Website Template

Often fanciers ask the question of how to make a start with Lacewings. My answer is the same as starting in any other variety. You must like the variety visually, you need to read about it, discuss and understand the genetics and breeding characteristics of the variety. (Remember you are probably committing yourself to a 5-7 year programme before you have established a winning line). You need to visit shows and look at the variety, making notes of breeders' names. It may be that the birds you are looking at did not win the class, this could have been because they were against other varieties in the AOC class which sometimes gives the Lacewing an uneven chance. Probably, the Specialist and Rares shows will give the best indication of the variety and of the quality which is around now.

The Lacewing is a sex-linked variety, so it is no use starting with hens as you waste a year trying to breed splits. You could start with a single cock as I did, but again it is a long process. My suggested initial purchase would be two cocks and four hens. If more can be afforded, then so much the better because it can take some time to accumulate Lacewings in quantity, especially cock birds. It is important that you decide whether you want White (Blue Series) which in my opinion are more difficult, or Yellow (Green Series) Lacewings. It is not advisable to try and mix the twp colours.

The most important feature of the Lacewing is the Cinnamon marking which is best observed in the normal variety. Although you will find it easier to purchase larger Opalines, the wing markings will be more faint. Blue or green sheen is another consideration when selecting your initial stock; this is similar to that on Inos, however, this can be eradicated during the second or third year of breeding. If you can buy birds with size and style, so much the better. However, you will probably find that you willl need to work on any stock available for sale.

Whilst it is best to buy from a winning stud, in the case of Lacewings, the number of specialist breeders is more restricted, and it is usually a case of buying from whatever source is available. Alternatively, speak to a known breeder early in the season and ask him to let you know when he will have stock available.

Initially, I would not suggest outcrossing until you have a quantity of related birds. Probably the first outcross would be in the third year. This outcross would only be used once in a family and in the following two years I would pair Lacewing to Lacewing again to revitalise the colour. The aim of the outcross would be to produce split cocks and visual hens, outcrosses generally are Cinnamon Dark Green or Cinnamon Grey Green for the green series, and Cinnamon Grey for the blue series. Other breeders use Normals instead of Cinnamons, whatever works for you is the answer.

Purity of the Lacewing relates to colour and markings. Colour is best achieved by pairing like to like. However, this tends to lead to a loss of size and shortening of the mask eventually. Fertility is also affected if you continuously pair related families together. Unfortunately, the Lacewing takes eighteen months to reach maturity and during that period should be allowed to fly in flights, but not studied for quality. Year old birds can be used for breeding, but I find they breed better in the second year, they also develop during this breeding period.

I would not use birds related closer than half-brother to half-sister, as when I have tried closer than this, I did not succeed. I also feel that fertility must be watched when breeding this close, I generally go no closer than cousins.

In the Lacewing, the most important feature other than the "Budgie" are the markings. These are also the most difficult to maintain, especially in the Opalines. I do not advocate the pairing together of two birds with faint markings as this will exaggerate the problem.

When deciding on outcrosses, the same rule applies as does to Inos. Don't use Light Green to the Yellows and stay away from Skyblues with the Whites.

When examining the varieties covered by the Budgerigar Society's colour standards, one wonders why certain varieties are popular while others are not. In fact some are almost extinct.

There are a number of reasons for this: the arrival of a new mutation; lack of interest; not making headway; insufficient stock available and most of all lack of encouragement from various official bodies. All these assist in the decline in popularity of certain varieties.

Two such varieties that enjoyed brief acknowledgement and success in the fifties and sixties and then returned to oblivion are the "Dark-Eyed Clears" and the "Continental Clearflights". Other varieties that hit bottom are the Violets, Mauves and their counterparts, the Olive, Fallows, Dutch Pieds and the Brownwings, just to name a few.

The Rare Variety and Colour Budgerigar Society must take full credit for reviving the interest in these varieties and of course, the Specialist and Rare Variety Open Show catering exclusively for such specialist colours and varieties will further assist their revival.

I became interested in the Dark-Eyed Clears (DEC) in 1988. The ones I had seen previously were of such poor quality that, like others, I criticised the variety and their owners, even though I am known for my appreciation of, and interest in the "lesser varieties".

I acquired two white DEC cocks from my friends Geoff and Cherril Bunker who were at that time in the process of moving house to the West Country. The two cocks were brothers and of reasonable quality. One of those cocks when exhibited in the Recessive Pied class on two occasions was wrong-classed even though it was entered in the correct class. I took them on for two reasons; I needed a new challenge and perhaps wanted to do my bit in promoting a variety.

Dark-Eyed Clears, from their name, are budgerigars of clear yellow or white, free from any markings and colour pigmentation. This purity of colour covers the entire body and wings. They resemble the Lutinos and Albinos except in the eye. They share a common ground with Recessive Pieds, insofar as they have the solid black eye without the white iris ring; hence at times they are referred to as a "Black-Eyed Clears". Like the Lutino and Albino the DEC can mask any colour. For instance, a Yellow DEC could be in fact, an Olive Green DEC or a Light Green DEC. The shade of yellow in this case will be deeper and richer in the Olive than in that of the Light Green.

The Budgerigar Society 1994 Colour Standards (for the Yellow variety) defines them as follows:

Pure buttercup yellow throughout and free from any odd green feathers or green suffusion.

Note: The intensity of body colour varies in depth according to the number of dark factors in the make-up of each bird.

Pure buttercup yellow throughout, free from black or grizzled tickings or green suffusion.

Records of their origin are rather scarce. They seem to have originated in Belgium about 1948, and a couple of years later in Denmark too. A breeder found these colours appearing in his aviary. He had at the time, the dominant Continental Clearflights and Danish Recessive Pieds breeding on the colony system.

The appearance of those DEC's caused some confusion, in the genetical sense, as to why two different type of pieds, one dominant and one recessive, should produce a bird free from any colour pigmentation as are the Redeyes, Lutinos and Albinos. Therefore, it is in order to describe them as a synthetic colour or man-made colour resulting from the mixing of two different forms of Pieds.

It took a while to understand the gene that controlled their production and by the fifties they were popular, as were the Continental Clearflights. It was found that when pairing a Clearflight with a Recessive Pied, half of the young would be Clearflights and the other half Normals, with all the young split for Recessive Pied. It was also found that by mating a Clearflight split for Recessive Pied back to a Recessive Pied, a certain percentage of the young will be DEC. These Clears are not really Pieds in appearance but are the Recessive Pied form of the Continental Clearflight, or more concisely "Clearflighted Recessive Pied".

It took me a while to understand their genetical breeding behaviour as written material on them was rather scarce. Those DEC's are in fact, birds that carry in their genetical make-up, one dominant gene (gene for Clearflight) and two recessive genes (genes for the Recessive Pied). Depending on which partner they are paired with, one type of gene will predominate and various varieties will be produced.

For example, if a DEC is paired to a Recessive Pied, then the recessive genes will act and the pairing will be as pairing two birds of recessive genes or two Recessive Pieds together. This type of pairing will produce DEC's and Recessive Pieds of equal numbers, theoretically.

The confusion arises when pairing a DEC with a normal (non-pied or split for Recessive Pied); we then produce the Clearflights. In this pairing we will not produce DEC's even though we started with one. In fact, the pairing will produce Clearflights and normals all split for Recessive Pied. What happens in this type of pairing is that the dominant Clearflight gene will act and the pairing is just like a Dominant Pied to a normal. Because the DEC had two recessive genes in hidden form, then these genes will continue to be present in the progeny in a hidden form as well, hence all the progeny will be split for Recessive Pied.

Yet, when pairing a DEC with a Clearflight split Recessive Pied, the dominant gene on both sides will act and the pairing is similar to Dominant Pied × Dominant Pied. This pairing will produce DEC, Clearflight and normal; both of the latter being split for Recessive Pied because of the recessive genes of the DEC, and because of the presence of the recessive gene on both sides, Recessive Pieds will appear as well.

It is interesting to see how the dominant and recessive genes of the DEC act depending on the partner. Because of the presence of a dominant gene in the DEC make-up, this gene can be present in a single or double dosage, visually both alike. The Pied genes act by eliminating the pigment melanin from the Pied patches. It seems that neither the recessive nor the dominant Pied genes can on their own, eliminate all the pigment, but two recessive and one dominant are sufficient to give complete elimination.

If you are not already confused with the genetics then perhaps the table of expectations below will assist in understanding the intermingling of the three varieties with each other.

The table below shows the various types of pairings that can be used to produce the DEC.

The single and double factor Clears from the above matings are indistinguishable from each other.

Will the Dark-Eyed Clears progress in their second revival? That will remain to be seen and be dependent on the level of interest shown in this variety by other fanciers. I know that I am very interested in them. To me they are a new challenge and the progress that I made in three breeding seasons was quite noticeable.

The Specialist and Rare Variety Open Show, of which I am the show organizer, provides separate classes for them rather than combining them with the Recessive Pieds as in all other shows. At the 1989 show a young Yellow DEC cock of mine came third in the Recessive Pied breeder CC line-up. He won best DEC in show and repeated his success as an adult the following year. The same bird was second in the breeder CC line-up at another area championship show. This was a pleasant success for me indeed.

