 |
RE: Re: [RC] [RC] [RC] Flaxen, Sabino gene - heidiOn 1/10/06, heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: So talking about a"sabino gene" is not accurate.It may not be entirely accurate, but it is useful for conversational purposes when we cannot launch into extensive detail. One need not be inaccurate to avoid detail. Perhaps a better way to describe it would be the "sabino trait." Unfortunately, it is so often called a "gene" that many reading it take it lterally and think that there actually has been one identified. And that simply isn't the case. It does tend to breed true (i.e. at least one parent must show at least minimal sabino patterns to produce sabino offspring). Ummm, no. Sabino "cropouts" from extremely "solid" parents are not at all uncommon--and in fact, were for many years very socially unacceptable in QHs, despite their not unfrequent occurrence. True enough for clear patterns to be recognized that are not due entirely to chance. Certainly a genetic basis behind it--not "entirely due to chance"--but that is not the same thing as saying it is a "gene." And I have yet to see a clear instance where sabino popped up randomly where neither parent showed even minimal signs of it, although if you look at the UC Davis paper that I referenced, overo seems to be a relatively common mutation in QH's that will then breed true - perhaps something such as this occurs with sabino, or the gene(s) that cause it. Well, no--many horses that have been mistaken for "overos" really are sabinos. And many of these come from "solid" parents and do not test positive for the overo gene. We just don't know. What Kris, and you have missed is that I never indicated that the original posters mare did NOT have the gene, merely that it was not certain that she did. I would guess not, but as I indicated, I recognized that there was no way to be certain. Well, no--it wasn't that part of your post to which I was referring at all. I was responding to the erroneous mention by several posters (of which you were only one) that there is indeed "a" gene that causes the sabino trait. I also noted in my original response that (in my opinion) there were likely more or different genes involved due to the variations found in different breeds. Yes, you did--which is contradictory to calling it a single gene in the first place. It would be beneficial to read clearly before responding, as I offered only my opinion, and references to what is known and what is not known. Perhaps I should respond to that by saying that perhaps if people would write more clearly, one would not have to read around such inaccuracies as "sabino gene".... Heidi =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|