# Do you have the answer? C and P linkage.



## WNTMousery

These siblings are different colors. One is an off-white and not albino, the other is albino. On the c-locus, the off-white girl has the possibility of being either C/c^ch or c^ch/c. On the p-locus she is either P/p or p/p (although I am pretty sure she has to be p/p since either C/cch or cch/c would NOT be white-ish). She should be black-based. My c and p are linked in her father's line.

The reason I know she is not albino is because she had a molt with obvious molting pattern when she was a bit younger and you can see a slight difference in color in person.

What do you think?


----------



## Jack Garcia

I wonder how the c- and p- linkage affects the inheritance of Splashed (or vice-versa), if at all. I posted some pics on the other forum.


----------



## WNTMousery

Jack Garcia said:


> I wonder how the c- and p- linkage affects the inheritance of Splashed (or vice-versa), if at all. I posted some pics on the other forum.


Roland's Argente Creams are Splashed.


----------



## SarahY

I have some a/a c/cch p/p mice which look just like that in my Abyssinian line.

Sarah xxx

Edited to correct typo.


----------



## WNTMousery

Himi?


----------



## SarahY

No, sorry - I didn't type enough 'c's :lol: It's corrected now.

Sarah xxx


----------



## moustress

The linkage of C and P are in question, that's for sure, in the case of tricolor or splashed. And the precedence of the dilutions may be disrupted and unstable. Since it works with modifiers, there is always the question of whether or not you have unknown modifiers, with diluting or concentrating factors that have unknown (to you) order of precedence.

The occasional odd-eyed always shows up and makes you question everything you thought you knew about the whole can of worms. Ruby-eyes you can sort of predict, odd-eyes, not so much.


----------



## Wight Isle Stud

pink eyed cream as a possiblex


----------



## WNTMousery

moustress said:


> The linkage of C and P are in question, that's for sure, in the case of tricolor or splashed. And the precedence of the dilutions may be disrupted and unstable. Since it works with modifiers, there is always the question of whether or not you have unknown modifiers, with diluting or concentrating factors that have unknown (to you) order of precedence.
> 
> The occasional odd-eyed always shows up and makes you question everything you thought you knew about the whole can of worms. Ruby-eyes you can sort of predict, odd-eyes, not so much.


What on earth are you talking about? Which dilutions may be disrupted and what are they disrupted by? Pink eyes caused by Himi or Siamese on Tricolor/Splashed is not the same as the pink eyed gene p/p. It is pretty rare for the "p" and "c" to cross over and I've never seen it anywhere in our country, especially with Tri/Splashed, except in the show lines which were imported from England.

I'm nearly 100% positive that these are p/p, and now that Sarah said she has the same in her Abys, it makes sense that they are also cch/c.


----------



## Roland

WNTMousery said:


> These siblings are different colors. One is an off-white and not albino, the other is albino. On the c-locus, the off-white girl has the possibility of being either C/c^ch or c^ch/c. On the p-locus she is either P/p or p/p (although I am pretty sure she has to be p/p since either C/cch or cch/c would NOT be white-ish). She should be black-based. My c and p are linked in her father's line.
> 
> The reason I know she is not albino is because she had a molt with obvious molting pattern when she was a bit younger and you can see a slight difference in color in person.
> 
> What do you think?


My English is not good enough to understand the question, but I am sure that the off-white is never C/*. Any C/* p/p would be darker (when she does not carry other mutations, like yellow/blue/chocolate etc.
Btw, I would love to understand the question... The linkage between c-locus and p is very much on my focus, since I have several examples for Spl/* having an influence on p/p too, even in combination with C/*

Best regards, dear Jenny, Roland


----------



## Jack Garcia

I hope you find an answer. I'm definitely interested.


----------



## Jack Garcia

Here are some of mine who've showed the same difference.

These two were about a year ago:








This picture was taken with an older, less-advanced camera than I have now.

These two are more recent:








This picture was taken with my current camera, and makes the mice appear more different than the eye (my eye, at least) can see, but it shows the general kind slight of difference.


----------



## Jack Garcia

WNTMousery said:


> Jack Garcia said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how the c- and p- linkage affects the inheritance of Splashed (or vice-versa), if at all. I posted some pics on the other forum.
> 
> 
> 
> Roland's Argente Creams are Splashed.
Click to expand...

