Talk:Cream gene

Will add section on cryptic creams and generally improve article. Also, will refer to other MATP mutations such as murine "underwhite" and human OCA1 albinism. Countercanter (talk) 19:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just be careful to speak in English! (grin). As in, "what is an MATP mutation?" And so on. Also, remember that this article is just on the dilution factor that produces palomino buckskin, cremello and perlino -- ie the "cream" gene (Cr??) is the only dilution in this article, but you may want to look over pearl gene, champagne gene, and the general articles on Leucism and albinism. I look forward to seeing what you can add! Montanabw^(talk) 04:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things to add...

All known homozygous creams have blue eyes, pinkish skin, and cream colored coats, whether they are cremello or silver classic grulla cream, unless they are grey in which case the coat turns white. These horses can be collectively called blue-eyed creams.

"Silver classic grulla cream" is a new one to me, have an example? (And isn't this just a blue dun with the cream gene over the top of it?) Montanabw^(talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the point. It doesn't matter what other genes you slap on there. Countercanter (talk) 01:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The skin/hair/eyes are not devoid of pigment; for comparison, see skin/hair/eyes associated with white markings, which ARE devoid of pigment.

You will have to explain the skin and eyes difference to me, cremellos with pink skin and blue eyes and overos with pink skin and blue eyes look the same to me. Hair coat has pigment with cream, yeah, I get that. Montanabw^(talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go meet one. It's dusty pink, not stark, flesh/There's Nothing But Blood Vessels Under Here! pink. The eyes...check out the Cremello & Perlino Education Association website. Added: [1] Countercanter (talk) 16:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! I have, though not an overo and a cremello side by side at the same time. I suspect that blue-eyed palomino on that page has the pearl gene, which would explain the dark skin. Well, if you can find a good source for this, I'll not kick up a fuss. Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So does his blaze. I sincerely doubt he is pearl.Countercanter (talk) 22:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On what evidence? Pearl or Champagne may lead to lighter eyes...single dilute cream does not, at least as far as I have ever read (if there's a study saying otherwise, point me at it). That's my only point. The article does suggest that the horse has an "overo" eye, (though on most overos, it is usually in conjunction with a white marking that crosses the eye, though not always) but I am not sure what your point is about the blaze-- I presume it has pink skin under it, as do most white markings on any horse. But I wonder if they are just guessing about all of it. (that other article describing a horse as a "dark buckskin" really pushes the envelope with me -- smoky black, I'll buy, but not "dark buckskin.") Oh, it isn't really all that big a deal to me, I say just go for the article! Montanabw^(talk) 05:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blue-eyed creams are not known for sunburning easily or susceptibility to skin cancer. [2] They might tan/freckle [3].

Interesting -wonder if "tan or freckle" is actually the champagne gene, which causes mottling. Montanabw^(talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, tan or freckle in response to SUN. Not everything is the champagne gene. Countercanter (talk) 01:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article does say that, but do we have scientific corroboration? One of these articles specifically has that scrotum shot and explains it as an example of champagne. Freckle in the sun? Sunburn yes, melanomas maybe, but freckle? Not saying it can't happen, just wanting to see something that says it isn't champagne. Montanabw^(talk) 05:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Well, if it can be sourced to scientific material, I'm cool. (and not breeder web sites, where they aren't always right on the genetics...we all know about the bay horses that allegedly "throw black." LOL!) Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo of the champagne+cream horse's sheath illustrates the difference between the pink skin caused by the cream gene, and the pink skin that is totally unpigmented--pink skin that gives rise to unpigmented white hair.Countercanter (talk) 17:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I have heard about the tan-mottled skin on the champagne horses. But cremellos sure look like they have pink skin to me... however, if you are sure there is a difference between really pink-pink skin and the awfully darn pink skin that is not quite pigmentless, I'll accept that -- can't say I have ever looked at an overo with blue eyes side by side with a true cremello with blue eyes to say for sure. So I'll go along with you on this one. Montanabw^(talk) 22:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No effect on immune system, strength, or health in any way. [4] (Cite also from a paper...searching)

Agreed. Montanabw^(talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interactions with silver, dun, pearl, champagne

That will be a fun section to figure out! BTW, on that, read pearl gene, there I touched on the "pseudo double dilute" terminology that the researchers on that gene use... Montanabw^(talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countercanter (talk) 21:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, don't mind my comments on these minor issues above, I just like to argue over minutae as a recreational sport. (never knew that, did you? (grin)). You did a great job on the lethal white article, and here, my curiousity is over what the research says. The breeder and association sites are good for basic info, though they are not always completely reliable (like how we both know APHA waffles on "overo" and LWS) I'm actually real excited to see what you have to add to this article, you have access to some great research (and have more time to research that I do, I think).

