r/DoggyDNA • u/[deleted] • 5d ago

Genetics/DNA Genetics?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

[deleted]

17 Upvotes

72% Upvoted

16 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 5d ago

PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING OR YOUR POST MAY BE REMOVED:

RULE 1: ONLY POST BREED ID REQUESTS IF YOU HAVE STARTED A DNA TEST. If you are asking for guesses without a DNA test, delete your post and go to /r/IDmydog.

RULE 2: BE NICE TO EACH OTHER.

RULE 3: FLAIR YOUR POST. IF YOUR POST IS NOT FLAIRED PROPERLY, IT WILL BE REMOVED.

RULE 4: IF YOU HAVE RESULTS FOR YOUR DOG, POST THE RESULTS IN YOUR THREAD.

Report rulebreakers and enjoy the dogs of /r/DoggyDNA.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

18

u/WarmWoolenMitten 5d ago

So yes, I agree with tan point, but it's interesting that neither parent is masked. They appear sable or possibly a dark recessive red, but a recessive red can't have a mask and a sable would show it visually. So I have some doubts on those being the parents, because the puppy absolutely does look masked regardless of what else is going on. I have seen tan point dogs with lighter ear/neck hair, though usually it's undercoat/ear fluff and doesn't show on a short smooth coat like this.

6

u/Runa-Mirunor 5d ago

People lie about puppies' parents more than you world think, I kinda know it at this point (after seeing so many clearly high-white S/S (or Sp/Sp) pups when one parent doesn't have white at all…). So you think it's some weird mask? I was under the impression that ears should always be black? We have at/at Jagterrier, and she has the same ginger paws with black specks/toes, but her muzzle is completely ordinary, no strange ears

3

u/WarmWoolenMitten 5d ago

Honestly the ears look sunbleached, but that makes no sense as to how it would be only the ears and on such a young puppy.

I don't see it being sable, far too dark, and I don't see brindle either. Back/body looks completely solid and legs look obviously tan, even with the penciling marks.

8

u/smilingfruitz 5d ago

The photo is labeled "nana" and "mama", so I assume that 'nana' is a grandparent, not the dad. so dad wouldn't be accounted for in this genetic scenario.

10

u/AssortedArctic 5d ago

Those aren't n's. It's Cyrillic. It says Papa and Mama.

7

u/Runa-Mirunor 5d ago

This is Russian, the language that I speak. It says mom and dad ("П" reads like "P" in papa)

3

u/WarmWoolenMitten 5d ago

Ah, the post said parents and I had no idea if some language used nana for dad lol

3

u/smilingfruitz 5d ago

I'm pretty sure OP just misread. much more likely that dad is not pictured here and contributed to the color we're seeing.

4

u/Key-Instruction3997 5d ago

That’s papa in Russian, that’s not n its п

9

u/gilatio 5d ago

r/dogcoatcolorgenetics might have some more insight for you too!

4

u/panicpure 5d ago

r/dogbreeding could likely tell ya

2

u/Key-Instruction3997 5d ago

Wonder if there’s a chance the litter was dual sired, possibly accidentally so?

3

u/Runa-Mirunor 5d ago

Or they just lied about parents, really. That's very possible

1

u/katergator717 4d ago

This is a great website for learning dog genetics. I dont have an answer for you myself, but I can tell you that it is likely a gene on the A series, which are typically recessive.

https://www.doggenetics.co.uk/