That's true. But they're also not a/a. You have to keep that in mind because the A-locus is known to affect how other loci are inherited as well.

With cch/c, it's possible (not likely, but possible) that when coupled with a linked "p" and a/a that Splashed would affect the color differently than on another background (like A/*). We see this with Umbrous on the A-locus, actually, since it affects A and a when paired together, but none of the other A-locus alleles (at, ae, etc). Sometimes, one combination only "works" with another combination is present. I don't know if that's the case here or not, though. But I don't know what else it could be.

The A-locus shows us a couple other "exceptions" in mice, so my hunch (which I can't prove) is that this appearance is related not only to the mice being possibly cch/c p/p Spl/*, but also a/a.

I can't blame my poor English, but hopefully what I've said makes sense. I'd love to be proven wrong (or right) so that we'd know for sure!


----------



## Roland

Jack Garcia said:


> With cch/c, it's possible (not likely, but possible) that when coupled with a linked "p" and a/a that Splashed would affect the color differently than on another background (like A/*).
> The A-locus shows us a couple other "exceptions" in mice, so my hunch (which I can't prove) is that this appearance is related not only to the mice being possibly cch/c p/p Spl/*, but also a/a.


From my experience there is a difference in the appearance of Spl/* on A/* and a/a, but it reflects the difference of the colour without Spl/* only, not any inheritance between p and different c-alleles: A/* p/p is darker and more reddish than a/a p/p, at least in my mousery. Hence the splashes differ too.



Jack Garcia said:


> I can't blame my poor English, but hopefully what I've said makes sense. I'd love to be proven wrong (or right) so that we'd know for sure!


Your English is quite ok, not good, but not "poor". 

Regards, Roland
Chilloutarea Mousery - Tricolor , Splashed , Merle , Recessive Red


----------



## Jack Garcia

Haha! Thanks! lol


----------



## WNTMousery

Roland, you say Spl/* has an effect on C/ mice? What effect? This is very interesting!


----------



## Roland

WNTMousery said:


> Roland, you say Spl/* has an effect on C/ mice? What effect? This is very interesting!


Jenny, I have to take pics from some babies soon. a/a C/* p/p Spl/* differ from a/a C/* p/p spl/spl. The splashed mice have well visible darker dots, you are able to tell who carries Spl/* and who is spl/spl only. 
I will try do do some fotos soon, but I have to leave for a trip to Berlin tomorrow, so I do not know when I will post. They loose the splashes when they grow into adult fur, so you have to select the a/a C/* p/p Spl/* from a/a C/* p/p spl/spl early in the nests. 
I am still not sure what Spl is on a molecular basis and what it does on a moleculare basis, but since c-locus and p are so close to each other and there seems to be an influence of Spl/* on p too, I have some (unproved) theories, which seem to be logical. Too bad, that no lab is interested to work on them.

Yours, Roland
Chilloutarea Mousery - Tricolor , Splashed , Merle , Recessive Red


----------



## Roland

WNTMousery said:


> Roland, you say Spl/* has an effect on C/ mice? What effect? This is very interesting!


Jenny, I found some time at the weekend to do fotos. 
Here you can see the splashes on C/* p/p babies. The eyes of the babies don't look red on the foto, but they are, believe me








Their mother had the same darker dots as a baby, but they disappear after some weeks, the adult C/* do not show any. I am not sure so far, if the genotype has to be C/c-dilution or can be C/C on the p/p mouse too.

















































Regards, Roland
Chilloutarea Mousery - Tricolor , Splashed , Merle , Recessive Red


----------



## SiamMeece

I keep staring at those ears forgetting about whatever markings..... :shock:


----------



## Jack Garcia

They remind me of antlers!


----------



## Roland

SiamMeece said:


> I keep staring at those ears forgetting about whatever markings..... :shock:


She has at least about 50% british genes from Sarah Y's dove line crossed with my best splashed buck from my (Mike Chiodo x Henry van Raij)- line. Unfortunately they are no carriers for piebald and I will not be able to transfer ears to the tricolors quickly.


----------



## WillowDragon

Its a rabbit/mouse hybrid! :lol:


----------



## WNTMousery

Roland said:


> SiamMeece said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep staring at those ears forgetting about whatever markings..... :shock:
> 
> 
> 
> She has at least about 50% british genes from Sarah Y's dove line ...
Click to expand...