As I understand the basics, the dilution genes are the relatively common dun and cream, and the less common silver dapple, champagne and pearl (or "barlink factor"). One thing I don't know is if these are in any way related to each other, I presume not at all? (At least, not in the way that "dominant white," sabino and tobiano all have some relation to the KIT locus). A real short summary of how incomplete dominants work (seeing as how the dominance article does explain it reasonably well) would also be cool here. Also, if there are particular breeds linked to certain genes, we could add that, perhaps to the other dilution gene articles...(for example, dun and cream show up all over the place, other than in Arabians and Andalusians, silver dapple seems to be mostly a Morgan and a Rocky Mountain Horse thing?? Pearl seems to be mostly seen in horses of Spanish-descended breeds, which includes the Quarter Horse and Paint, and I have no clue how widespread champagne is...?) Anyway, that's some thoughts. Do as you wish and proceed until apprehended! Montanabw^(talk) 05:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC) (activating radar... )(<--grinning, ducking and running...)[reply]

Rewrite

Initially, I almost had a cow, and just threw a fit here, but on more thorough lookover, the only thing I question is the "seal brown buckskin thing. I'll buy it if the web page used as a source actually DNA tested the "seal brown buckskin" and verified that it isn't a sooty black! I redacted my earlier hissy fit and my apologies...you do have it straight! LOL! Made some formatting tweaks, some rewording, hid a couple things I really wondered about, hidden text and tags should explain any changes that aren't self-evident. But I still see zero difference between the "amber" and brown-eyed horses. I think it's just reflection off the lighter coat color. But that's just an IMHO. Montanabw^(talk) 05:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging cremello, perlino, smoky cream

The cremello, perlino, and smoky cream articles are pretty BLECH in comparison to this one. Unless there's any really good reason not to, I want to merge them. They're all so redundant, and this article covers them well. Countercanter (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not opposed to it, the trick will be incorporating some of the small but useful bits, I can take responsibility for that, if you want...by the way, I'm not sure I understand your hidden comment on that perlino photo in this article? My only issue is not inserting that particular photo (though I don't see what the problem is, other than being just a head shot?), but I think we do need an example of a double dilute up there. A good full body cremello would probably be better if we could find one. Montanabw^(talk) 03:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I scoured those minor articles and made sure everything was covered in the Cream Gene article, so there shouldn't be much of anything left to do. Eh the subject of the perlino photo was just a bit nuts-looking. I know plenty of people who are adverse to blue-eyed creams because of their eyes. I love the smoky cream tobiano; he is SO useful! Countercanter (talk) 20:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And on a different note, we can tweak the single/double dilute headings, but the terms "single dilute" and "double dilute" are very common, so while there is logic to saying "homozygous" and "heterozygous," it is also worth mentioning the colloquial terms in the article. I'll play with it, feel free to change.

Also, I'll go look up the Welsh pony breed standards. Based on what the registries say, I'll either toss the tag or clarify it. All I know is that there is a chestnut Arabian registered as a "palomino" in one of the color breed registries because he has a really flaxen mane and tail. So I'm always a little dubious. I was dubious about Thoroughbreds for a while, too. Montanabw^(talk) 03:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[5] "The Key" DNA tested smoky cream registered purebred Welsh B.

Okey. I stand corrected. DNA testing is convincing. Registry vagueness iwas not exactly convincing, but with examples gets there.

[6] "RosMel's Creme De Mint" cremello Welsh A.

[7] Both the Welsh Ponies featured on this WPCSA page are palominos.

The rulebook is a better example. Best is a registry site saying "our breed comes in Palomino/etc." LOL! (Thank you AQHA!) Montanabw^(talk) 07:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[8] Ahem.

