[QUOTE=Daventry;8533922]
She’s keeper for us, as she is an outcross for our Section D stallion. She does have a brown dorsal stripe, but no other dun-type markings.[/QUOTE]
I think it would be terribly interesting to have her tested at UCD for nd1. It may explain a WHOLE lot of what we have considered to be from sooty, especially on brown-based colors.
[QUOTE=JB;8534313]
I think it would be terribly interesting to have her tested at UCD for nd1. It may explain a WHOLE lot of what we have considered to be from sooty, especially on brown-based colors.[/QUOTE]
What the heck! I have decided to get her tested. Will fire it off tomorrow. She has a very distinct, wide dorsal stripe down her back.
Excellent! I’ll be REALLY interested in her results!
[QUOTE=JB;8535665]
Excellent! I’ll be REALLY interested in her results![/QUOTE]
Test results came back. She is nd2/nd2 for dun dilution. So, nada. 
Rats! Just proves that phenotypes will continue to be confusing in some cases LOL
So why doesn’t anyone test for Brown anymore? Was it not a reliable test they were doing? Maybe I missed that part from last year’s posts. I always thought my stallion Contempo Is probably technically Brown. He is EEAa, and looks black but some slightly lighter areas. Or can that still be bay, just very dark dark bay? Confusing but fascinating!!
PetDNA was the only one who had the test. It was thought to be at least reliable enough.
Then they started getting conflicting results - some horses they tested as At? had previously tested as aa at, say, UC Davis.
The thought was that there was a combination of “Ata” as a single variance (instead of just At, or just a), which was throwing things off. It didn’t change the horse’s color, as it still behaved as “a” even if it was “Ata”, but obviously it threw a wrench in things, so they stopped to do some more research on it.