In 1988 I paired the best of the two DEC cocks that I had acquired, with one of my best Recessive Pied hens. That pair produced three White DEC hens and some Recessive Pieds. Again, using the best of those hens back to one of my best Recessive Pied cocks the following year, produced three Yellow DEC cocks, one of which I mentioned above. Now the quality of those DEC's are such that I use them with Recessive Pieds instead of splits as partners. In this way there is no production of inferior quality splits and therefore, no wastage.

There is great scope for the Recessive Pied breeder in taking up breeding DEC's, as there is no wastage with them. They are exhibited in the same class as the Recessive. Pied. With understanding and appreciation by the judges, they did win CC's allocated to them in conjunction with the Recessive Pied, in the early- and mid-90s.

Future Mutations

I have hesitated for a long time before writing this article, because, unlike the talks which I give from time to time, I cannot have the help of colour slides and laminates of various members of the Parrot family. However, I am vain enough to worry in case one of my predictions is overtaken by the appearance of the real thing before I have got into print.

Had I been writing this articles in the early 1930's I like to think that on firm genetical grounds, I would have predicted the eventual appearance of a yellow-faced blue budgerigar. How thrilled I would have been when, only a few years later such birds appeared.

There is no space here to go into the complexities of colour in the Parrot family, fascinating as they are. Suffice it to say that colour in the budgerigar is due to the presence or absence of two pigments, black and yellow, and various feather structures which give the blue shades by selective reflection of light. Unusually, budgerigars have no red pigment and it is not possible for a mutation to produce one, hence there will never be a naturally occurring pink budgerigar. Contrary to most peoples' perception, once a species is fixed, a mutation can only prevent (or modify) the formation of an existing substance.

Several parrot species other than budgerigars, have exactly the distribution of yellow pigment needed for "yellow-faced blue". The various Caiques hve yellow heads above white breasts and Pilated Parrakeets have rich yellow heads above deep blue breasts. These are just two of a number of examples which show that in the Parrot family, one or more genes exist which can "switch off" yellow pigment selectively. The appearance of this type of gene in the budgerigar, is not, genetically speaking, a very big step and was reasonably predictable.

A number of parrot species have the precise distribution of pigment needed for "white-faced green" and I predict that sooner or later we shall get such a budgerigar.

The Cuban Amazon has a snow white area above its beak and around the eyes, and a body which is mainly shades of green. Maximilian's Parrot and the Blue-headed Parrot have blue heads above green bodies and so have the correct distribution of the yellow pigment. Turquoisines have blue faces, flecked with white above yellow breasts. The Blue-fronted Amazon has a blue and white front to its head and the amount of white can vary between individuals. This variation may well be a factor for potential selection. For this reason it is essential to watch budgerigars heads for the slightest signs of white feathers. Even one feather might give material for selection.

I have several other predictions to make but I will save them for another day and a future newsletter.

Keeping Rares in an Exhibition Stud

In the last issue of the Rares magazine, Colin Putt made reference to the way in which manage to breed English Fallows alongside a "normal" exhibition stud. He made reference to the fact that I stagger my breeding seasons. At least I think that that is what he meant, and not that I stagger from one breeding season to the next! I thought that it may be of interest to other members if I were to go into a little more detail.

Firstly, I have two cabins. The large cabin is 20ft long × l0ft wide. Attached to this cabin is an outside flight measuring llft × 8ft. Inside are two flights measuring approximately 7ft × 4ft each. These flights are from floor to roof with the seed provided at floor level and the lowest perch about three feet from the floor, thus forcing the birds to use their wings. Flight "A" has access to the outside flight through a small bob hole. I will refer to the other flight as Flight "B". A removable partition separates the inside flights which means I can have a 14ft × 4ft inside flight with all birds having access to the outside flight if I wish. There are twelve breeding cages measuring 36in wide, 15in high and 20in deep. These cages can be converted to six large stock cages measuring 72in × l5in × 20in by removing partitions. There are a further fifteen breeding cages measuring 30in × 15 × 20in. These can be converted to three stock cages measuring 14ft × 15in × 20in. I know that this does not add up but they go round a corner utilising space which is not available when they are in "breeding mode". This cabin is referred to as my main cabin because this is where I breed the exhibition birds which includes the Lacewings and Dilutes.

The small cabin is l0ft × 6ft. This has eight breeding cages measuring 28in × 15in × 20in which can be converted to two stock cages approximately l0ft long. Above these is a flight cage measuring l0ft long, 3ft high and 2ft deep. I will call this Flight "C". I also use this cabin to store my supply of seed which I buy in bulk to reduce costs. This cabin is referred to as my rares because this is where I breed the Fallows, a few Greywings and one or two other oddities.

In October the exhibition cocks are in Flight "A" and the hens are in Flight "B". The rare cocks and hens are in Flight "C". The breeding cages in the main cabin are repainted during October and November ready for pairing up in December.

In December I put up between 24 and 27 pairs of exhibition birds. Once I am satisfied that all the pairs are going to lay eggs the remaining exhibition birds are then all put in Flight "B" and the rares brought into the main cabin to spend about 3 months in Flight "A". There are a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, it gives the rares a chance to stretch their wings and have access to the outside flight. Secondly, they provide that additional noise in the main cabin so desirable during the breeding season. Thirdly, it means that all my birds are housed together during the winter months makes life a lot easier for me! I usually have between 35 and 50 youngsters hatch in early January. These are in one of the 14ft stock cages until they are between 10 and 12 weeks old.

During January and February the small cabin is completely refurbished ready for the rares' breeding season. In mid-March the rares are transferred back to their cabin. If they are in breeding condition I will take the opportunity to pair some up at this time rather than risk them "going back" due to the change of cabin. This is where the "stagger" comes into it's own. Like most exhibition breeders I keep back more hens than I need and there are always some useful birds that have not been used during the breeding season. These are the outcrosses for the rares which is vital if the exhibition standard is to be improved. By waiting until the end of the standard breeding season I do not have to worry that I am "wasting" a good bird on the rares. The exception to this rule is the Lacewings, which get first pick of two normal hens in December.

Flight "A" which the rares have just vacated, is then washed down and repainted. The non-breeding exhibition birds are then moved from "B" to "A" and then Flight "B" is washed and painted. The flights are then opened up and the first round youngsters are introduced. This can take several weeks because I will only release a maximum of 5 youngsters to the flights at once. I have found that introducing too many young birds causes chaos in the flights especially for the first few nights.

By early May many of the exhibition pairs are winding down their breeding and are being returned to the flights. I now begin the annual culling operation using the vacated breeding cages as stock cages. Any adults which I have decided to let go and first round youngsters which are not meeting my quality level are brought out of the flights for me to study in more detail before making the final decision to depart company. This process continues throughout the summer months as young birds mature.

I also use the 6ft stock cages to prepare birds for the shows although I do not exhibit too often, probably six shows per year.

Also in May the rares will have babies, and the first round youngsters are brought down into the main cabin to be housed in a stock cage for about six weeks prior to going into the flight cage in their own cabin. The second round youngsters use the breeding cages (converted to stock cages) vacated by their parents which will have been returned to the flight cage. I usually cull the rares in September just in time to start the annual cycle all over again in October Come to think about it, Colin was right when he said that I stagger from one breeding season to the next!

My Way of Breeding Lacewings

The Lacewing is a sex-linked variety as is Ino, Opaline, Cinnamon and Slate. Therefore breeding results are predictable both for colour and sex. This makes the Lacewing an easier variety to improve than the recessive varieties such as Fallows or Greywing.

Basically the Lacewing conforms to either Green or Blue series (green being the yellow and blue being the white). Before moving on, I am aware that we can also have a yellow-face white which can appear cream in colour. With the lacewing we are looking for a pastel shaded bird with normal markings in cinnamon brown - a fundamental factor being a red eye with normal iris ring. Some say that the Lacewing is a "cinnamon ino" cross-over and not a variety in its own right. I refute this concept and to prove my own views that it is a separate variety from cinnamon-inos, I have been able to produce Lacewings from non-cinnamon families. In other words I have bred out the cinnamon that had been put in by others who strongly recommended using cinnamon as out-crosses.

Basically what the vast majority of Lacewing breeders were doing was creating Cinnamon Lacewings. Such lacewings show paler markings (soft beige) and less intense body colour as one would expect when using cinnamon with any variety. I do not use cinnamon-carrying birds and, where possible, use only outcrosses that do not in any way have a risk of carrying cinnamon. Hence normal hens as opposed normal looking cocks.

I have found by selective breeding, sometimes ruthlessly getting rid of a family, I have created to non-cinnamon lacewings that have darker markings and richer body colours, a much more impressive bird altogether. Maintaining colour contrast is all important in my opinion. For choice with the green series Lacewing I would be looking for a good example of dark or olive green which would put colour into the body. Light green can lighten the body colour too much and can, importantly, increase suffusion. Suffusion in the blue series can be very pronounced, so to allay this scourge I have found the use of grey has a positive effect in reducing suffusion. However, it must be used prudently as over-use can produce an off-white body colour. Use for one or two seasons only as otherwise, as with cinnamon, all the stud will carry grey.