Trust me, people will want proof that TRIGGER was a Palomino! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 07:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All *I* know is that the Jockey Club doesn't list perlino as one of their colors. I feel that the existence of registered individuals with a certain coat color is SUPERIOR to the "word" of the registry. Not that it matters in this case. Countercanter (talk) 04:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But only if the registry admits it! LOL! (Remember the "palomino" Arabian that isn't!!)

LOL! After looking up the Welsh pony one (talk about no help there), I realized that someone later may question others, so I just went in and dug up breed standards and linked most all of them. Couldn't find a couple. SO: I'll grant you the Welsh pony one, but must point out that farm and advertising sites will not pass the scrutiny of the GA reviewers (at least, not if Ealdgyth gets ahold of it! LOL!) This is one reason why I am really questioning the "brown buckskin" thing. The only citation is a farm cite, and just like Bays throw black, a bay can throw a smoky black. So on that one I say they are smoky blacks until proven otherwise, particularly with the photos of the sooty buckskins you have--which appear to be sooty plus dilution?? (But if you CAN prove otherwise..?!) Montanabw^(talk) 07:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the article looks good, don't remember how it was before the merge, but since the creme gene is what causes buckskin, smokey, palomino, cremello and perlino it should I imagine all be in the same place. I was told that the creme gene has less influence on the "Black" coat hair colors, and that is why buckskins can have Black manes and Blacks with only one copy of the creme gene can look pure black. anyway, they, the double dilutes perlino and cremello were listed as albino's in the past in the Puerto Rican Paso Fino registry. The trick with perlino, is that is could be a dark bay or a black ( smokey creme? )or a light bay, the only difference being that the mane and tail of a perlino is a little rustier (reddish or purple weird)sometimes the body as well in color than in the "Cremello" . which is a "Red" or chestnut horse with two copies of this creme gene. Good job though.Arsdelicata (talk) 18:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arsd: :Right, that's what we said in there, somewhere. Thank god for genetic testing these days! Basically, the article before was much smaller, and not as much of the genetics info was here. CC: As for the blue eyes thing, yeah, a lot of people think they are weird-looking (including me), but it's reality. Maybe I can put in that cremello parade horse shot instead, but it's not great, either. Montanabw^(talk) 21:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montana and CC, The horse in the Parade looks like a roan over palomino, I could be wrong tough, I don't understand dun very well yet. I can try to find a prettier pic of a perlino, but they are not so common. I do have another pic of a horse, the owner said it was "white" the product of a Black horse and buckskin horse cross. It basically looks like the perlino already in the article. Maybe I'll get a pic of a Champagne or Perle some day. The article looks great already though. I'd say one of the best explanations online to date. Arsdelicata (talk) 09:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Park 'em here as a gallery and we'll sort it out! If they are particularly weird, note what colors their sire and dam were. I bet your"white" was simply a perlino or cremello--Smoky black in particular can be masked and look like an ordinary black, and buckskin obviously has one copy of the cream gene. Dun is not cream dilution -- it's a different one. When things get weird is when the same horse has multiple genes...imagine what you'd get with a horse carrying roan, dun, tobiano and cream all in the same animal! =:-O It could happen! Then, if they were gray on top of that, they'd fade to white and no later owner would even know what else was hiding in there! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 18:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures of cremello, perlino, and white mimics

A gallery will go here until images can be sorted out, or discussed later deleted or usedArsdelicata (talk) 23:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note the darker mane and tail color on a perlino
Note the lighter mane and tail and darker body hair on a cremello
This horse was spoted durring the same parade as the cremello and the picture taken from the same angle, but this horse has a whiter coat, and dark eyes I bet this is almost for sure a sabino-white
this is a white horse with black spots pic taken from the same spot I bet this is also a sabino-white
A new and gorgeous photo of a perlino.
Strange palomino with blue eyes and Lavender skin, on the left a buckskin, on the right a bay with amber eyes.
Full body shot in Bella Forma Class
Face Close Up
Closeup of skin between hind legs

