the very base level a 25% chance of being EE. Now with another 50/50 of either of her parents being EE, that could possibly increase her chance of being EE up to 75% chance.
Since neither of her parents have thrown a chestnut (yet) and none of their parents threw a chestnut (yet or that was kept), it's likely, or even most likely that they can only throw black or agouti (depending on if they where bay or brown).
So it's highly likely Dark Snow is a double black.
You can test out the likelihood and breed her to a chestnut. If she has only one E, then she'll have a 50/50 chance of throwing a chestnut foal, however, you'll want a chestnut that's agouti negative, otherwise the single e can still hide under bay and brown.

Makes sense but going with the off chance of her parents inheriting an e I really can just wait (i don't think i have a chestnut with negative agouti, and finding one is nearly hopeless due to unknown/false color and rarely any photos from foal to adult )
Maby i'll try if i get lucky in time <.<' But thanks for explaining in such detail that really helps a lot

[BlackOak2]

Makes sense but going with the off chance of her parents inheriting an e I really can just wait (i don't think i have a chestnut with negative agouti, and finding one is nearly hopeless due to unknown/false color and rarely any photos from foal to adult )
Maby i'll try if i get lucky in time <.<' But thanks for explaining in such detail that really helps a lot

Hmm... you got a point. I've located a double black I use for figuring out suspected genes, but I haven't yet tried to find agouti negative chestnuts.
It's still a solid point though, if you ever get a chestnut, it'll still mean she'll be Ee and not EE. Not having agouti just means it'll either, ever be black, or ever be chestnut. With agouti just means you could have black (or bay or brown) or you could have chestnut.

Anyway, I'm glad it made good sense to you!

[Raikit]

however, you'll want a chestnut that's agouti negative, otherwise the single e can still hide under bay and brown.

I just wanted to get some clarification on this point. If you're testing to see if the mare has a recessive red (e) gene, then as long as you breed her to a chestnut you will see that recessive gene if she passes it. Homozygous recessive (ee) always overrules the Agouti gene, no matter what that Agouti gene is. So the Agouti gene on the chestnut horse would have no bearing on the color of the foal unless the foal was heterozygous dominant for recessive red (Ee). This might have been what you were saying, but it seemed to me that you were saying that bay or brown (A-/at-) overruled extension, which is not the case.

[BlackOak2]

however, you'll want a chestnut that's agouti negative, otherwise the single e can still hide under bay and brown.

I just wanted to get some clarification on this point. If you're testing to see if the mare has a recessive red (e) gene, then as long as you breed her to a chestnut you will see that recessive gene if she passes it. Homozygous recessive (ee) always overrules the Agouti gene, no matter what that Agouti gene is. So the Agouti gene on the chestnut horse would have no bearing on the color of the foal unless the foal was heterozygous dominant for recessive red (Ee). This might have been what you were saying, but it seemed to me that you were saying that bay or brown (A-/at-) overruled extension, which is not the case.

Like you said. I wasn't saying that agouti had any basis in it at all. Just that you wouldn't see agouti if you worked with an agouti negative chestnut. All the foals would ever be was black or red. Just makes it cleaner, that's all.

[Raikit]

Like you said. I wasn't saying that agouti had any basis in it at all. Just that you wouldn't see agouti if you worked with an agouti negative chestnut. All the foals would ever be was black or red. Just makes it cleaner, that's all.

Okay, so you're using agouti negative to mean homozygous recessive? I've usually only heard negative in the sense that a horse does not carry something, like a genetic disorder. Since agouti codes for something, even when recessive, it's not a word I often hear associated with it.

[BlackOak2]

Okay, so you're using agouti negative to mean homozygous recessive? I've usually only heard negative in the sense that a horse does not carry something, like a genetic disorder. Since agouti codes for something, even when recessive, it's not a word I often hear associated with it.

Yeah, I use agouti negative when I mean agouti recessive (a/a), essentially 'no wild bay, no bay, no brown'... hence agouti 'negative'. It's just the way my brain defines it. Same thing with chestnut, they're 'negative' for chestnut when they're 'double black'. I do use it technically incorrectly, I suppose, but generally speaking, my point is still understood.