That explains the high set.


----------



## WillowDragon

Do you try your very hardest to be rude Jenny, or does it come naturally?


----------



## SarahY

I don't know what you're trying to imply Jenny, but there is no resemblance at all between my mice and those. My doves have the correct 10 to 2 ear position, as other experienced show goers on this forum who have actually seen my mice will verify.

Sarah.


----------



## SarahC

It would be a shame if some sort of us and them attitude is developing on this forum.After all mouse lovers are few and far between and it's a gift to be able to liase with each other from the comfort of our own homes.Perhaps a bit more care needs to be taken in how we come across to others if no offence is intended.


----------



## Rhasputin

:thumbuo


----------



## WNTMousery

I see a great resemblance, however, all I have is photos to go by and have not seen them in person.


----------



## SarahY

Oooh, a resemblance in one picture! Well, all my mice must look like that then.

The angle of the photo is low but you can clearly see the ears go off at angles, not sticking straight up. The ears of this splashed mouse are quite clearly positioned at five to eleven. The two mice look completely different and I would question your 'eye' if you don't see a difference.

It's interesting that you choose the only picture where one of my mice actually looks like that. What about the tens of pictures I've posted of mice clearly displaying the correct ear position? Just for your reference, this is a picture of the same doe, on the same day, taken about one minute after the picture you choose:










Sarah.


----------



## Roland

Hi folks,

my intention to post the pictures was to show an example for the influence of Spl/* on p/p with C/*. Nobody answered, although this was the original question. Hmm. 
The adult mouse shown here keeps her ears straight on the pictures, and I like that, because it very well shows the size. As Sarah's mouse on the picture above, I could take many fotos of the same mouse with another position of the ears. But why should I? I do not have any motivation, because I do not need to prove something. I breed mice for my own pleasure and not for the pleasure of others.

Best regards, Roland
Chilloutarea Mousery - Tricolor , Splashed , Merle , Recessive Red


----------



## SarahY

Nothing against your mice at all Roland, honestly, although I realise that I seem quite insulting. I'm sorry for that. You and I are just different types of breeder, and there's nothing wrong with that! I breed for purely show, where the ears *must* be set at ten to two. Without showing I wouldn't bother breeding as I enjoy the competition and the goals set, and the show standard is important to me. I'm very proud of my doves and the ears are an area in which they excel.

Sarah xxx


----------



## Roland

SarahY said:


> I'm very proud of my doves and the ears are an area in which they excel.
> Sarah xxx


Hi Sarah, I do not feel bad at all, especially not about your words in this thread. I know that you are proud of your doves and I can tell whoever wants to know or does not want to know, THEY ARE FANTASTIC ! If I would feel bad about the discussion, I would do new fotos.
Perhaps I really should do fotos of this mouse with ears in good position, but this will take a good piece of my free time, and I still do not see the benefit for me or others, if I prove something.
Indeed, I do not need to be judged as a winner, not in discussions, and not on the showbench. The reason is: I already feel as a winner without it :lol:


----------



## SarahC

Good attitude Roland.I have 2 of Sarah s doves also,requested by me to improve some of my mice.Not only are they excellent size and type with fabulous ears but most importantly fit and healthy.


----------



## WillowDragon

Not that I feel it needs to be said, but I also have had some of Sarah's mice... and they were beautiful, not only in type but also in temprement and health.

I think this thread has gone in the wrong direction... apologies


----------



## Jack Garcia

I also see the resemblance Roland and Jenny see. *shrug*

It's not a bad thing to see a resemblance in one feature, in my opinion. They're both great mice from great breeders. All mice have their faults, and sometimes it's those faults that say "this mouse was bred by..." I know with my own mice that some faults (or perceived faults) show up very easily in pictures.

For example, sometimes I see resemblance in some of my mice to another breeder's mice (to whom they're related) because of their humps. They're very, very good mice, but this is one identifiable feature that magnifies itself in pictures because of the way the mice hold themselves (which I wouldn't be surprised was true of the ears, too).

As far as insults and communication, I don't think it can be stressed enough that we're all from different places and speak (and write) different dialects of the same language, or different languages entirely. I'm not denying that we do insult each other sometimes (or that some of us deserve it! lol), just that it's good to take this stuff into account more readily. I've heard it said that the UK and America are "two countries divided by a common language." 