added the pics, what I like is that the cremello and white horses were taken from the same spot, so the lighting should be very close. Not the best pictures but what I have for now. Arsdelicata (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC) On flicker I saw a beauty Cremello, or Perlino, they called is an Isabel Lusitano. The Akhal-Teke looks good too. Arsdelicata (talk) 15:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montanabw and all, this past weekend I went to a show and took pics of what might be a Perle or Champagne, or Silver Dilute, The horse looks like a palomino, with gray streaks in mane and tail, it has blue eyes, and lavender grayish pink skin. Might be of use, if so let me know if I should park it somewhere. Arsdelicata (talk) 21:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ooo, where are these pictures? Countercanter (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, do upload, how about uploading and just popping them into the gallery above and we'll sort them out. I would almost kill for images suitable for Pearl gene. You can upload some Flickr images, Commons has a bot thingy that will tell you if the license on Flickr is transferrable, they have a special Flickr category to walk you through it. Montanabw^(talk) 03:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montana and CC, I remembered you really wanted or needed something like that, so I took plenty of picks for you to choose from if you like and uploaded at Flickr here, since there is so many, and I don't know what you want yet. Then I will upload what you want to Commons, or I guess you can do it, I am not sure how everything works yet. I am new to flickr too, so I'll have to find that category. Like I said, it could be just a palomino, but the lavender skin, makes me think it was what you were looking for. [9] Arsdelicata (talk) 02:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can post the Flickr URLs here if you want. Your own stuff you can upload directly to Commons. Montanabw^(talk) 03:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tied to paste the link up above where it says 9, ?, not sure if that worked, maybe here http://www.flickr.com/photos/arsdelicata/3254791754/in/pool-wikimedia_commons Tried to add to a Wikimedia Commons group though flicker, but it does not come up. I'm just not sure if Commons wants that many picture ( like 18). But maybe you can see from there if any are usable. ok, uploaded the first...Arsdelicata (talk) 04:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Arsdelicata (talk) 04:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Spanish heritage of the horse breed, eye and skin color, with closeups showing that skin is NOT mottled, suggest pearl gene to me, maybe a cream-pearl pseudo double dilute, given that we have a palomino-looking critter. CC, what do you think? Have I found my photos? (Pleaseohpleaseohplease) Everyone take a look at the sources on the pearl gene page, many go to photos, a couple of them really look like this horse. Montanabw^(talk) 04:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't wait to see what CC thinks, I think it is a Palomino with Perle Factor, the mare has a bay colt, and a buckskin daughter both with dark eyes. Think the sire was bay in both offspring cases. The father of this mare was a Palomino I think, but I'd have to look ask the registry to dig that up.Arsdelicata (talk) 05:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I have to honestly say that I'm not sure what color this mare is! Superficially, she looks to be a palomino with some sooty qualities: dark smudges on her legs, with funny pale silvery lower legs. I did use the word "silver" but palominos cannot exhibit silver dapple traits. Only black-brown pigments are chemically affected by silver dapple. So whatever the cause of the grayishness on her points, it's not silver dapple and it's not gray.

The "blush" in her skin is unusual too, though not outside the realm of possibility for palominos, which can have lighter skin. Arsdelicata, you described it as "lavender"? Can you elaborate?

What throws me are the eyes, and since we're dealing with a mature horse let's limit our discussion to adult colors. Just like with people, normally horse eyes are dark brown. Totally unpigmented eyes in horses are not red, but pure, crystaline blue. The slightly-pigmented eyes of true cremellos are more yellowish or white, and don't have the dark, vivid oceanic quality around the pupil (see photo in the article). Single-dilute creams typically - in my experience - have lighter eyes. This horse is an excellent example: [10] Even lighter still are champagne eyes, which are hazel: [11] The eyes of heterozygous pearls don't seem unusual, but homozygotes apparently do have lighter eyes: [12]

And then of course there are the amber-eyed Paso Finos, which seem to have normal skin and coats.

What could give us these funny-colored eyes, blushed skin and an otherwise palomino-colored body? I don't think we are dealing with normal eyes, or unpigmented "pinto" eyes. Nor is this mare a homozygous cream. It would seem that this mare does not have obvious freckling and is not likely a champagne but I wouldn't be too quick to rule it out. Their skin gets darker as they age and I've always described champagne skin as "purplish". I doubt that she is a homozygous pearl; the quality of her coat color isn't flat apricot, it's golden.

1 cream + pearl? We'd expect eyes like these [13], bright pink skin, and a cream-ish coat. This is not what I see. 1 cream + champagne? We'd expect aqua to hazel eyes and a very pale coat with paler, freckled skin. Again, not what I see.