I strongly discourage the use of Inos with Lacewings - the combination is not useful to either and confusion can creep in. Ino is dominant to Lacewing, hence in a nest of Inos appears a Lacewing - why? is the question - the Ino cock is split for lacewing. I am often asked by interested fanciers how one could start with Lacewings. Firstly, stock is not plentiful so getting birds is a challenge in itself. If no visuals were on offer I would certainly consider a split cock. I well remember giving a person a split cock - it was paired to a normal hen and four young were bred - 1 normal and 3 Lacewing hens. One would be good, but three! I try not to use Lacewing × Lacewing pairings for more than 1 generation as I have found no evidence of advancement. Colour and markings need to be selective factors in such pairings, only the best × best should be used. I would then use outcrosses in the second generation and maybe third before attempting a Lacewing × Lacewing, again only using the best (i.e., good type, colour and size)

The Lacewing complements a stud of normals so a fancier could successfully run a small stud as a challenge without threat to either. For anyone wanting a pastel coloured variety of outstanding beauty, the Lacewing is ideal.

"Rainbow-coloured" conjures up in most people's minds something very colourful - something that displays all the colours of the spectrum; from red, through orange, yellow, green and blue, to indigo and violet. Can there be a budgerigar variety that displays all those colours?

Well, not quite all of them. No red or pink mutation has yet occurred in budgerigars as far as we know, nor is it thought likely to, so the red sector of spectrum regrettably cannot be included. Nevertheless there is a group of composite varieties that can display most of the spectrum colours. They have been given the name Rainbows, and certain variants of them given the name Goldenface Rainbows, as they are all very colourful birds.

The specific combination of colours and markings all in one bird was given the name "Rainbow" by the Keston Foreign Bird Farm in Kent, England. The proprietor was not the first person to breed birds answering to the same basic description, but was the first to breed the most colourful versions, and to sell them commercially.

The Budgerigar Society recognises such birds as Yellowface (or Goldenface) Opaline Whitewing Blues. The blue can be Skyblue, Violet Skyblue, Cobalt, Violet Cobalt, visual Violet, Mauve or Violet Mauve. Now, at last, after nearly half a century, the BS has given full recognition to all the Yellowface and Goldenface varieties (not just the one mutation previously recognised) by detailing official standards for them all in their 1994 Colour Standards Book They have also now published Standards for both Rainbows and Goldenface Rainbows.

To be a true Rainbow of the Keston type the Yellowface mutation used should be what is known as Mutant 2; and to be a true Goldenface Rainbow, a similar mutation but with a deeper chrome or golden yellow is necessary. To produce these composite varieties, the bird farm proprietor is reputed to have used birds of the Clearwing (Whitewing) mutation obtained direct from Australia, also birds of the Australian Opaline mutation (not the Scottish or European mutations), plus the yellowface Blue Mutant 2 which is known to be of English origin. For the Goldenface Rainbow he used the Goldenface Blue from Australia in place of Yellowface Mutant 2. Nowadays, many birds which are exhibited as Rainbows are of the Yellowface Blue Mutant 1 type, as that was for many years the only Yellowface mutation the Budgerigar Society in Great Britain seemed to recognise.

Yellowface Mutant 1 birds have the yellow much more restricted in area than the other Yellowface and Goldenface mutations, so for exhibiting Yellowface Blue and Grey Normals and Opalines the first mutation is preferred. For Rainbow production, Mutant 1 Yellowface helps to produce birds of more substance and other desirable exhibition points, but such birds are not quite so colourful as the true Rainbows and Goldenface Rainbows. Nevertheless, as they are recognised by the BS, they are allowed to compete in the same classes - and it must be said, as most judges are conditioned to give size and certain other exhibition points priority over brilliance of colour, they often take the awards.

As mentioned earlier, the blue body colour can be of the wide range of colour from Skyblue through to Violet Mauve. Grey birds are also part of the Blue series, but are usually excluded as the word "rainbow" presupposes something very colourful. The Slate mutation would also fall into the same category as the Grey.

So in a true Rainbow or Goldenface Rainbow we have a bird with a yellow or golden-yellow head and mask; a body colour ranging from Skyblue through to Violet and Mauve, with an area of green of graduating depth of colour where the yellow of the mask blends into the blue of the body feathering; the "V" of the Opaline giving a blue mantle; wings which have an off-white ground, with opalescent blue, green and yellow markings; and off-white or pale grey flight feathers. The long tail feathers are mainly a deep blue, but with lighter areas flushed with yellow. The shorter tail feathers show less of the blue and more of the yellow colour. As would be expected, where the Dark and/or Violet factors are included, most of the colours and markings are correspondingly darker.

Yellowface Blue Mutant 2 and Goldenface Blue can give a greater intensity to all the colours. The Goldenface mutation can even turn some of the markings on the wings into an attractive bronze colour, the nearest to red that we can get. This is not to be confused with the Cinnamon mutation, which is definitely to be avoided in breeding Rainbows and Goldenface Rainbows.

Buff-feathered birds do not show the true brilliance of colour of the true Rainbow, so the yellow-type texture of feathering is preferred by most Rainbow breeders. It is generally accepted that the Goldenface Visual Violet Rainbow is the most colourful of the whole range.

There is also a certain genetic novelty appeal about the Rainbow, and breeding them serves a very useful purpose in being a good introduction to that subject, because in one bird are included two recessive mutations (Clearwing and one of the Yellowface-Goldenface Blue group) and a sex-linked mutation (Opaline, preferably the Australian one). Combined they give the skyblue version of the Rainbow or Goldenface Rainbow. Add to that one semi-dominant (the Dark factor) to achieve the Cobalt, (and in its double dose the Mauve), and one full dominant (the Violet factor) to achieve the Visual Violet. Combining them all can be quite an interesting exercise with something very attractive as the end-product.

There are a number of ways of combining the mutations to arrive at a pair of birds suitable for breeding Rainbows or Goldenface rainbows. One such way for breeding the Mutant 1 version would be to start with an Opaline Blue cock paired to a Whitewing Blue hen, and a Whitewing Blue cock paired to a Yellowface Blue Mutant 1 hen. Certain of their young, when paired together the following year could produce Rainbows.

I give below some of the pairings which will produce Rainbows of the Mutant 1 variety:

For those interested, the whole story is already in print in my colour-illustrated 72-page book Rainbow Budgerigars and Constituent Varieties.

Any fancier interested in breeding these colourful birds can obtain the book from:

":Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". This applies to any Budgerigar variety and without a doubt the Greywing variety has got that certain appeal to many Budgerigar breeders. As a breeder of this variety I found the challenge to breed a good specimen as rewarding as breeding a good Light Green or a Skyblue.

The first Greywings were established in around 1919 in Europe and were of the green series. They were initially called Apple Green or Jade. But when the Greywing of the blue series was established, initially in Austria in 1927 and then afterwards in the UK in 1928, the Colour Committee of the Budgerigar Society grouped them together and gave them the name "Greywings" in 1929.

It is easy to recognise the variety when viewing it in daylight by the grey marking on the bird in comparison to that of the black on the normal varieties. By comparing a Greywing Light Green to a normal Light Green the spots, undulations at the back of the head, markings on the wings and primary wing flights are all of a grey colour instead of black in the normal varieties. The cheek patches are of light violet and the body colour is diluted by 50% of the normal body colour. Also the colour of the tail is grey with a bluish tinge instead of dark blue in the normal varieties.

At times fanciers find it difficult to distinguish between the Dilutes (Yellows and Whites) and the Greywings, especially if both varieties are of the grey factor (Greys and Grey Greens). Here a closer look at the body colour and wing marking of the Grey Yellow and Grey White when compared to Greywing Grey Green and Greywing Grey is that the body colour of the former is that much further diluted than the latter. The tail feathers of the Dilutes are off white to pale grey while those of the Greywing Grey and Grey Green are grey. Without a doubt Greywings are more appealing on dark factor birds such as Dark Greens and Cobalts.

It was found that a recessive gene controls the Greywing when mated to normal varieties. So when a Greywing is mated to a normal all the young will be normal but carrying the Greywing gene in a hidden (split) form; Normal/Greywing. If one of these splits is mated back to a Greywing then&nbp;50% of the young will be split for Greywing and the other 50% will be visual Greywings. Mating two Greywings together will result in all the young being Greywings. Because of the recessive gene it does not matter much which sex is the visual Greywing as both cocks and hens can be mated and produced according to the above three types of mating. Also because of that recessive gene, a bird can be carrying the Greywing factor in a hidden form for many generations.

This is why on occasions a Greywing can pop up in a nest of normal parents in a stud that does not carry this mutation and the fancier is at a loss as to how the Greywing appeared. Following the Mendal Theory of Inheritance, pairing two normals that are split for Greywing will result in 25% of the young being Greywings. Another 50% will be normal/Greywing and the remainder 25% being pure Normal. Suddenly the Greywing factor has been established in this stud.

