Guide/topic ir to hair genetics?

[Nazarach]

Hello you lovely people :3

Has anyone actually ever done a guide/comprehensive genetics topic for the inheritance of mane, tail and feathers growth? Length-wise and type (like, smooth - curly/frizzy; short, medium, long and/or mowhawk)? I noticed some differing patterns in regards to inheritance of growth time as well...

Would anyone (or a collective) be interested in doing one? I'd participate as well, but my time is rather limited currently and my stables are rather full, so no place for breeding to figure out certain inheritance chances as well ^^'

In any case, thanks for reading and answering or participating!

[BlackOak2]

Not done yet! (And also shared)
Although I have heard of some that were interested in the answers and maybe pulling one of them to study.

But from experience, they do seem to be genetically linked for growing in. It doesn't seem to be just random rolls.

I don't have any time for such a study though.

[Nazarach]

Not done yet! (And also shared)
Although I have heard of some that were interested in the answers and maybe pulling one of them to study.

But from experience, they do seem to be genetically linked for growing in. It doesn't seem to be just random rolls.

I don't have any time for such a study though.

I thought as much - especially one of my pearl lines had a sire with REALLY fast out growth of all the hair - and his offspring seemed to carry on in his manner (like... full long mane and feathers - if there - at like 2 years or something ^^') pretty nice if you want to get the horses full look as early as possible instead of waiting for about 6-7 years like in some other cases <.< but probabilities and such would be nice to know (or if its something like the overflow/accumulation effect like in some other phenotypical expressions)...

(for anyone interested - the sire in the mentioned case https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1293933)

[BlackOak2]

Not done yet! (And also shared)
Although I have heard of some that were interested in the answers and maybe pulling one of them to study.

But from experience, they do seem to be genetically linked for growing in. It doesn't seem to be just random rolls.

I don't have any time for such a study though.

I thought as much - especially one of my pearl lines had a sire with REALLY fast out growth of all the hair - and his offspring seemed to carry on in his manner (like... full long mane and feathers - if there - at like 2 years or something ^^') pretty nice if you want to get the horses full look as early as possible instead of waiting for about 6-7 years like in some other cases <.< but probabilities and such would be nice to know (or if its something like the overflow/accumulation effect like in some other phenotypical expressions)...

(for anyone interested - the sire in the mentioned case https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1293933)

Yup!
I've had foal mane flop as early as I think 3 months or so.
I've also had foals look like literal miniaturized adults as early as 8 months (give or take) and foals that kept that foal look for as late as almost three years or more.

I know that mane and tail display and lengths also go a long way into the overall look, resemblance and feel. But it's amazing how much this game can resemble real life, especially because there are so many codes that are written in simplicity form, compared to real life.

[Nazarach]

.

Yup!
I've had foal mane flop as early as I think 3 months or so.
I've also had foals look like literal miniaturized adults as early as 8 months (give or take) and foals that kept that foal look for as late as almost three years or more.

I know that mane and tail display and lengths also go a long way into the overall look, resemblance and feel. But it's amazing how much this game can resemble real life, especially because there are so many codes that are written in simplicity form, compared to real life.

I also wonder if there is always three stages of growth (even if they might be unused/invisible by some kinds of lenght/fullness/type) - like f.e. this mare https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1378097 - which I'm pretty sure is finalized in hair growth - kept the medium sized fluff-mane but still grew out her feathers to full. So, are feathers apart from mane/tail growth but have conciding times when they would/might grow? even mohawks have differing lenghts - how is the type (mohawk/fluff/smooth/ragged) different and which growth (length wise) is the phenotypical if a f.e. a long mohawk breeds to a long smooth mane - would the foal be able to always express a long-type as well or would the mane rather be a medium length? or to go opposite - would a long mohawk and short smooth tend to express mohawk and if, would it be possible to get a long smooth mane due to the lenght of the progenitors mowhawk or could it also end up with a short mohawk?

I've only bred consciously for the fluff types - not mohawks, so I'm rather unfamiliar with that :/

[BlackOak2]

I also wonder if there is always three stages of growth (even if they might be unused/invisible by some kinds of lenght/fullness/type) - like f.e. this mare https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1378097 - which I'm pretty sure is finalized in hair growth - kept the medium sized fluff-mane but still grew out her feathers to full. So, are feathers apart from mane/tail growth but have conciding times when they would/might grow? even mohawks have differing lenghts - how is the type (mohawk/fluff/smooth/ragged) different and which growth (length wise) is the phenotypical if a f.e. a long mohawk breeds to a long smooth mane - would the foal be able to always express a long-type as well or would the mane rather be a medium length? or to go opposite - would a long mohawk and short smooth tend to express mohawk and if, would it be possible to get a long smooth mane due to the lenght of the progenitors mowhawk or could it also end up with a short mohawk?