In my opinion, this mare's coat and eyes are what I might expect from a Paso Fino that is amber-eyed and palomino. We have evidence in pearl+cream and champagne+cream of synergistic effects of dilution genes. That is, while amber-eyed Paso Finos might otherwise appear to have normal colored skin, when combined with single-dilute cream, you might see unexpectedly light skin and eyes. Countercanter (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input CC, yes it might be a palomino with no pearl, I am rather stumped as the examples you gave and none quite like her. She has a lavender cast or blue haze to her coat on dark areas of skin. I would say it is similar to the blue in Weimaraner dogs or Russian Blue cats, Like a dilution to the black pigment in the skin, and the sooty parts of her coat. With the palominos, I've seen plenty with black eyes. It makes me wonder about the eye color at least partially being inherited separately. I'll keep an eye out for any apricot looking animals, or champagne, or what I think might be pearl, Maybe eventually we can get it all figured out. With time, Fascinating though. The palomino you links to I think has an Amber eye very like many of the bays I've seen here. I'll post if I find anything new that may be of help. Arsdelicata (talk) 01:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen palominos with dark brown eyes, or at least eyes I didn't think were especially different from regular eyes. And it is not outside the realm of possibility that you saw something quite unique. I don't think it's pearl though. Countercanter (talk) 13:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say definitely not Champagne due to no mottling, but who knows. I'd say Pearl if anything, though CC is right that a pseudo double dilute should be lighter. Say! How about asking the owners to send in DNA to UCD and settle the matter for us? They can do Pearl, Cream and I think Champagne too! Actually, all the weird things going on with the Amber eyes on a bay and all is EXTREMELY weird (cool weird, but weird) and ought to be something to bring to the attention of VGL at UCD -- maybe the PRPF folks should contact the University -- any time a breed association starts pushing something, a test usually comes up within about two years. Montanabw^(talk) 19:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Been working on homework for the Golden yellow eye thing, I'll send this in as well, perhaps they already know what it is. Will keep you all posted Arsdelicata (talk) 07:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussion, but I don't see the possibility of buckskin + silver discussed yet. The mare does have striped hooves and the legs have silvery hue I'd expect in a bay based silver thing. Pitke (talk) 19:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merging of "cremello", "perlino", and "smoky cream"...

Are there any objections? Countercanter (talk) 13:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, I kind of wish we could keep them separate, but you are right that there is so much duplicative material. Remind me that we will have to tweak the coat colors template when you are done. Montanabw^(talk) 06:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

I personally think that cremello, perlino, smoky cream, etc could all be discussed in one article. Much of the literature and data and wordage is redundant. Such a merger would also make it easier to discuss more unusual combinations, such as blue-eyed cream+dun, and so on. These articles fall under reason 2 (overlap) for merging pages. Countercanter (talk) 19:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Food for thought. We do have cream gene as a possible base. We also have dilution gene, which is mostly a list and included other animals. Keep in mind too, that we also have palomino, smoky black, and buckskin (horse). (And hm, who was it that broke out smoky black and smoky cream when I had them merged into one article, eh? (grinning, ducking and running!)).

More merger

And we do have the concern of the multiple dilution genes. There are articles on all of the different ones out there, I think. Note the article I created on the "barlink factor" or pearl gene, which can create a "pseudo-double-dilute" and then of course champagne gene, dun gene, and silver dapple gene. Oh yes, and then my favorite (not) American creme and white horse registry. Remember too that both Palominos and Buckskins have their own "registries," in spite of the genetic impossibility of true-breeding those colors, thus they aren't really "breeds." Sigh...

None of my above thoughts are really insurmountable concerns, I just am thinking of the overall big picture. What do you think of this idea? Start at cream gene and clean it up, bring it up to par. We MIGHT, at that point, feel we can then merge the others into that one, or we may decide that there is some other organizational scheme that would be better. But if cream gene would be suitable for a base, then let's make it a really good one. At that point, we might be able to simply get rid of the various redundant material in the individual other articles by suitable wikilinking and keep them separate, or we might decide to merge.

Incidentally, we have a similar situation with Piebald, Skewbald, Tricoloured (horse), Tobiano, and Pinto. Overo you already know about, and last I heard we were talking about whether to break out frame and splash as had been done with Sabino???