It's Thanksgiving Day here now and I'm thankful for all y'all!!


----------



## WillowDragon

This is the last thing I will say on this thread.

Too many of Jenny's comments have been passed off as 'miscommunication'... Well i'm sorry Jack, this is not gonna play anymore. What she said was insulting to a show breeder who takes pride in the type of her mice, and I believe Jenny intended to be insulting.

Your an intelligent guy Jack, don't make yourself sound dumb by defending a friend who so obviously enjoys causing bad feelings.

W xx


----------



## Jack Garcia

I actually see how you could think that, because it goes both ways and I sometimes think the same thing--that some of Sarah's posts are incredibly rude and that you're defending her past the point where you reasonably should.

But I know that's not the case. Just as you know Sarah in person and know she's sweet and generous (which I have no reason to doubt), I know Jenny to be the same way. That's what's ironic about the situation. You're as certain that Jenny is being rude as I sometimes am that Sarah is being rude. That's why I think it's communication errors, which the Internet is notorious for. I think by and large, we're both wrong about Sarah's and Jenny's intent. If we were all together in a room having tea (or coffee), I have no doubt that we'd get along well and would love to see (and hold, and take...hehe) each other's mice.  On the Internet however, we can and do tear each other apart with one sentence! I wonder if this isn't why some of the very best mouse breeders in the world don't participate on mouse forums or at least don't participate anymore--it's just way too easy to be misunderstood, maligned and even banned because of the way you say things.


----------



## WNTMousery

I suppose that once a person expects me to type something offensive, anything I type will come across as offensive whether it was intended that way or not.

I made an observation about a few pictures, I admitted that my statement was made based upon a few pictures, I even re-posted the pictures, which are undeniably similar, at least somewhat. I don't see why this is a huge issue.

By the way, I chose that picture because I thought the set was high when I saw the picture posted in the biggest ears thread just a few days ago. I don't follow people around looking at all their pictures-- I come to the forum and click the active topics link, read a few threads that catch my interest, then move on. Simple as that.


----------



## Jack Garcia

So, I'm just curious now. Have we determined the answer to the original question about why the mice are so super light, but not PEW, and how (or if) Splashed plays a role?


----------



## icedmice

You know ... I would be over the moon even to have a cull from your mouseries and your disagreeing about ear set *slaps forehead*.

It's better than what we have and I've put a ton of work into getting them as far as I have, I'd kill for an exhibition mouse half as good as the eye candy I've see here.
I keep bragging to the Aussie fanciers about how advanced you lot are and look at your projects with keen interest hoping to pick up tips on improving our stock. Even if it vaguely resembles your stock that'd be something.

All we have are pet typed mice and way to many fads and gimmicks that distract good breeding practice. We have far to many "experts" that claim to all be the most ethical, have the most champions, be the most knowledgable. Then in the next breath they go and do something silly like buy a pet store mouse to "improve" stock. 
Man ... we must be desperate if ours aren't measuring up to pet shop stock!
So that's telling me in the last 10 years of the rodent fancy in Australia we've achieved nothing!?! And here people find it insulting to be associated with a mouse that would run rings around our stock :shock: .

Seriously, even from our crummy mice it's clear one generation of outcrossing can cause a significan't change. I've seen ones from my own mousery outcrossed, they don't look so great first generation. Doesn't reflect anything about my stock or the other breeders stock only that there may be some incompatabilities that can be worked out over time.

I have no idea about splashed, wish I could help, I thought I did and I might have fluked a pet shop tri find. But sadly I was never able to reproduce the trait. 
So Australia currently is still a splashed free zone  .


----------



## bethmccallister

I have a new litter of mice that are genetically either cch/c and or ch/c. Some are piebald and some are just tans/fox. I've noticed however that both the parents were P/p carriers as well as piebald carriers because I got about 50% pied in the litter and even though the parents both had dark eyes I've gotten some piebalds that have pink eyes and when they have pink eyes their spots are diluted from a sepia color to a light sepia.


----------



## Roland

Today I had time for some fotos and did some of the splashed satin dove female again. 

















Best regards, Roland
Chilloutarea Mousery - Tricolor , Splashed , Merle , Recessive Red


----------