I've only bred consciously for the fluff types - not mohawks, so I'm rather unfamiliar with that :/

Okay, from what I remember, mane and tail genes are the same, so if you have full-length tail genes, you will also have full length mane genes (a little annoying since I wanted a long tail and a super short mane on my leopard tarpans, anyway...). However, you're right, mane and tail grow-in do seem to be separate (or can be) from one another. I didn't take close examination on whether grow in (when separate from each other) is also inheritable, but I assume it is.

So a quick breakdown on the genes themselves:
Mane and tail length is incomplete dominant.
Long mane/tail is recessive.
Medium shares one of both.
Short is dominant and homo- for short.

Feathers are also incomplete dominant with some sort of negative.
If there are no feather genes, we won't even see the start of them.
The super shorts, the ones that are there but never grow in, are dominant. I assume that it's a feather gene and a no feather gene, but I just don't know for certain. What I do know is that these horses that show the very beginnings of feathers can and will throw foals with feathers that grow in.
The short feathers are also dominant and I assume it's homo for short.
Then the mediums (incomplete dominant) produce the medium-length ones that look like your mare you linked.
And finally the recessives are the super longs (like belgians).

Here's an earlier post about feathers with images: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20310&p=135646#p135646

So, feathers and mane & tail are both separate from each other so they likely also have separate growth factors as well.

Now for mohawk. Mohawk is also recessive and works in conjunction with mane & tail (well, just mane) genes. I suppose it's more appropriate to say that mohawk is a modifier gene that is either 'there' or 'not there'. So mohawk gene length itself is in direct correlation to mane length and not separate. So if the horse would have a short mane, then the super short mohawk is what grows in. The long one that looks a bit messy, I think is simply the long mane genes when fully grown in. But maybe... it's a modifier to the pony mane. I haven't worked with both genes at the same time, so I don't know if the pony mane actually affects the mohawk or vice versa. They may NOT be able to work with one another, one of the genes may turn the other one off, hide it. In this case, I suspect that the mohawk would hide any pony mane that might exist.

And that depletes my knowledge of those genes.

[Nazarach]

.

[...]
Now for mohawk. Mohawk is also recessive and works in conjunction with mane & tail (well, just mane) genes. I suppose it's more appropriate to say that mohawk is a modifier gene that is either 'there' or 'not there'. So mohawk gene length itself is in direct correlation to mane length and not separate. So if the horse would have a short mane, then the super short mohawk is what grows in. The long one that looks a bit messy, I think is simply the long mane genes when fully grown in. But maybe... it's a modifier to the pony mane. I haven't worked with both genes at the same time, so I don't know if the pony mane actually affects the mohawk or vice versa. They may NOT be able to work with one another, one of the genes may turn the other one off, hide it. In this case, I suspect that the mohawk would hide any pony mane that might exist.

And that depletes my knowledge of those genes.

thanks for the breakdown It certainly helps having the barebones down - as I didn't really even manage to find these <.<'

On the topic of manes in regards to the fluffy mane on ponies i've encountered one case which makes me wonder till today; the normal stages of the fluffy type on ponies is usually similiar to the smooth one; but I've had one expression that made me wonder - and I can't quite figure it out where it might've come from as I didn't encounter a similiar phenotypic expression in my herds since (and due to their age I'm quite sure they should've grown out what could grow) ^^'
to compare - the usual growth would be foal, next the mane will just flop with a slight increase in length; then after would normally be the medium, and last the full length if they grow - right?
f.e. https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1672590 (gallery pics)

So, there is she - and I'm not sure as the mane did follow the usual foal one to flop down - but then it just grew right somewhere between flop-length and medium... is it some kind of weird mismatch due to the smooth kind from the sire perhaps?
https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1592814

[BlackOak2]

thanks for the breakdown It certainly helps having the barebones down - as I didn't really even manage to find these <.<'

On the topic of manes in regards to the fluffy mane on ponies i've encountered one case which makes me wonder till today; the normal stages of the fluffy type on ponies is usually similiar to the smooth one; but I've had one expression that made me wonder - and I can't quite figure it out where it might've come from as I didn't encounter a similiar phenotypic expression in my herds since (and due to their age I'm quite sure they should've grown out what could grow) ^^'
to compare - the usual growth would be foal, next the mane will just flop with a slight increase in length; then after would normally be the medium, and last the full length if they grow - right?
f.e. https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1672590 (gallery pics)

So, there is she - and I'm not sure as the mane did follow the usual foal one to flop down - but then it just grew right somewhere between flop-length and medium... is it some kind of weird mismatch due to the smooth kind from the sire perhaps?
https://www.horseworldonline.net/horse/profile/1592814

She has shortie genes.
Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say.

