Rare Or Not Recognsed Colours

[Tapua]

This is slightly off the original topic, but when you register puppies that are not a recognised colour what do you do? I have BC's and for instance I know sable is not a recognised colour (even though it's gorgeous!). So with my 2 it's easy, they are listed as black and white because that's what they are and that's a recognised colour/s. But if it were a sable puppy, what are they listed as on their pedigree? I know they should be on the limit registry, I'm assuming though that there should also be some record of their colour.

I also find the colour genetics most interesting - and also somewhat confusing!!!

Be warned that canine colur modes of inheritance do not necessarily follow Mendillian Laws of Inheritance.

As far as non-standard colours are concerned, IMO it depends on how much respect do you have for the breed standard? If you want to call your dog 'Sable' but put it on limit register then that shouldnt be an issue but if you intent to breed from her you would be in breech of the Dogs NSW Code of Ethics I think.

If your breed's experienced breeders of by-gone years considered only certain colour acceptable than ask why - is it because the non-standard colours are associated with poor or weaker conformation or a colour related health issue? Diluted colour are often discouraged because of their sensitivity to the sun and poor pigmentation eg pick noses and pads. Or was the design of the standard too narrow in the first place? Every 5 years ( I think) the breed clubs are asked to acknowledge the current standard or make arguement for additions or changes. I have no issues with any colour as long as the dogs are healthy and of a sound type and temperament. However each breed has their own health problems and some genetic health issues are linked with the colour of the dogs especially the dilute colours and solid white.

[Janba]

Why haven't BC breeders made the ANKC change the standard to allow all colours? If the country of origin allows it, then getting Australia too follow the rest of the world shouldn't be too hard?

Australia is listed on its standard as the country of development. NZ had the first breed standard followed by Aus. UK, the country of origin didn't have a breed standard, KC register or show BCs till later. The FCI standard is the UK standard.

The NBCC voted to allow more colours several years ago but work is still in progress to iron out discrepancies in the motions voted for and submit a modified standard to the ANKC for consideration.

[Sayreovi]

Why haven't BC breeders made the ANKC change the standard to allow all colours? If the country of origin allows it, then getting Australia too follow the rest of the world shouldn't be too hard?

Australia is listed on its standard as the country of development. NZ had the first breed standard followed by Aus. UK, the country of origin didn't have a breed standard, KC register or show BCs till later. The FCI standard is the UK standard.

The NBCC voted to allow more colours several years ago but work is still in progress to iron out discrepancies in the motions voted for and submit a modified standard to the ANKC for consideration.

So it's a work in process? That's good then :)

[Trisven13]

Fauves generally speaking are any shade of Fawn to Red without white. Some white is allowed on the chest, and from photos I've seen, tends to exist more in the truly red Fauves. However as the colour doesn't impact on their working ability it is not uncommon for Fauves from hunt lines to have more white on them. They also can be born with a lot of black in their coat which *generally* will all fall out leaving a very deep red but doesn't always. There have also been instances of a Griffon Fauve sized dog being born in a Basset Fauve litter. My European contacts tell me that this happens as hunt kennels used to occasionally use a Griffon Fauve to increase drive (they are a harder dog) and if those lines are used together, even generations down the track, a pup can be born that will eventually end up the size of a Griffon Fauve.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Trisven13

[Janba]

Why haven't BC breeders made the ANKC change the standard to allow all colours? If the country of origin allows it, then getting Australia too follow the rest of the world shouldn't be too hard?

Australia is listed on its standard as the country of development. NZ had the first breed standard followed by Aus. UK, the country of origin didn't have a breed standard, KC register or show BCs till later. The FCI standard is the UK standard.

The NBCC voted to allow more colours several years ago but work is still in progress to iron out discrepancies in the motions voted for and submit a modified standard to the ANKC for consideration.

So it's a work in process? That's good then :)

It probably will be for years, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for prick ears or smooth coats to be allowed in the Aus standard despite them being in the UK standard. THe BC is probably one of the few breeds where the Aus standard differs from the country of origin standard in a major way.

This is the UK standard

Ears

Medium size and texture, set well apart. Carried erect or semi-erect and sensitive in use.