Early breeders established, using Laws of Genetics, that although the variety is recessive to the normal, it is dominant to the Dilutes (Yellows and Whites), the same as the Clearwings (Yellow-wings and Whitewings) are dominant to the Dilutes, even though all the three varieties are recessive. In fact all the three varieties are separate mutations of the same gene and form what is known as a multiple allelomorph.

If a Greywing is paired to a Dilute all the chicks will be Greywings but split for Dilutes. The same will apply if a Clearwing is paired to a Dilute. But something quite unusual happens when pairing a Greywing to a Clearwing. Here the resulting young will posses the combination of both varieties in one bird and are called "full bodied Greywings". This means that they have the full body colour of the Clearwing variety with the Greywing marking; quite an unusual and beautiful coloration. These full-bodied Greywings are split for Clearwing but cannot be split for Dilutes.

If a full-bodied Greywing is paired to a Dilute then the results will be 50% Greywings and 50% Clearwings all split for Dilutes. However, if a full bodied Greywing is paired to either a Greywing or a Clearwing then the results will be 50% full bodied Greywings and 50% Greywings (or Clearwings).

Saddlebacks - A New Mutation in the UK

It is common knowledge that I have always been interested in colour mutations and specialist varieties during my 26 years of keeping and breeding Budgerigars. However, much to the surprise of many, this does not distract me from wanting to breed and exhibit quality budgerigars of the more normal and dominant varieties.

For many years I have heard of a few mutations in Australia that have never been introduced into this country; one such mutation is the Saddleback. Slides of this mutation were sent to me many years ago, but the slides were of poor quality. Therefore, when the opportunity presented itself to me to view these varieties when I was invited to lecture and judge in Australia in May and June 1994, I was fortunate enough to see the Saddlebacks as well as the Mottled, Faded, Dilute Greywings (the Australian version of the Clearbody), the Dutch Pied and most of all the Light Yellow (which is now extinct in the UK).

Origin

The Saddleback first appeared in the aviary of Les and Barry Ryan of Sydney during the 1975 breeding season. Barry informed me, when I met him at the Sydney Seminar, that he and his father mated a pair of Normal Skyblues to start a new line of Blues. In the nest of the first round, one chick started showing the Opaline characteristics. As the bird grew and feathered up, the Opaline characteristics became more evident in the head and the saddle area but the wing marking was different to that of an Opaline in so far as the ground colour of the wing was white and not that of the body colour as in the true Opaline.

It was also noticed that the wing marking was bi-colour with the shoulder region being grey and merging into black in the area of the secondary and primary feathers. However, as the bird left the nest and matured it was evident that the bird in question was a cock and could not possibly be a sex-linked Opaline as we know it.

When the Ryans asked for a second opinion, it was confirmed that the bird in question was different. As it was the only bird produced during that breeding season, they decided to pair it back to it's mother to reproduce its kind. Four chicks were produced from that mating; two being normals and the other two (both cocks) were the same as the father. In the following season hens were produced and the Ryans decided to keep the variety as pure as possible, hence very few outcrosses were introduced.

Genetics of the Saddleback

The Ryans soon discovered that this new mutation they had produced was recessive in its genetical make-up. Therefore, when two Saddlebacks were paired together, all the chicks would be Saddlebacks in both cocks and hens. Obviously, to get the variety in the Green series and the Dark factors, the Sky-blue Saddlebacks were mated to Normal Greens, Cobalts and Mauves and all the chicks produced were normals but split for Saddleback. The following season they mated the splits back to Saddlebacks and produced more Saddlebacks of the Green series, and Dark Factor birds in both Green and Blue series. So after a few breeding season the Ryans established this new mutation; the Saddleback.

Description

I was fortunate enough to visit the aviary of Pam and Vic Giles on the outskirts of Sydney and saw some 50 Saddlebacks. I was fascinated by the sight of so many of the variety in one stud I took many pictures of the Saddlebacks and when shown side by side with both Normals and Opalines, one can see the difference straight away. The Saddleback has, without a doubt, Opaline characteristics. The saddle or the V-area is clearly defined, not due to absence of any markings, by virtue of the fact that the markings in the saddle area are dark Grey on an otherwise normal background (black-marked) bird. The bird also resembles an Opaline in that the head markings are minimal but where they do appear they are also dark grey rather than black. I also noticed that the striations (zebra markings) of this Opaline were much more condensed than the proper Opaline. The rest of the bird, in so far as the body and tail colours, legs, beak, cere and eyes are all as any Normal budgerigar.

Further study of the ground colour of the wing led me to the conclusion that the wing is either white in the Blue series or yellow in the Green and not the body colour as expected in the Opaline variety. The colour of the wing markings could also be described as bi-colour. The markings in the shoulder region are greyish and merge into a definite black in the area of the secondary and primary flight feathers.

Obtaining stock

I left Australia interested in this variety as well as the Light Yellow (referred to as Black-Eyed Yellow). But to get them to this country was virtually impossible. By virtue of luck, I was judging the European Championship Show in Germany two months later and in front of me was a Saddleback. I mentioned this to my fellow judge Rienhard Molkentin and he informed me that he had obtained the variety from Australia a few years back and bred with them successfully. When he decided to leave Germany to live in South Africa he sold the entire stock of Saddlebacks to Wilfred Kopp. He further introduced me to Herr Kopp, and I was able to obtain two pairs from him in December of that year. The pairs were a visual Saddleback cock to a split hen and a split cock to a visual hen.

The 1995 breeding season proved quite fruitful. The first pair was very fertile and the norm was eight laid and eight hatched. I had three rounds from that pair and many Saddlebacks were bred. The Saddleback hen from the second pair never laid an egg but I was happy with what I produced. I exhibited examples of the variety at the Specialist and Rare Variety show, BS Club Show and the National that year. The 1996 breeding season gave me the opportunity to put down more pairs by using the split cock from the second pair as well as the first pair again. I also mated one Saddleback hen to a normal cock to produce more splits. Again the fertility was quite good.

Again, birds were exhibited in both the adult and young bird classes at the above shows as well as the new London and Southern Counties BS Rare Show. More interest was shown by those who appreciate new mutations and the lesser varieties.

Although the specimens that I have at the moment are small, there is plenty of room to improve the size by pairing them to quality normals in order to obtain the splits to improve the variety.

I also found the Saddlebacks produced in the medium and dark factor were more striking in appearance than their light factor (Light Green and Sky-blue) counterparts. I intend to keep the variety bred back to Normals only, without introducing any other variety into them such as Yellowface, Opaline, Cinnamon etc.

You may notice that the terminology "I" was used throughout this text. This because my partner Janice, disowned that part of the partnership, but I am pleased that I have contributed something to this wonderful hobby of ours by introducing a new mutation into the UK called the Saddleback.

Confused? Well we will attempt to cover one of the most confusing group of varieties available in this country (Australia): the Clearbodies.

If you look up your ANBC Standard you won't find the word "Clearbody" mentioned anywhere, yet the Clearbody is a standard variety. You will, however, find in the Standard, the varieties Greywing Yellow and Greywing White (in the Greywing section). In recent times the term "Clearbody" has come to be associated with these two varieties, in Australia at least.

The term "Clearbody" loosely means a bird which has a clear body (i.e., yellow or white) but normal markings, the exact reverse of a Clearwing (clear wings and normal body). In America they have a mutation which has normal marked wings with a yellow or white body. The term "Clearbody" is of American origin. It could be argued that we in Australia have at least one similar mutation. This mutation (or possibly a couple of similar mutations) was given the name Greywing Yellow (or Greywing White).

With the benefit of hindsight, a more confusing name could not have been chosen. On first seeing the name "Greywing Yellow", one immediately thinks of a compound variety involving Greywing and Black-eyed Yellow (i.e., Dilute). However geneticists will tell you that this is physically impossible since Greywing is dominant over Yellow. The confusion becomes worse now that we know that the Greywing Yellow is not a true Greywing (as in say a Greywing Light Green). The term "Clearbody" is gradually becoming more popular and less confusing for these birds.

Unfortunately, very little has been documented about the origin of the Greywing Yellow, but following recent discussions with some local breeders it seems that Newcastle has at least one very strong link to the Greywing Yellow's history. The following is an account of my discussions with Andy Mason of Merewether.

Andy Mason and his younger brother "Nook" were keen bird breeders as lads, which no doubt was instilled in them from their father, Andrew C. Mason, well known as a champion racing pigeon breeder. Their father was renowned for his knowledge of bird breeding and extensive library on the subject. He wrote sometimes for publications in England and Canada etc.

The boys used to save all their money to spend on birds. Andy, an apprentice carpenter, used to make cages for a bird shop which was two or three doors down from the Civic theatre in Newcastle. One particular Friday night he delivered some cages to Fred Barker's bird shop and he noticed that the dealer had just received a consignment of several hundred wild budgerigars, which had been caught in the country. He chose a couple of pairs from this lot, these particular birds because they were slightly bigger than the rest, (something that his father had told him to look for in birds) and they were also a slightly different colour green to the usual. Andy described them as being a pale green about the colour seen on Silvereyes.