Both of her parents are medium-length genes, therefore they have one dominant (short) and one recessive (long). So they can through any of them as foals, a shortie, a medium, like them or a long, like the first one you posted. It just so happens you had the 1 in 4 chance to get a shortie.

Pony manes, these ultra-puffies are also recessive, so you can pop a fully from two straight-haired parents. But you shouldn't be able to pop a straight from two puffies. If that were to ever happen, we'd have to reevaluate our knowledge on the pony mane genes.

Did I understand your confusion?

[Nazarach]

She has shortie genes.
Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say.

Both of her parents are medium-length genes, therefore they have one dominant (short) and one recessive (long). So they can through any of them as foals, a shortie, a medium, like them or a long, like the first one you posted. It just so happens you had the 1 in 4 chance to get a shortie.

Pony manes, these ultra-puffies are also recessive, so you can pop a fully from two straight-haired parents. But you shouldn't be able to pop a straight from two puffies. If that were to ever happen, we'd have to reevaluate our knowledge on the pony mane genes.

Did I understand your confusion?

Sry for the late reply ^^' was a bit too wrapped up with my alt - the joys of progress in a project x) i always thought the flop was the short mane? cause in comparison in short maned frizzy types there is no difference - flop>medium>long - or are there 4 potential stages of growth: foal>flop>short OR medium>long if medium?

or at least if you compare her pic at 1.83 vs 3.63y there is a minute difference...

[BlackOak2]

She has shortie genes.
Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say.

Both of her parents are medium-length genes, therefore they have one dominant (short) and one recessive (long). So they can through(how did I miss this misspelling???) throw any of them as foals, a shortie, a medium, like them or a long, like the first one you posted. It just so happens you had the 1 in 4 chance to get a shortie.

Pony manes, these ultra-puffies are also recessive, so you can pop a fully from two straight-haired parents. But you shouldn't be able to pop a straight from two puffies. If that were to ever happen, we'd have to reevaluate our knowledge on the pony mane genes.

Did I understand your confusion?

Sry for the late reply ^^' was a bit too wrapped up with my alt - the joys of progress in a project x) i always thought the flop was the short mane? cause in comparison in short maned frizzy types there is no difference - flop>medium>long - or are there 4 potential stages of growth: foal>flop>short OR medium>long if medium?

or at least if you compare her pic at 1.83 vs 3.63y there is a minute difference...

Yeah, I got it. Those projects, when rolling smoothly, can really get interesting and fast! No problems though, the community chats when it gets around to it, right?

Technically, there are four possible types of hair growth and depending on the genes, some of these stages can be skipped or not acheived.
Foal (then flop) --> short --> medium --> long
And each of these can happen with mohawk and also pony and also thin and also thick manes and tails (I don't know if there's such a thing as a medium thickness though, 'we' have always been rather remiss about defining the actual thicknesses of manes and tails).

Usually, the hair growth simply stops at the genetic disposition for it. But under certain conditions (genetic preferences) the hair growth can seem to skip a step, going from foal mane to almost medium flop mane in a single turn. It's rare though.

However, the flop is just still growing out to the short stage. Not really a stage, not really not a stage. Think of it as the mane is 'growing in'. Most likely when we see the flop and you see no difference between the short and the flop in puffies, it's most likely because the thick mane is already grown in and hiding the thickening that the thinner and non-puffy manes still require.
-_-
That does still come across rather screwy though. I think to visually help to see and explain the difference, one would need to work with horses with regular manes in both the thin version and the thick version in shorties and [hope] that they grow in super fast with a turn between the flop and the shortie mane (well, maybe not a necessity for grow-in speed, but certainly slow growth would be difficult to catch). In this way, the thickening of the mane itself could determine the factors and whether there is a 'hair thickening' or 'grow in' stage for the shorts. Thereby defining that the 'flop' is actually a half-stage between foal and short.