Coat

Two varieties: 1) Moderately long; 2) Smooth. In both, topcoat dense and medium textured, undercoat soft and dense giving good weather resistance. In moderately long-coated variety, abundant coat forms mane, breeching and brush. On face, ears, forelegs (except for feather), hindlegs from hock to ground, hair should be short and smooth.

Colour

Variety of colours permissible. White should never predominate.

The Aus standard

Ears:

The ears should be of medium size and texture, set well apart, carried semi-erect. They are sensitive in their use, and inside well furnished with hair.

Coat:

Double coated, with a moderately long, dense, medium textured topcoat while the undercoat is short, soft and dense, making a weather resisting protection, with abundant coat to form mane, breeching and brush. On face, ear tips, forelegs (except for feather), hind legs from hock to ground, the hair is short and smooth.

Colour:

Black and white, blue and white, chocolate and white, red and white, blue merle and the tri-colour black, tan and white. In each case the basic body colour must predominate and be the background colour of the dog.

[Sayreovi]

Interesting, thanks for that Janba, I do like BC's but never really looked into the standards too hard. I find it weird that Australia have set their own rules on the breed.

Can't wait for the day when you see a short coated sable in the ring :p

[zeebie]

This is an excellent article written on colour in poodles -> http://nationaldog.com.au/2007/2007_dec/026p.pdf

what is more interesting is the fact that to the uninitiated silver poodles are "Grey" and people cannot be convinced that they are not called 'grey' but silver with various shadings.

Vetgen have at this stage not definately identified the fading gene in poodles, and all poodles tested show 'DD' irrespective of colour, unlike labs, and other breeds. So they cannot identify the fading gene when testing, Vetgen refer to the graying gene as 'G' and that Kerry Blue Terriers have what they refer to as the 'GG' as they fade out to their eventual 'blue'colour. but this is not the case with poodles, however they are working toward trying to eventually identify more colour gene tags in poodles.

So in my girl's case I went to lines that on the sire's side were 100% proven Silver dogs, from a breeder who specifically breeds silver's. On the dam's side there were Silver/blue and whites with proven litter's of silver and blue pups.

Despite this genology in colour it is always so interesting that these pups are all born black then fade out to the silver or blue, with the final adult colour totally dependent on each individual dogs colour pattern. with possibility to have deep steel through to silver beige to platnium.

[pepe001]

Interesting to find out some of the reasons certain colours were exclused.

German Shepherds for example, white were apparently excluded because they couldn't be seen against snow when herding - that is what I have read many times and told by GSD people. But Max von Stephanitz used whites in his breeding program and didn't discriminate against them, apparently. This was until he was forced from the GSD orgainisation by the Nazis and then the culling began. Nothing to do with sheep herding but clearly choosing one colour is bad. (They said that the whites were to blame for all weaknesses in the breed, such as poor health, temperament and trainability. As with many ‘scientific’ proclamations made by the Nazi Party, this was also incorrect. The whites were also blamed for albanism, deafness, and colour fading of the standard colour shepherds coat. All and has been proven wrong by many scientists, geneticists and breeders. Whites can produce all colours in the breed, even solid black and sable, when bred to Shepherds of other colours.

from http://www.wgsdcv.org.au/breedinfo.htm)

I'm sure the people on her with whites know the history better and can correct my knowledge.

Also of interest why the showlines are predominately black and tan; and working lines black, sable and bi-colour. The reasoning I have been told is that once West and East germany split the East bred for English and USA show-people and they prefered tall (more fluid moving and pretty), ligher coloured dogs (and less-black faces) as they looked less aggressive. The East kept breeding according to the State Run Program and didn't cull the dark faces etc. Apparently, the dark faced dogs that lived in the West when the division took place were simply shot. Anyone have more knowledge of this.

I would love more stories of other breeds and colour preferences.

[dancinbcs]

This is slightly off the original topic, but when you register puppies that are not a recognised colour what do you do? I have BC's and for instance I know sable is not a recognised colour (even though it's gorgeous!). So with my 2 it's easy, they are listed as black and white because that's what they are and that's a recognised colour/s. But if it were a sable puppy, what are they listed as on their pedigree? I know they should be on the limit registry, I'm assuming though that there should also be some record of their colour.

I also find the colour genetics most interesting - and also somewhat confusing!!!