These birds were subsequently mated and in one nest of eight or nine youngsters, one was noticeably different to all the rest. This one bird had a yellow body with the normal yellow and black wing markings of a green bird. With their father's guidance and knowledge, they were able to use this bird and its close relatives to produce more of these birds.

They bred these birds for three years, then wrote to the Budgerigar Society of Australasia in Sydney in order to give the variety a name. The Society asked to see some of the live birds and a pair was sent. The BSA decided to call the birds Greywing Yellows; this was in about 1933-4. After refusing to sell the pair, one bird was returned and the other unfortunately died while in Sydney.

Andy and his cousin next door, Joe Wilmott (himself responsible for the development of the Harlequin in Australia many years later) then took some of the Greywing Yellows to Sydney, to compare their birds with those being bred by the well-known Sydney breeders. Not one breeder had seen or heard of anything like them. During this aviary tour, they came across breeders (one named Johnson and another, whose name has been forgotten, who lived in North Sydney) who were breeding birds with grey wing markings but they had nothing like the black markings of the Newcastle birds.

Andy and Nook bred birds as the "Mason Brothers", and often sold their Greywing Yellows to breeders (mostly from Sydney) for 6 pounds Australian a pair, a lot of money during the Depression. When the brothers sold out their stock, the birds went to all corners of the land (although a lot probably went to Sydney again). After getting married Andy switched back to breeding racing pigeons and gouldian finches, while Nook (more well-known to established Newcastle budgerigar breeders) continued to breed budgerigars until his death a couple of years ago.

The history of some other varieties has shown that they have occurred approximately simultaneously in different areas. In a lot of these cases the varieties were only one or two generations removed from wild stock which may mean that the mutations actually occurred in the wild but were not enhanced or developed until they were more closely inbred in captivity by breeders skilled or lucky enough to spot these mutations.Such may been the case with the Greywing Yellow. The ANBC Standard which includes a small section on the history of the different varieties gives some credit to a Mr Shaw of Sydney for developing Greywing Yellow by selection around 1934 (he may have been the "unknown" North Sydney breeder above).

South Australia may also have a link in the history of the Greywing Yellow,but again nothing appears in print about it. Perhaps some of our Australian readers could find something out for us. It is believed that the Australian version of the Clearbody (i.e., the Greywing Yellow) is only available in Australia. For those of you who are brave enough to carry on, the Clearbody tale now becomes even more confusing with the appearance the Cinnamonwing Clearbody. Again this is a variety which has been standardised under another name - the Cinnamonwing Yellow (or White). This can be found in the Cinnamonwing section of the ANBC Standard.

When the novice first comes across the term "Cinnamonwing Yellow", one immediately presumes it is a compound variety of Cinnamonwing and Yellow. Wrong!! In actual fact the modern Black-eyed Yellow in Australia is the true compound variety of Cinnamonwing and the original Yellow (i.e.,Dilute). From a genetic viewpoint the modern Black-eyed Light Yellow is really a Cinnamonwing Dilute Light Green.

What then, is the Cinnamonwing Yellow described in the Standard? To answer one must know about the Cinnamonwing factor and its effect on other varieties. Most budgerigar's feathers contain black pigment in various proportions and configurations. The most highly concentrated areas of black pigment occur in the black wing markings, head, neck and saddle barring and mask spots. When the Cinnamonwing is introduced into other variety it causes any black pigment present to change to brown pigment, hence the brown markings instead of black. Therefore, when the Cinnamonwing factor is introduced into a Clearbody, the black markings become brown markings. The result is a yellow (or white) body colour with brown markings.

This bird when it first appeared was given the name Cinnamonwing Yellow, but in actual fact genetically it is Cinnamonwing Clearbody, or put another way it is the Cinnamonwing form of the Greywing Yellow. At first glance they can resemble Lacewings. Lacewings have red eyes not black. Quite often reference is given to the terms "Cinnamonwing Yellow" and "Cinnamon Yellow". This was an attempt which hasn't really worked to end the confusion in the names given the different varieties. The term "Cinnamonwing Yellow" was to be the Cinnamonwing Clearbody as mentioned earlier, and the "Cinnamon Yellow" to mean the modern Black-eyed Yellow. Since the word Cinnamon is only an abbreviation of the word Cinnamonwing which has crept into the hobby to describe the usual green and blue series birds this system has not worked very well. To use the term Clearbody is much less confusing.

To add even more confusion to this variety, more evidence is appearing from test matings by the author that this mutation is actually a wing variety only. It appears that the clearbody only visually appears when the dark wing variety mutation is superimposed on Yellows. The dark wing variety mutation can also be superimposed on clearwings resulting in birds which look like very dark greywings. The author currently has birds which genetically carry the dark wing factor, yellow and clearwing simultaneously. These birds suitably mated are capable of producing clearbodies, yellows, darkwing clearwings and clearwings in the same nest.

This darkwing mutation appears to be recessive to normal (anecdotal evidence only). It has been in existence since the 1930's but has almost without exception been retained in combination with yellows in order to produce the dark winged yellow bird (known as the Greywing Yellow or Australian Clearbody). The assumption in the past has been that it was either another member of the Greywing, Clearwing, Dilute multiple allele family or it was a separate mutation. Both these theories appear to be incorrect. It is likely that the Greywing Yellow is a compound variety of Yellow and an unnamed dark wing variety. In error it was given the name Greywing Yellow.

The most common matings used in producing Greywing Yellows (Australian Clearbodies) are:

N.B. The existence of the Double factor Greywing Yellow has not been proven beyond all doubt at this stage.

The above matings are also very common incorporating Cinnamonwing as well. Very few other matings other than the above have ever been tried in all the years of the existence of the variety.

I would like to thank Joe Wilmott, Andy Mason and Frank Amos for their efforts assisting my research into the above article.

The Australian Recessive Grey

The first Recessive Grey budgerigar appeared in 1992. It was a Normal Grey hen bred from a pair of Normal Violet factor Cobalts (Visual Violets) in a father to daughter mating. She was the last of four chicks to hatch. Three other chicks hatched but all died at the age of one or two days. The fourth chick would probably have died as well if left with her mother. The egg was fostered under a pair of greens whose eggs were infertile. Surprisingly the chick feathered up Normal Grey. It was doubly surprising because of the fact that only three of the 70 or so birds I had were grey factor birds. The only grey factor hen bred with that year laid a clear round. Cocks and hens are kept in separate flights, and the only grey factor cock bird was an Opaline Greygreen. Furthermore there were no Yellows, Whites, or Inos which could carry the grey factor inconspicuously. My main interest is in the dark and violet factors so I have little use for Greys and Greygreens. The Grey hen could not be easily explained away.

However, at the time I thought the most likely explanation was that the Grey was an abnormal Mauve. In 1993 the suspect Grey was paired to a Skyblue Normal. Only three chicks were produced but all three were Skyblue Normals (one cock and two hens), not Cobalts as one would expect from a Sky to Mauve pairing. The Grey's parents were paired up again as well but produced only infertile eggs.

In 1994 the Grey’s Violet Cobalt mother was paired to the Grey’s Skyblue son. Five chicks were produced in total, a Violet cock, a Violet hen, a Violet-Sky cock, and two Grey cocks. All were Normals. As far as I was concerned the result confirmed that the suspect Grey was a Recessive breeding Grey. Whether or not it is the same mutation as the long lost English Recessive Grey is an open question. English Greys are reportedly quite dark, my Recessive Greys are not particularly dark. All that can be said is that the Greys arose from Australian exhibition stock and were not derived from the English budgerigars imported into Australia in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. For the present, it is probably best referred to as the Australian Recessive Grey.

Progress has been slow but steady with a few gains and losses. There are currently two Normal Recessive Greys and a dozen splits. The most recent Recessive Grey to be bred is a Normal Grey hen bred from a pair of Normal Skyblues. Most of the splits are either Skyblues or Light Greens.

Recessive Greys are easily distinguished from Dominant Greys once you know what to look for. The following description is for the Normal Recessive Grey:

In all other features Normal Recessive Greys are like any other Normal budgerigar. In size and quality they are similar to their non-Grey nestmates. One drawback is that their feather seems to be weaker. Their flight and tail feathers tend to fray more easily than the other colours.

The late Cyril Rogers had speculated that a Dominant-Recessive Grey composite might be very dark grey or black. Due to the second World War, attempts to breed such a bird were put on hold and by war’s end the Recessive Grey had vanished. No such composite bird has ever been recorded. At present I have a Dominant Grey split for Recessive Grey and with some luck will breed a Dominant-Recessive Grey composite over the next couple of breeding seasons.

Footnote:

As a result of contact originally made through these pages, Inte Onsman of Mutavi has been able to microscopically examine feathers sent to him by Peter Bergman.

He concludes that cross-sections of feathers from this new recessive grey form do not share some of the special features of the now extinct English Recessive Grey, as described and illustrated in Genetics for Budgerigar Breeders. In fact the internal structures revealed show some similarities to those of the Slate, although the differences are sufficiently great as to produce a distinctly different neutral grey colouration.

