Bicolor? - Page 3

"Bicolor is what I say it is - nothing mysterious about it "

Ha ha, that's exactly what I said, isn't it?  Nowhere else can I cite a source that says "must have tarheels and toe marks, no brown behind the ears" and so forth, except from your mouth and others who have quoted you.

Melanistic black&tan will produce itself as a recessive variation of the black & tan saddlebacked pattern.  Or to rephrase, a blanketback does not produce a saddleback unless it's mate carries the gene for that phenotype.  Alleles transfer "in whole" from one parent to it's offspring, so the parent whose allelic type contains the fewest codons straying from the original "wild type" (sable) wins out in expression for dominance if the two are paired together.

And just for your information, your personalized definition of the bicolor phenotype isn't the only one offered. http://www.shawlein.com/The_Standard/07_Colour_&_Pigment/Colour_&_Pigment.html  Between the description differences of yours and Linda's, there is a certain amount of contradiction, and therefore confusion.  I'm personally saying, it doesn't even matter, you could say "must have black tongue marks" as well, or "must have the eichenluft name".  Whatever becomes common acceptance is what we'll deal with, but describing particular sets of phenotypes is not necessarily an accurate reflection of the genotypic interaction that is taking place.

Linda Shaw's take...

3. Rich Bicolour, Melanistic Bicolour, faded bicolour.
Typically, the bicolour is a black dog with tan points much the same as a doberman. It is in fact the same gene. A very dark one with a strong black mask and much extension of the black may appear to be solid black, with a black undercoat and only some tan shading on the feet. Theoretically, bicolours always show tan around the vent, but I have seen a virtually black dog with just enough tan around the vent (and between the toes) to suspect that it was a bicolour, but not enough to be sure. However, a pale bicolour can look strikingly like a black sable, showing much black over a light grey undercoat, with tan or grey over the nape of the neck and along the harness lines, and black markings on the legs and feet. These dogs have the genetics for fading of the black mantle, and while they can still appear dark to the eye, will produce colour fading.

Your pup is a bi-color, just because it says black & red on the papers means nothing,
all GSD's go through many color changes some keep changing color for up to six years, I have dogs that had a solid blanket of black on their back, only to notice that when they turned 4 years old they got silver hairs mixing on the shoulders and legs.

From the looks of the illustration above I would say you dog will be rich Bicolour not black bicolour.



This is Rollie, he is a bi-color, mom is blanket black & red, dad is sable:

mirasmom - the OPs dog is not a bicolor - note the lack of tarheels and toemarks, and the color behind the ears in the adult pictures.  Your dog pictured IS a bicolor and good pictures to demonstrate one - note the presence of toemarks and tarheels and lack of color behind the ears/other shadings as an adult.  Daryl - note the presence of toemarks and tarheels in ALL of Linda's picture descriptions of bicolors.

Along the same lines - can you point out a black sable, red sable, dark red sable, patterned sable, how about a black/red "saddleback" dog as most show-lines are described?  How about "blanket back, saddle-back, reverse mask, "melanistic black/tan ?    I can, as could most people on this forum to varying degrees of accuracy (many people claim their dogs being "black sable" when really they are not quite) - but OH MY GOODNESS - none of these "colors" and patterns are noted by the SV, now are they, Daryl????  Does that mean they don't exist?

I know what I'm talking about from experience - you can keep posting your stolen charts and pictures and keep touting your book-learned facts as I realize that is all you know - doesn't mean you are right.

Bicolor is a very clear color pattern with very clear distinct genes and genetically it is different than black/tan.  And no matter how dark a black/tan dog is, it is not bicolor without the black toemarks and tarheels.

molly

Stolen chart?  Are you referring to MY Color Matrix that was published in Schutzhund USA mag without my consent?

I know how much you dislike being proven wrong, but that wasn't even my intent here.  I haven't shared my personal understanding, so I can't be either wrong or right at all.  I do however know that YOU are wrong.  You're defining the genotype by your personalized nomenclature of phenotype.  Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

Like I said, bicolor can be whatever you want it to be, and I actually have no problem with all your made up "facts","gene tags" and other nonsense.  Your claim to expertise looks pretty amusing from here.

So, go ahead and prove me wrong Daryl - if there is no bicolor and in fact the bicolor dog is in actuality a black/tan, then it would produce black/tans (with no black toe marks and tarheels that is) when bred to a non-black/tan producing dog.  It doesn't.  unless you can prove it does.....

In which case then a black/tan that produces bicolors would be carrying the  same color genes as black/tan that doesn't.  Right?  Not.  unless you can prove it - why don't you ask Linda who is surely more of an expert in color genes than I am - surely you are in close touch with her as I'm positive you asked her already for permission to publish HER charts, written descriptions and illustrations, right Daryl?

molly

edited by Moderator Wagging.  MrDarcy requested you take off topic comments to PM's.


I actually DO find the OP's dog adequately described as "bicolor", but I also see it as a matter of subjective and popular opinion, which I won't argue no matter what final conclusion is made.

The dog in the OP I believe would be considered a 'Tan point'

Which if you really want to 'split hairs' is the proper definition.

The ACD in my avatar pic is a 'Tan point'
If he was a shepherd, he'd be a Bi colour as he has toe pencilling and mucky hocks.

And "bicolor" border collies with no toe marks?

Tan points, they are all tan points, a dobermann is a tan point, likewise a rott or a manchester terrier.

For example: A tri-colour collie would be a tan point with the white spotting gene.

I think sometimes we stare too hard at the one breed, and we don't look at the bigger picture.  Other genes interact, maybe there is something in the old , 'Mucky hocks = Black carrier' or the Mask gene influencing the pigment spread.

Just an observation and I haven't done much research, but in ACDs you will often see a tan point with mucky hocks, but rarely (I'm still trying to find one!) a plain faced ACD with Toe pencilling, there seems to be some correlation between full double masks or back spots and toe pencilling, but I'm still kind of looking into it.