Border Collies were always registered as their correct colour and the breed standard still does not have any disqualifying faults except for missing testicles. It does list certain colours and any other colour was regarded as a "show" fault, like pricked ears or a blue eye or whatever. As the cosmetic colour did not affect the dog in any way the coloured dogs could still be bred and shown but not shown with any degree of success. In fact new colours used to be added to the standard as people started to show them more.

About 10 years ago the ANKC, for some stupid reason known only to them, brought in a blanket rule for all breeds that only the colours listed in the breed standards could be put on main register. So now if you ask any of the member bodies what to register a puppy as they advise using the closest listed colour if you want then on main register. The whole thing is a complete farce.

[becks]

the recently (to aus) recognised white miniature schnauzer

This is my young bitch Fria.

Are white schnauzers white because of lack of pigment, or because of a pale ee expression?

They have pigment and like a lot of white dogs, can have some biscuit colour to the top coat.

[~Anne~]

I'm interested to hear other's thoughts on 'rare' colours of the pug.

On one hand I do not like them. There is ample evidence the colours were introduced through cross breeding.

However, how many generations later is that line considered a purebred pug again? Part of me thinks that the fact the dogs are breeding true to the standard, apart from colour, the standard should be altered to include the new colours....however as I said, I also do not like the thought that the dogs were crossed and therefore are not 'pure' for a large number of generations and that they were crossed purely for colour, not health.

Edited January 28, 2013 by ~Anne~

[Greytmate]

the recently (to aus) recognised white miniature schnauzer

This is my young bitch Fria.

Are white schnauzers white because of lack of pigment, or because of a pale ee expression?

They have pigment and like a lot of white dogs, can have some biscuit colour to the top coat.

She's pretty. Good to know that they are fully pigmented.

Anne, I remember the big thread we had here about pugs. I'm not convinced that brindle is supposed to be in the breed.

Even if it is in the breed, by making them a registrable colour, there will be a lot more of them in the breed. Because black hides brindle it will take test matings to know if a black is a carrier, and because of the way the gene works, many litters will be all brindle or all fawn. Brindle is a dominant gene, so all fawn dogs are already known not to carry brindle. The gene could be eliminated from the breed if people were prepared to do that, unlike a recessive gene which would be nearly impossible to eliminate without genetic testing.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Greytmate

[becks]

Found this pic on the GP UK website history of the breed.

Interesting to see a pepper/salt or 'silver' german pinscher - the result of using schnauzers in the recovery of the GP breed after the war when only 2 were thought left in the breed. One breeder tried to breed for the silver colour but it apparently isn;t around in the breed now.

[Sheridan]

the recently (to aus) recognised white miniature schnauzer

This is my young bitch Fria.

How very cute.

[Pretty Miss Emma]

This is slightly off the original topic, but when you register puppies that are not a recognised colour what do you do? I have BC's and for instance I know sable is not a recognised colour (even though it's gorgeous!). So with my 2 it's easy, they are listed as black and white because that's what they are and that's a recognised colour/s. But if it were a sable puppy, what are they listed as on their pedigree? I know they should be on the limit registry, I'm assuming though that there should also be some record of their colour.

I also find the colour genetics most interesting - and also somewhat confusing!!!

Border Collies were always registered as their correct colour and the breed standard still does not have any disqualifying faults except for missing testicles. It does list certain colours and any other colour was regarded as a "show" fault, like pricked ears or a blue eye or whatever. As the cosmetic colour did not affect the dog in any way the coloured dogs could still be bred and shown but not shown with any degree of success. In fact new colours used to be added to the standard as people started to show them more.

About 10 years ago the ANKC, for some stupid reason known only to them, brought in a blanket rule for all breeds that only the colours listed in the breed standards could be put on main register. So now if you ask any of the member bodies what to register a puppy as they advise using the closest listed colour if you want then on main register. The whole thing is a complete farce.

That makes sense, not good normal sense but I understand! I hope that they change it one day to allow all colours. To me a good dog is a good dog, the colour doesn't make it a good dog!

[BlackJaq]

So BC's actually come in blue merle as well? A friend of mine's boss bought one (purely as a pet) and I was convinced she'd been had. My friend is not all that dog savvy so she didn't know whether the dog had DOGS NSW papers or even what they mean but was quite adamant the dog was pure bred and papered.