This mutant form is thus new to budgerigar culture and the title Australian Recessive Grey is very apt.

The Future White-faced Greens

Margaret Young's excellent article in the October 1995 issue of the RV&CBS; Newsletter will, I hope, make many members think very carefully on the subject of the descriptive titles given to some of the budgerigar varieties and mutations. I think the article deserves a much wider audience, and I hope that Margaret will consider forwarding it to Cage & Aviary Birds or even to the editor of the Budgerigar Society's journal.

I also have for many years thought that a Whiteface Green mutation was entirely feasible. I do not have Margaret's widespread knowledge of genetics, as my limited knowledge is from what I have been able to assimilate from listening, reading, and experimenting over about forty years, but it seemed obvious to me that as the amount of yellow pigmentation in budgerigars can and does vary considerably, from full golden-yellow colouring down to nil quantity - and that some areas of a bird can show yellow while other areas show none at all. It must be only a matter of time before we have a bird with yellow in it's body feathering but with none (leaving just white) on its head or face. I did, actually write of the possibility of a future Whiteface Green in correspondence with Clive Hesford, our vice-president, a few years ago. He may recall the circumstances.

We know that all those that can loosely be called the Blue mutations, whether they be the ones we call Yellowface, Goldenface, or the more common Whiteface, suppress the yellow pigment of the"wild type" green bird (the Light Green) in varying degrees, depending on which mutation it actually is, and whether the character has been inherited in single or double factor (dose). The common White-face Blue mutation and the double factor version of Yellowface Blue Mutant 1 suppress the yellow completely, giving us a bird with a blue body and white head and mask. All those mutations mentioned, with their "wild type" allele form what is known as a series of "multiple allelomorphs". That is because all the mutated genes responsible, are alternative mutations of the same original pair in the "wild type" Green bird. As I explain in my book, I think of "alleles" as "allies". I find that it helps. Allies work together, and so do alleles.

It would seem to me then that the mutated gene (or pair of genes) necessary to create the visual effect of a Whiteface Green, would also follow a similar pattern of restricting the yellow pigment incertain areas, and would therefore, very likely, be an addition to the existing series of multiple allelomorphs.

When the Whiteface Green does appear, I think the Fancy will have to call the normal Green series birds "Yellowface Greens". It seems to me to be entirely logical that this should happen. If so, the calling of other birds "Yellowface Greens" will have to cease.

At present, some people call a Green bird which carries one mutant gene of the allelic series mentioned, a Yellowface Green, when they should rightly call it a Light (or Dark, etc) Green split Yellowface Mutant 1 Blue (or Mutant 2, or Goldenface Blue). All Blue series birds, whether they be Yellowface, Goldenface or Whiteface, are recessive to Green, so a visually Green bird can be split for Yellowface Blue Mutant 1, Yellowface Blue Mutant 2, or Goldenface Blue, in exactly the same way as it can be for ordinary Whiteface Blue. A Blue bird of any of the mutations mentioned, when bred with another Blue bird of the same or any other Blue mutation will produce a Blue result, whether it be Yellowface, Goldenface or Whiteface. A Whiteface Green mutation will make the series even more interesting.

Anyway, thanks very much Margaret for your thoughts on the subject. I, for one, look forward to your other predictions.

The greywing is a very attractive mutation of budgerigar and for many years it was very popular. Today however, this is not the case although in the last few years interest has steadily grown.

The first greywings to be bred in the UK were in 1919, but it has been reported that they have been in existence in Belgium and Germany as far back as 1875. In those days greywing greens were referred to as Jades and Apple greens while the greywing blue was referred to as a Pearlwing and Silverwing. On the Continent however, the green series were known as May greens.

Buttercup yellow, ornamented by 6 evenly-spaced, large round, grey spots; the outer 2 being partially covered by the base of the light violet cheek patches.

Back, rump, breast, flanks and underparts bright grass-green diluted to 50% of a normal lightgreen's body colour.

One thing I think has contributed to the loss of popularity of the greywing is the emergence of the cinnamon mutation in 1931. As for exhibition purposes, the cinnamon and greywing were lumped together in the same class, and while the greywing held its own for a while, it was not long before the cinnamon began to dominate and therefore fewer and fewer greywings were exhibited. The fact that greywings are recessive and cinnamons are sex-linked meant that cinnamons were bred in larger numbers.

Being recessive means that both cock and hen in a pairing must either be a visual or split to produce a greywing in the first generation. An exception to the rule on pairing is that if you pair a greywing cock to a dilute hen or a normal hen split for dilute, you can produce greywings in the first generation; this is because greywing is dominant to dilute. Of course, the pairing can be reversed with a greywing hen to a dilute cock. Obviously, should anyone decide to take up the breeding of greywings, it would be advantageous to acquire a basic knowledge of how the recessive factor works. In my own case, I pair greywings to normals and opalines to produce splits and in turn the splits can be paired to visuals or other splits.

Today, the future looks better for the greywing especially with Specialist and Rare Variety Shows being held all over the country where classes are provided for them. The BS have put them in the Any Other Colour classes. This, together with many people taking up a rare variety to run alongside their mainstream colours, can only be good news for the greywing.

At the time of writing (7th June 1998), recently, there have been two separate articles written about "mottled" budgerigars, one appearing on this website by Larry Moore and one appearing in the April 1998 edition of Budgerigar World. There is also an article, written much earlier, by Ethel Dobie which also appears on this website, describing mottled budgerigars.

In the case of the human (homo sapiens), there are two well known hair conditions which both normally appear only in adult life, one is greying and the other is baldness. Both conditions can occur as true hereditable genetic conditions or can occur as a result of environmental and emotional influences, i.e., premature greying and alopecia; this clearly demonstrates the many different controlling influences acting upon the production of hair follicles, genetic influence being just one possible cause.

If the "mottling" colouration in budgerigars is caused by heritable genetic factors, then the breeding pattern of both ancestors and relatives to such mottled birds will indicate whether a new mutant recessive or dominant gene type is at work.

If a new mutant dominant Mottled gene, M, was the cause of mottling then the breeding pattern of such a bird would be as in diagram 1:

From Diagram 1, it can be seen that a mutant dominant M gene would produce 50% mottled offspring which in turn would breed as the original mottled parent producing 50% mottled offspring. Such a mutation would soon become established. In view of the fact that the mottled budgerigar has not become established, then I consider it safe to say that the mottled budgerigar is not the result of a new dominant gene mutation.

If the mottled budgerigar was the result of a mutant recessive Mottled gene m, then the breeding pattern would be as in diagram 2:

From Diagram 2 it can be seen that the mating of a recessive Mottled with a Normal would produce 100% heterozygous (split) offspring. If two such mM heterozygous budgerigars were mated as in Diagram 3, then 25% of the resultant offspring would be Mottled.

If a mm Mottled was mated to a mM heterozygous Mottled then 50% of the offspring would be mm Mottled phenotypes.

In the cases reported in the recent articles, none of the occurrences seem to show any pattern with regard to typical Mendelian ratios of expectations, and as such, this indicates that hereditary factors are not at work.

Since the breeding pattern of Mottled budgerigars described in the articles, clearly proves that mottling is not the result of a dominant gene then if mottling is produced by genetic influence, then it must be caused by a recessive gene. It is suggested in the Budgerigar World article that the Mottled budgerigars occurring in Scotland are descendants from the Jim Moffat stud: if this were so, then it seems strange that Jim Moffat has not produced the strain in quantity within his own stud, if not by design but by accident; there is no report of this. I therefore very much doubt that a recessive gene is the cause of mottling.

It thus seems most likely that other factors are at work in producing mottling. In all the cases of mottling described in the budgerigar, it appears that feathers which were formerly green are replaced with yellow feathers and formerly blue feathers become white. It is therefore obvious that in all cases there is a later failure of the feather producing cells to produce the blue colouration in feathers. As already established, the blue colouration in budgerigars is not the result of pigmentation, but one of light refraction caused by air-filled vacuoles in the medullary layer of the feather, therefore, for one reason or another, certain feather producing cells must develop a modified ability to produce a normal feather structure, which results in the mottling of the feather colour, from the genetically programmed colouration.

To give a a more obvious comparison: if a grey-haired man is also bald on the top of his head, yet his hair colour was black when he was a child and a young man, he still possesses the gene for black hair colour when other factors have modified his hair colour in later life. It is hard to speculate what factors may play a part in modifying the ability of cells to produce a normal medullary layer in the feather, but as seen in man, stress may well be a major factor.

My first experience with the Faded variety came about in December 1985, when I returned from Albury, N S Wales, where I had been working, in order to relieve my brother who had been caring for my budgerigars while I had been away.

In one nest box a pair were hatching their third round which comprised of nine fertile eggs. The third and fourth chicks to hatch had pink eyes, and like anybody else would, I assumed that I had bred a couple of cinnamon hens. At this stage the cinnamon chicks held little significance as I was more concerned with getting all nine eggs to hatch. The last three eggs were fostered as they were starting to become dirtied by the excreta of their elder brothers and sisters. By the time the three eldest chicks had left the nest the youngest three were ready to be returned, and it was this procedure that was successfully adopted.

