I found a lot of info online about B and E in Labradors, but I'm curious about C. Am I right that this is the gene that controls the shade of yellow from "white" all the way to "fox red"? Does this gene affect the other colors at all?
I'm really wondering if the dark and light shades of chocolate are controlled by this same gene? I know chocolates will vary in color depending on the condition of their coat, but I've seen photos of puppies from the same litter that are different shades of chocolate, and I wondered why.

I've noticed that some of the lighter chocolates look "warmer" like they have a reddish tone to them, while the darker ones look "cooler", if that makes sense. I don't know if that has anything to do with the C gene, of if it's just a matter of perception- lighter looks warmer.

I tried to figure this out by searching online, but I had a hard time understanding it all. Whew! I figured I'd go to the experts :)

I know it's a silly question, but it's gotten me all curious. If anyone has any info on this, I'd appreciate it!

Thanks in advance!

Neither do the DNA laboratories. There are no tests yet for variants of what Little called the "C" (chinchilla)gene. We don't even know if there IS a related group of alleles that control variations of red/yellow and brown hair. Schmutz is investigating what she calls an "I" gene (intense) that modifies the intensity of color in phaeomelanin (red/yellow) hair. That would explain the variations from fox-red to creme. However, this would not apply to shades of brown, because it is a eumelanin color.

There are 4 different reasons why dogs can be brown. One of the things we DO know is that the gene combination that codes for brown has no bearing on the shade of brown. Dark, light and medium browns can have exactly the same gene pattern on those 4 loci. The shade is controlled by some as yet unidentified gene activity. Isn't research interesting????

http://www.labbies.com/genetics2.htm

One quick question- Why do these fox red and white breeders get more respect that the improvement dilute breeders?

Because fox red and cream are included in the Labrador standard, the dilutes which is the result of a cross breeding after the Labrador Stud Books were closed deserves no respect.

has anyone ever proved that? Or is that someones opinion? The fox red breeders and the white breeders are breeding for color also

I figured this thread was heading this way.

No, it can't be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt because the d gene was introduced by another breed many generations ago now. The cat is out of the bag so to speak. DNA can only prove parentage, not breed. It is very apparent to those who know breed type that the look of most dilutes, which were silver because the breeder who first starting promoting the cross as rare, only bred from chocolate lines, were undeniably of the Weimaraner breed!

However, throughout the history and development of the breed the d gene was never active in our founding dogs and since the closing of our stud books in the early 1900s.

Fox Red and light cream (which is falsely labeled as a white) has *ALWAYS* been a shade of yellow. It is well-documented throughout the history of the breed. Since most people don't breed for color, the quality of a true fox red has not been up to show standards. There are some breeders who want to preserve the color however and therefore are trying to bring it up to par with the other shades of yellow. Light creams are already favored and the quality is there. It's the same with the chocolates. Again, chocolates are well-documented throughout the breed's history. They were not favored in the early development, but they are today and we have some fantastic chocolates.

The dilute gene is NOT documented *ANYWHERE* in the early history of the breed. It is NOT documented *ANYWHERE* after the closing of the stud books. It is still NOT mentioned in ANY book of Labradors written by long-time reputable breeders. You do find a reference in ONE book about a litter of pups with a silvery cast HOWEVER the silver/dilute breeders like to take it out of context and forget to mention that upon follow up ALL of the dogs had black coats as adults. Not the work of a dilute gene, sorry folks.

It started out as a rare color-the silver. The breeder who started ripping people off with his "rare" color only bred chocolates that carried a dilute gene, therefore he only produced the silver color. He was not smart enough to realize his creation was a simple reccessive dilute gene that was introduced as a result of another breed. He purposely inbred his dogs, father to daughter, mother to son, brother to sister in an attempt to keep the gene. He first called the color a "mutation". It was not a mutation. Then they started calling it a "shade" of chocolate. It is not *brown*. Now that unscrupulous, uninformed breeders who jumped on the silver bandwagon have introduce black and yellow lines into the mix. No longer is it just the silver it's charcoal too. Or just plain dilute. NO mutations here folks, just a dilute gene that NEVER before existed in the breed that just miraculously appeared to one breeder who exploited and sold it as rare and lied his ass off to make people buy his product. It's not a natural gene to the breed. It is quite apparent to breed type experts what breed introduced the gene into the dilute line.

Believe what you want, I choose to believe long-time, reputable breeders who only have the breed's best interest in mind.

Fox red and cream are not colors, just a shade of yellow.

I'm breeding for black. Does that make me a bad guy?

Don't you know the good guys wear white, bad guys black....

I would like to add that silver is not a color, just a shade of chocolate...AKC, in accord with the LRC, agree on that much.
If anyone wants to question that, do examine a dilute chocolate (aka silver) hair under a microscope before you do. You will see plenty of *brown* pigment, in fact all the pigment will be *brown*. No really, before you spout off about no *brown* you better go take a look.

It is easy to poke at the Culo breeder, a colorful guy and very outspoken, horrific inbreeding indeed. problem with the whole theory espoused by so many here, and just now reposted, is that not all dilutes come from Culo's dogs. Beavercreek, Husker, and several other lines I am not at liberty to presently divulge do not go back to Culo, yet they are throwing silver puppies.

Still trying to figure how these are the "same color."


If you look at their hair under a microscope, one appears totally clear, and one is full of red pigment...very much different "colors"...opps, I mean "shades." Really though, who cares if there are modifying genes causing this; modifying genes that affect how an allowable color is expressed are acceptable within the breed, right?

The thing that all you dilute breeders are in denial about is the fact that the "shade" modifier as you want to call it DOES NOT EXIST THROUGHOUT the breed's history. NO WHERE has a dilute gene EVER existed, well that is until recent history when Culo either purposely made the cross or purposely inbred the cross to "discover" the rare hidden dilute gene. When he started selling his rare color at a huge price by lying to unsuspecting idiots that bought his flat earth society speal, there were "other" breeders who recognized this cross and did their own cross. That is why you saw it in a few other lines. One silver kennel was banned from AKC though after the DNA testing didn't match. Ooops!

So while you can have different modifiers control the shade of yellow expressed, that has been well-documented. The same thing cannot be said about the d gene. Too bad so sad.

Oh and please tell us why EVERY book you see about Labradors ONLY mention Black, Yellow and Chocolate? Breeder bias? My, my, I think the world truly is flat.