I don’t think we should make fun of rmh_rider, as she’s obviously got a history of having been told incorrect information, or has made up her mind based on visuals which can be a very bad thing to do when it comes to color genetics.
rmh, if you look at the UC Davis genetics site - among the leading equine genetics researchers - you will see this
[I]
Gray results are reported as:
N/N No copies of the gray gene. Horse will not turn gray.
N/G One copy of the gray gene. Horse will turn gray and approximately 50% of offspring will be gray.
G/G Two copies of the gray gene. Horse will turn gray and all offspring will be gray.
[/I]
It really is as simple as that.
SNL is right about percentages over a population. 2, 3, even 10, 20 foals may seem like it tells the whole story, but it’s not statistically significant. Remember, roughly 50% of a population will be boys vs girls, but Equine Repro at one point had 49 colts in a row
STILL not statistically significant enough.
People like to say a stallion must be EE homozygous black because he had 30 foals out of chestnut mares and none were chestnut. Well, the odds are increasing that he’s EE, but 30 isn’t enough to definitively state that.
alto, there ARE some genes that are linked, which skews the 50/50 ratio. Extension and Tobiano are linked, and usually the T is linked to the e. Over time, in a given population, that means there are roughly a 50/50 mix of Tobianos with a fairly equal distribution between the red-based and black-based colors (assuming 1 horse is Tt and the other is tt).
BUT, in certainly lines, the Samber line being a well-known one, the link with T is with E. So, that same Tt bred to tt where the T and E are together, still produces roughly 50% Tobis, but NONE of them will be red-based, all of them will be black-based.
I think gray has been around long enough that any such linkage would have been discovered, so it’s pretty safe to say something similar doesn’t exist 