It was also at this time that it became obvious that I had some "funny coloured" cinnamons among the clutch and a search through the cocks ancestry was undertaken. The father of these "pink-eyed" birds was, what I refer to as a Light Greywing Cobalt, because the Greywing is not as the standard requires. His mother was a Normal Cobalt bred in 1983 from a South Australian cock obtained from a local pet shop (BSSA S1 8933) and which passed at first glance like a pretty reasonable Clearwing Laurel. The father of the Greywing Cobalt cock was another pet shop Grey green, which had, two years previously, been paired to a cinnamon opaline green hen. Not one of the fourteen chicks they raised was cinnamon, so obviously or very unlikely, the grey green was not split for cinnamon. It was obvious then, that I was dealing with a variety other than cinnamon, firstly because there was no cinnamon in the background and secondly because one of the young "pink-eyes" was taking on the characteristics of a cock bird (85 97828).

Any knowledgeable breeder will inform you that if one wishes to breed sex-linked cocks then the mother must show the sex-linked gene. The only alternative since the parents were normal, was that a recessive gene must have come into play. As it happened, the mother of the "pink-eyes" was a Violet Laurel split for Light Greywing and for blue, and she was the daughter of BSSA 81 8933, the South Australian bird, and a Violet opaline hen. Thus in a very short space of time I had found the source of the "pink-eyed" gene. Then followed a search for those descendants of BSSA 81 8933 which I still possessed and which may have been carrying the Faded gene.

All was not plain sailing from here, however, although it was assumed at the time that it would be. Most of the chicks from the first two rounds had by now been disposed of, even before the third round had been hatched. Nevertheless I remember thinking that I could readily form two pairs and be well under way with this odd variety,

As I was a member of the Budgerigar Council of Australia at the time at their Albury branch, I took these two "odd" birds down there to show them to the more senior members of the club, and to ask their. Much interest was aroused, but no offers to buy the pair were received. The two senior judges present commented that they had never seen birds anything quite like these before and that I should persist in attempting to breed them in all the normal shades and varieties.

During 1986 it was decided to pair the 1985 young Faded Olive? (86 97831) to his sister Faded Light-Greywing Mauve? (86 97831) and to pair their mother the Violet Laurel/Light Greywing Blue Faded to one of her Violet sons (85 2211) reasoning that I had a 2/3 chance that he too would be also split Faded. This later proved to be the case. I also remember trying to pair the Light Greywing Cobalt (84 40963) back to his mother, the Cobalt (83 49134) but recall that she played football with anything white that appeared in the nest box

Anything produced (hatched) by the pair of young "plum-eyes" lasted for a day or less and the young Faded hen died 21/11/86 much to my disappointment. The second pairing was more fruitful however, and out of eight chicks two Faded hens were produced, (87 2197) This was a Faded Mauve or Violet Mauve of good size. Her sister (87 21300) a Faded Light-Greywing Violet, a very attractive colour but somewhat smaller bird. Both these hens were shown to a couple of Budgerigar Society of Australia judges (I was living in Wollongong) but their reaction was one of little interest. I was disappointed at their reaction which was contrary to the objects of the Society in that the cultivation of new varieties is to be given priority according to a major BSA document,

I was at this time still determined however, to find out what variety these birds were. The answer came, (I thought), when leafing through a book at a stand at the BSA Annual Show, The title of the book The World of Budgerigars by the noted British author, Cyril Rogers, contained a description of the "the Faded variety" which had features similar to the birds I had been attempting to breed. I soon penned a letter containing photographs to Mr Rogers via Gerald Binks, then editor of Budgerigar World, telling him of my birds, and asking for more information. A letter was promptly returned in which Mr Rogers said "their eye colour and poor breeding results points to the fact that they are the Faded". This news and opinion was good enough for me so I have called my plum-eyed birds Fadeds ever since. I have recently sent Mr&nsp;Rogers a letter telling of progress since March 1990, I only hope that he will be as pleased as I, since he was the last person in England to breed the Fadeds, now, many years ago,

In 1987 the Faded Olive? (85 97328) was paired to the Faded Mauve (violet mauve) (86 21297). They produced one chick which died at one day old. The hen died some four months later of egg peritonitis on 19/12/87. Her sister the Faded light-Greywing Violet (87 21300) fared a little better. She was paired to a son of the South Australian cock which just happened to be split Faded. They produced a Faded Spangle Violet Sky cock (87 10190). This bird bred up until late 1992, although under unfavourable conditions.

The reader should be able to see by now, from the examples given above that the breeding of the first of my line of Faded budgerigars was not as easy a task as once anticipated, although it has been made a little easier in the past few years.

When using birds that are split for a variety, and one has little knowledge of their genetic make-up, a number of speculative pairings have to be called upon. Sometimes these will prove fruitful and at other times they are of little use whatsoever. I can assure the reader that up to 1989 that this was my predicament.

In 1987 one such speculative pairing was made, a Light-greywing Sky/opaline (84 40988) brother of the Light-greywing cobalt (84 40963) was paired to a runt of a Cobalt hen which was actually split Faded. This pairing provided two birds which have proved instrumental in the continuance of this variety, (87 10198) a Faded Cobalt cock and (88 4436) a Faded Sky cock were produced. The Faded Cobalt cock was paired in 1989 a half-Scoble hen (88 4431) and a Opaline Grey Green (85 6774) and a Lewis/Kakoschke cock, and father of the half-Scoble hen, was paired to a Faded Laurel hen (87 10151). This was done firstly, and most importantly, to provide a vigorous outcross and secondly to introduce the grey and opaline genes. The Faded Cobalt cock paired to the Opaline Grey Green hen (half-Scoble), produced 16 young splits. More importantly the Warren Lewis bred Opaline Grey Green succeeded in fathering 6 young splits from his Faded partner. It is not often that Faded hens will produce chicks in such quantity, if at all.

These outcrosses I feel, have provided the vigour that was lacking in the previous strain of Fadeds. This has, however, been at some detriment to the body colour and to the depth of markings. Hopefully this may be corrected through the use of a non-Scoble non-Kakoschke strain.

Just when you think that all is proceeding well, nature brings you back to earth with a thud. In my case it was psittacosis. From the end of 1989 many of my best birds as well as the Fadeds were lost. Of the twenty-six split Fadeds bred in 1989 only fourteen survived the following year, and others have died since .Through not observing proper quarantine measures I had placed my flock in an unenviable situation. The fact that it took from early l99O to late 1992 for a veterinarian to accurately diagnose and treat the disease has not helped matters either.

Luckily no Fadeds were paired in 1990, but in 1991 the Faded Sky Blue cock referred to earlier (88 4436) when paired to a Laurel/Faded hen (from 88 4431 the half-Scoble hen) produced eleven birds. Of these the two Faded cocks and the two split Faded hen have been the ones to produce. One Faded Cobalt hen (there were two normal Green Fadeds) was tried but she produced only pea-sized clear eggs. Another pair of splits bred well also. Both were Grey Laurel/Blue type II. The hen was opaline while the cock was split opaline. A large number of splits were bred. Of the surviving Fadeds, two are Grey, (possibly cobalt grey) and two Grey Laural Green. The two Greens and one of the Greys are cock birds and all are opalines. These Faded opalines are all of a distinctive body colour and the lone hen has much more darker markings than the cocks as one would expect. The body colour of the Faded Opaline Grey and Grey Greens is much lighter than their normal counterpart. The Greys are the colour of heavily suffused whites while the Grey Greens are of a mustard-coloured shade. These features alone warrant the inclusion of the Faded as a separate variety in the National Standard. In addition normal Faded cocks have ouch more clearly defined markings than ordinary normal cocks along with a violet cheek patch.

During this past season the Fadeds have continued to breed well with one exception. Sufficiently well in fact for me to assert that the Faded variety is once again an entity and entitled as such to be a recognised variety on the show scene.

The above article appeared in the Rare Variety and Colour Budgerigar Society Newsletter Winter 1993/94 with the following editorial note:

This article written by Mark Goodsell of Australia and sent to Wally Walraven (Amsterdam) and gives a very exciting account of his work with "Faded Budgerigars", apparently a plum-eyed variety which was first identified in 1932 by a Mr Coulson of Lincoln. The late Cyril Rogers refers to this and subsequent re-appearances in the 1970's in The World of the Budgerigar pages 122/123. Cyril indeed bred a number until fate took a hand, we are indebted to Mark Goodsell for his work and endeavours and to Wally for sharing this exciting article with us. It will raise many questions and theories, How often do varieties go unrecognised? A question we cannot answer, but Cyril discovered his "Faded" in a mixed flight and described as an "odd" Greywing, by the owner!

In 1998, Ken Yorke kindly sent these photos to accompany this web page together with these notes:

These photos were all given to me by the original breeder Mark Goodsell. Each photo shows a comparison between a variety of budgerigar and its Faded equivalent.

Points to note in the photos are that in all cases the Faded bird has less than full intensity in colour of wing markings and body colour and the feet are much pinker (in fact some examples bright pink).