[Kavik]

So BC's actually come in blue merle as well? A friend of mine's boss bought one (purely as a pet) and I was convinced she'd been had. My friend is not all that dog savvy so she didn't know whether the dog had DOGS NSW papers or even what they mean but was quite adamant the dog was pure bred and papered.

Yes BCs come in blue merle :) It is becoming quite a popular colour now.

[BlackJaq]

It must be because I have never met a dumber dog lol It definitely doesn't seem like it would be much good for working. It's pretty though!

[Steve]

Parti might be rare in Poodles, but the gene behind the pattern is not rare in dogs. One of the things that gives the poodle breed its unique characteristics as a totally solid colour dog, is the rule that any lack of pigment is a fault and the dog can't be registered. This doesn't eliminate the gene from the breed (it has always been there), but it does mean that the gene is not so widespread. Solid colour dogs are generally fully solid and the odd parti or irish marked pup that is born is a very rare occurrence. The lack of pigment is a fault, but people find them attractive so they do get homes as pets.

If parti is allowed to be registered in poodles, I see two potential problems that might occur.

One is that the gene will become common, and as it is an incomplete dominance we will see the effects in solid dogs. Some will have lack of pigment in toes and chests. If they allow the parti pattern to be registered, will they also allow the many other possible expressions of the gene to be registered? Or will we lose these dogs from the genepool?

The other possible consequence might be that the bloodlines with the parti gene will be avoided by solid poodle breeders, and that the parti breeders will be on their own. This would mean essentially the parti poodle would be a separate breed. We might see the Common Blue Staffy Syndrome happen with parti poodles, because the unscrupulous will breed only for colour, guaranteeing them 100% parti pups. Continually breeding parti to parti carries a risk of deafness, as well as the loss of conformation we see in the CBS.

Backyarders are already doing this now, but giving registration approval for parti would give the breeders the credibility of official ANKC papers and allow the breeders to make claims of "champion bloodlines" and the like.

It is important to understand how the parti gene works. It isn't just a colour, it's a lack of pigment in a pattern.

Here is a website with good current information about colour genetics in dogs. This page especially will help understand the parti gene and its possible effects. http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/white.htm

Some of the info from that website is under review. For as long as I can remember its been accepted that the piebald / white spotting gene are responsible for causing deafness but there is a fair bit of new work being done including that of Professor Clare Wade from Sydney Uni and a couple of others world wide have done a lot of work on identifying the deafness gene which as it turns out may not caused as simple as it was thought - there is no doubt that deafness is more prevalent in dogs with more white but this may not be the whole story and may explain why some breeds with these genes are affected and others are not .Common belief is that they also thought it was something to do with lack of pigment in ear drum but it turns out it the deafness, which usually develops in the first few weeks after birth while the ear canal is still closed, usually results from the degeneration of part of the blood supply to the cochlea (the stria vascularis). The nerve cells of the cochlea subsequently die and permanent deafness results. The cause of the vascular degeneration is not known, but appears to be associated with the absence of pigment producing cells (melanocytes) in the blood vessels. All of the function of these cells are not known, but one role is to maintain high potassium concentrations in the fluid (endolymph) surrounding the hair cells of the cochlea; these pigment cells are critical for survival of the stria. So it may be caused by a multi gene or the presence of two different autosomal recessive deafness genes, or a syndrome with incomplete penetrance. In some breeds it may be linked to genes which give different pigments and patterns but it explains why not all dalmations and not all white boxers are deaf - why some breeds with recognised potential problem genes such as the piebald are affected and others not. When it comes to genetics its liquid and often not even the experts agree. There is no evidence or even a hint that parti poodles are deaf more than any other poodles. Deafness is a potential issue in the poodle breed but its thought to be more about breeding them with narrow ear canals but that too may turn out to be the blood supply/potassium thing too when they start looking for that as its a new concept. Beagles also have the piebald gene and the Irish gene and whilst deafness is listed as an issue in the breed Ive never met a deaf beagle in 40 odd years. Hopefully there will be a DNA test soon to identify a dog with the deafness gene.

Oh and there is no longer a concern that partis will corrupt the entire breed because there is a DNA test available now in poodles for the MITF [the piebald gene]anyway.

[Christina]

Lots of articles & opinions on the rare colours but where are all the photos ?

I want to see some more.

Here is my Irish St Patrick Leprechaun Poodle.