OK, so long story short. You might be right. On the other hand, laypeople know squat about genetics and when they want to learn about, say, palominos, they will search for palomino and may be confused to be redirected to cream gene. I guess I think we DO need to look at cream gene and make it into a solid article. Then, we might decide to merge in some or all of the others -- or we may not. Your thoughts on this idea? Montanabw^(talk) 05:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm specifically interested in merging cremello, perlino, and smoky cream because they are so similar visually. Smoky blacks and smoky creams look NOTHING alike and you're right, most people know diddly-squat about genetics, so would be confused as to why the two would occupy one article.

I also agree that buckskin and palomino, at least, should stay in their own articles. I do think the palomino article still needs work...the article suggests that the color breed stuff about palomino is The Way It Is, and that I feel is misleading. The color breed information, even the stuff in the intro section, should probably be in the color breed section. I may not have addressed everything. I'm sleepy; I just finished the last book in that atrociously trashy, thoroughly enjoyable teenage vampire romance series. Countercanter (talk) 01:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see your thinking. Makes some sense, given the redundancies involved. If you are OK with the basic idea that cream gene would be suitable as the base article, I am OK with the merge. That said, it would have to start right off with appropriate redirects and a very accessible intro that says something like "the cream gene is an incomplete dominant gene responsible for cremello, perlino and smoky cream coat colors, and in its heterozygous state also produces palomino, smoky black and buckskin -- or something like that... If so, how about you go ahead and start tweaking on it, I'll tweak on it, and once everything is in there that basically describes the three colors (feeling free to swipe photos and what cites are in the other articles, even copying and pasting), then we can do a review of the others and decide if we are ready to merge them. You want to put on merge tags so that anyone else who cares can comment? I would suggest using {{mergeto|Cream gene}} for all three. We could put {{mergefrom|article name}} for each of the other three on the cream gene page. I may be slow to do a lot of work here as I am in the middle of trying to get Horses in warfare ready for FA (by the way, if you want to do a review of that and comment, it's at peer review -- you haven't been an editor on that one, so you would be a great third party set of eyes to see where we might be having problems). Montanabw^(talk) 20:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunalino?

In looking on this horse I would thik it ist a Palomino roan. In a dunalino the color on the coat schold be less extendet. --Kersti Nebelsiek (talk) 19:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, Duns often have slightly darker heads and legs, red duns quite noticably so. A "palomino roan" wouldn't have the light eyes. But I'll wait for Countercanter's analysis. She's our genetics guru. Montanabw^(talk) 18:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The argument can be made either way. Why don't I just change the caption to reflect the ambiguity? It's an important photo all the same. Countercanter (talk) 18:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That or just toss the photo. In all honesty, I have never heard of a "palomino roan," though I suppose such a critter could exist, Roan is a dominant. I truly do not care. Montanabw^(talk) 20:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's on a different allele, unlike Pearl (which is why a horse can't have 2 copies of cream and 2 *or 1* copies of Pearl, a horse can have (and exhibit) both cream (such as a palomino) and roan at the same time. For a picture of a palomino roan, google the name "Metallic Oak" for a palomino roan QH. To go into even more detail, a horse can have, and exhibit all at the same time: agouti, cream, dun, silver and roan, since all are on different alleles. 198.111.204.46 (talk) 22:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Narmowen[reply]

Yes, I do now see that is possible, And you will note that this discussion ended in 2009 (grin), and we've improved our understanding quite a bit since then.. But a palomino isn't going to exhibit agouit, as it has no black to suppress (smile). Montanabw^(talk) 23:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism - we need it

So, what does the gene actually do? I have Viitanen, she cites Gerts, Gremmel and Furugren, what she writes is that Cream

reduces production of pigment (by what mechanism?)
affects the shape and size of pigment particles
leaves the base of the hair very pale, allowing pigment mostly at the tip

This info (or superior explanations) should be found in this article.

I suppose I'll be getting this Furugren book, it seems to hold most info on colour mechanisms. Unfortunatyly it's in Swedish, but I'm getting better. Pitke (talk) 06:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. As far as I know, nobody has published a theory of how this SNP affects the function of MATP. The MATP gene encodes a protein that is involved in converted tyrosine into melanin. Countercanter (talk) 23:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cream gene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516050127/http://www.arabianhorses.org/registration/markings/index.asp to http://www.arabianhorses.org/registration/Markings/Index.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Cream gene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]