Normal and Faded Sky Blues	Normal and Faded Opaline Grey Greens


Normal and Faded Light Greens	Normal and Faded Opaline Light Greens

The years l933-35 saw the announcements of the arrival of the various grey-coloured mutations. The late Cyril Rogers detailed them in his book The World of Budgerigars. Before passing on Cyril's copies of Budgerigar Bulletin, dating from 1927, to the Budgerigar Society, I read all the early reports of the mutations of what came to be known as the Recessive (English) Grey; the Dominant (Australian) Grey; the other English mutation, a sex-linked one called the Slate; and a Grey bred by Karl Feyh of Chemnitz.

All four mutations seem to have occurred in the early 1930s. The original breeders, and in some cases, more experienced fanciers who were helping them, were all reporting their findings to Budgerigar Bulletin and corresponding between themselves and with Cyril Rogers, who was at that time General Secretary of the BS.

E A Brooks of Mitcham, Surrey, England, bred the first Recessive Greys and Mrs S Harrison of Murrumbeena, Victoria, Australia, the first Dominant Grey. Although a strain of German Greys was reported, nothing further was heard of it - probably due to the world-shattering events taking place in that country from 1933 onwards.

Actually the first mention of a "grey" mutation was made by F S Elliott, the editor, when he recorded in the Search 1935 Budgerigar Bulletin that R T Watson of Bedford, England, had in his possession a hen of a slatey blue colour. The hen, in adult plumage, unringed, had been bought from a dealer in August 1933. Paired to a White Cobalt cock it raised two normally-coloured Cobalt young - a cock and a hen - before dying. Cyril obtained the skin of the "slatey blue bird for his collection.

In May 1935 T Bowman of Carlisle, on the border between England and Scotland, bred a bird of unusual colour which he called a Slate . In his opinion, the word being a good descriptive term for the colour, as it looked very much like that of the Welsh roofing slates used on so many buildings in the UK. The young bird, a hen, came from a Cobalt cock and a Skyblue hen. The following year he bred more Slates, including a Cock bred by pairing the original Cobalt cock to its Slate daughter.

Years later when the variety had become well-established and confirmed as a sex-linked one, Cyril Rogers compared the colour of the skin of the Watson bird with live specimens of what Cyril described as Slate Cobalts. The colours were identical. Cyril therefore believed that the hen purchased by R T Watson could have been the original Slate. The T S Bowman bird (which we would term a split Slate) could just possibly have been the Cobalt cock bred by Mr Watson, but there is no record of it being sold. It is recorded that the cock was bred to its own sister by R T Watson with no further birds of "slatey blue"colour being produced, so if it was sold to the breeder in Carlisle, it would have to he subsequent to that. Alternatively if the actual mutation had occurred some generations earlier, the Watson and Bowman birds could have had common ancestry.

In June 1936 the editor of the Budgerigar Bulletin devoted a number of pages to "The New Grey Varieties", at that time unnamed, except for T S Bowman's descriptive term "Slate"for his variety. What a pity that the English Recessive Grey and the German Grey seem not to have survived the Second World War.

For some years after the war, the Slate variety progressed satisfactorily, as they were being bred by a fair number of keen breeders in the UK. During the late sixties and into the seventies interest in the variety remained quite steady and the BS published a Standard for it, but there were signs that the Dominant (Australian) Grey was increasingly affecting the popularity of the Slate.

In the summer of 1970 Cyril Rogers had a visit from a young Dutch couple. They were very interested in his Slates, being the first they had seen. When they were due to return to Holland, Cyril gave them a pair suitable for breeding. After a few years their stock had increased quite well, but in 1974 the husband was killed in a road crash, and eventually the dead man's sister took over the breeding stock. When she married, she passed the only live Slate she had onto a friend, Inte Onsman, who lived near Amsterdam.

During this period up to 1990 the variety seems to have died out in the UK. I remember Cyril telling me that he was down to one cock which he hoped was split for the mutation. Frankly, I like colourful birds, so the variety had little real attraction for me except as a novelty. As usually happens when there are two similar varieties in existence, the one that is easier to improve in exhibition qualities - usually a Dominant mutation - prospers, while the other declines.

In early 1992, hearing that Slates were by then non-existent in the UK, Inte Onsman contacted Cyril at his home at Aldeburgh in Suffolk and offered him a couple of cocks. That offer was gratefully accepted; they were brought to the UK, went through a period of quarantine; and eventually reached Cyril on 11th July that year, the first Slates he had seen for about 20 years.

He paired one (1991-ringed), to a Light Green/Blue hen and the other (l990-ringed), to a Clearflight Cobalt hen that I had bred in my aviary at Clacton-on-Sea in the adjacent county, Essex. Cyril wrote in late 1992:

As soon as I hung up nest-boxes the Green hen went in one and stayed there, laying six eggs - all of which were clear. The Clearflight Cobalt, after laying her first egg from the perch, took over a nest-box and produced four more eggs. I was delighted when all four hatched and gave me a Slate cobalt hen, a Skyblue/Slate cock, then another Skyblue/Slate cock and then a Clearflight Slate Skyblue hen. I now have a small nucleus to get the Slate mutation established once more in this country. Being sex-linked it should not be too difficult to do this and I hope to make a start next breeding season with this object in mind.

Cyril was the Chairman of the Rare Variety and Colour BS in the UK, (one of the six Specialist societies all associated with the BS itself); and I was that year, the President. He did breed some more Slates and splits in 1993 from the one Slate cock and the Clearflight Cobalt hen from my aviary, naming a total for 1992 and 1993 of 11 young.

In June 1993, at the request of Cyril's daughter, and with his own approval (he being in hospital in Ipswich), I removed all his budgerigars to my aviary. As I knew that it was his dearest wish that Slates be seen on the show benches again, I entered two of his hens in his name - one 1992 in the appropriate Any Age class, and one 1993 in the appropriate Young Bird class at the Specialist and Rare Variety Show, held at Ryton near Coventry, later that month. He was delighted to hear of it and they attracted considerable attention. In July that year I paired the 1990-ringed cock from Holland, which had already fathered 11 young, to a Clearflight Opaline Skyblue still in my possession, a full sister and nestmate of his earlier partner. This pairing also proved successful.

In August of that same year, Cyril Rogers, the world-renowned walking encyclopædia on avian matters, died. I was asked to give the funeral oration at Alleburgh Church and to write an Obituary for various magazines.

I continued to try to persuade the second cock, the 1991-ringed one, to breed, but without success. I passed some of Cyril's Slates to four other members of the RV&CBS including Dr Margaret Young. She also tried to get the second cock to breed. Cyril, myself, and now Margaret, had all tried, but with no success. That means that all the known Slates in the UK are descended from the one cock, which I had in my possession until its death early last year (1996).

There are now Slates spread all around the UK - mostly with RV&CBS members, but some also with non-members. I am told that some have been exported, in fact I know it to be true in one case, as a caller to my aviary from Holland (strangely enough) took one back across the North Sea with him.

I keep a few breeding pairs of the variety, as I do of many other varieties, but I am having to reduce numbers all round. It is most difficult to decide which have to go, but it must be done.

Thanks initially to Inte Onsman and Cyril Rogers, I feel that all that can be done to re-establish the Slate variety has been done. It must now survive on its own popularity. We have to be realistic about this. We know it can never be really popular, but just hope that it does not decline to dangerous levels again.

That is the history of the mutation as I know it. Now some details of the actual variety. How does its appearance differ from, say, the Dominant (Australian) Grey?

As with the Grey and all other varieties, there are three depths of colour - no dark factor (the equivalent of Light Green or Skyblue); single Dark factor (equivalent of Dark Green or Cobalt); and double Dark (equivalent of Olive Green or Mauve). If you do not know, or cannot visualize, the colour of a Welsh slate, it is difficult to explain it. It is a softer, warmer, colour than the equivalent Dominant Grey. Perhaps the Slate Skyblue is the most attractive of the three shades. The Slate Mauve is quite dark and is difficult to recognize unless one Is familiar with the variety.

There can be a Slate version of all the colours in the Green and Blue series, including Yellowfaces and Goldenface Slate Blues of the three depths of colour, plus the whole range of Slate Violets including the Yellowface and Goldenface versions. It is obviously unwise to mix the Dominant Grey mutation with the Slates. Opaline, Cinnamon, etc. and all the dominant and recessive "markings" mutations can, of course, be combined with Slate, producing many differently-toned results.

Whereas the Dominant Grey mutation produces birds which have grey cheek patches, those of the Slate mutation are a dull deep violet. The long tail feathers of the Greys are known to be black; those of all varieties of Slate that I have seen are a dull dark blue. The wing markings of the true Slate, the Blue series bird from which the mutation originated, are a very clear-cut black on white.

There seems to be no reason why the Slate varieties should not attain the size, type and other exhibition qualities of the majority of budgerigar varieties - at least the same as the other sex-linked ones. Only time will indicate the answer. That seems to complete the story of the Slate as I know it. If there is sufficient demand I expect the Budgerigar Society in the UK will eventually re-introduce a Standard for the variety.