New Dreamy Fold ears recessives

[Reven Rosca]

(05-03-2016 08:10 AM)fabioazevedo Oh Wrote:  the idea of these post in the forum is exactly bring the evidence and pedigree visible for all to see.
to access the reference link, it was not possible to find any image with the proof so we can hit the hammer.

I see that you often reference the Saga charts when you determine known ranges of traits. Does this mean that some parts of the charts are more trustworthy than others?

---

(05-02-2016 09:21 AM)Ivy Lane Wrote:  A friend (Jaime Poutine) gave me this kitty,Sir Chadwick, and he has the dreamy fold ears



I bred him to a female that had soft curl ears since i saw the ear was pulled by soft curl on the forum
I knew that something was hiding behind the Dreamy fold , from the other starter and she had no idea what that might be she just knew she was getting the new ear when they were together

At this point it appears the Ody Rounded Fold came from the other starter
and it looks as if it is dom to the Dreamy fold

I will work to get a female and breed back for more proof if needed for confirmation but to me with this breeding it appears that Dreamy Fold is recessive to Orf and dom to soft curl.

If you haven't done so already, Ivy, can you please send this pedigree to Sagakitty so they can place the ears precisely?

[Tad Carlucci]

There was a period where Saga's Charts suffered from a lax manager, were not updated as often as desirable, and began to fall out-of-date. The new management has taken steps both to eradicate any errors and keep the charts up-to-date.

That said, YES, we DO implicitly trust the charts.

The main difference is Saga's Charts are run behind-the-scenes; they lack transparency. Should a faulty analysis occur, we have no means to spot it until we notice an inconsistency in the published charts. These threads provide that.

These threads started back when Saga's Charts we falling behind. So they also offer a more timely reading on the known dominance hierarchy. In addition, since we are not dependent upon a single person's analysis, we'll accept a proof here based upon ONE example where Saga's Charts has a TWO-example requirement to accept a fact as proven.

I view the two methods as complimentary. For a quick-check, I look to these threads. But for an in-depth analysis, especially using older trait values, I depend upon Saga Charts.

You should, too.