personally im a bit sceptical of these pics...
photoes are edetid. obvious... due to the backgroung being all black and no other colous shown. this would make it fairly easy to reduce the red orange and yellow hue in the photograph without it being obvious the pic has been edeted! if there were say foliage in the pic and you changed the hue settings it would show in the background too... you could do it without changing the background but its more fiddly... _________________ May........
errm..yeah... sorry if i offended anyone.... i couldnt find any text about the photo so didnt know what they were saying about the blue mutation or weather it was just an example. _________________ May........
here in Europe the rumor has been going on for ages.
Recently I don't remember where I also saw again someone mention blue kakarikis in Aus but i wonder about the legitimacy of such rumors.
About a year ago a Spanish colleague was alarmed that some of his young chicks had cobalt blue in the wings and he thought it was a mutation. They were simply wildcolor birds, but he had only bred heavy pied and goldcheck kakariki until that date.
In any case it would be nice to have new mutations. In recent years there only a possibly "false spangle" mutation has appeared in Europe, but from what Peter Wouters told me it seems to be a variation or allele of the pied mutation. _________________ AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
I do not see why a reputable photographer like Rod Morris would edit a photo without mentioning it. Suppose it is, than I find it badly done. A genuine Blue would have a pure white crown and ear coverts. This bird shows strong similarities with the Blue variety mentioned by Buller. In fact I believe it is the same bird. Compare the note at the bottom of the picture with Buller's note.
It says: Red-crowned parakeet (Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae novaezelandiae) blue mutation. This is the only blue mutation of a wild kakariki ever documented, it was collected in Southland in the 1800's. The remarkable colour is caused by the absence of Psittacin (responsible for the red, orange and yellow pigments in parrots).
Bullers description: No. 2 is a beautiful instance of cyanism. The entire plumage of the cheeks, throat, and underparts is a delicate marine-blue, or isabelline, the feathers on the lower parts and sides of the body narrowly edged with dusky; supplying the place of crimson on the vertex and ear-coverts is a pale yellowish or greyish brown; the rest of the upper surface is a deeper isabelline, varied with a still darker shade of blue, and with the feathers more distinctly margined with dusky; there are no uropygial spots; the quills are marked with ultramarine as in ordinary specimens; the tail-feathers have greenish reflections, with a wash of blue down the outer vane of the lateral ones, the under surface of wings and tail being dusky brown. Bill and feet of the normal colours. This is the Parrakeet mentioned by Prof. Hutton as the “blue variety from Southland.”
peter of course i could be wrong... It would be really cool to see a new especially a blue mutation.... but if this had sprung up im sure the breader would be trying to produce more of them... but.... think i somehow missed something......is this bird a stuffed one in a museum somewhere? i was thinking it was alive
also.... says feet and bill are normal colour....... feet look yellow...!!! maybe they faded over the years.....
*may gets her coat n leaves the room quietly hoping no one will notice* _________________ May........
you may be right in this one, and this bird may be stuffed, as now looking at the claws the bird is not closing them, but they remain open. An alive bird would grasp the perch around with its claws.
And as you correctly say it has an orange tinge in some parts of the crown, it could be an aqua (or another par-blue mutation) bird rather than the true blue mutation.
In budgies and recently also in cockatiels there is a parblue mtuation that is almost blue, there isn´t almost any psittacin left. In cockatiels is called cream-face and it´s equivalent to one of the Yellowface mutations in cockatiel.
I mention this because the kakariki in the picture looks very much like blue, and in my opinion an aqua bird would be rather seagreen (thinking of an aqua agapornis roseicollis). _________________ AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
*may gets her coat n leaves the room quietly hoping no one will notice*
Yes, this bird is as stuffed as can be. If it is indeed Bullers bird then I guess it must be around 120 years old. In those days it was found in the Otago museum in NZ.
If the blue was caused by a mutation then you are right with saying it must have been a par-blue. Aqua has a uniform psittacin reduction. About 50% according the universal namegiving. Turquoise has an irregular psittacin reduction. Some parts on the bird can be totally blue while others are greenish and/or orange. So I guess it must have been a Turquoise mutation. I wonder if that mutation is still around in a hidden form. After all, he has received the mutated gene from both his parrents and they received it from at least one other bird. The blue bird must have had brothers and sisters who carried the gene and passed it on.
as I said in other occasions, I don´t know about the blue mutation, but I would not be surprised that maybe in Europe we are breeding other mutations and they are going completely unnoticed.
An important % of kakariki bred are yellow/BEC/goldcheck so chances are that some mutations could be going through, i.e. grey, dark factor, etc...
And maybe even some breeders are discarding those birds for having poor feather quality.
Bearing in mind the confusion that exists already with species like cockatiels and lovebirds, I would not be surprised about kakariki mutations being bred, having far less literature and being relatively rare.
Nevertheless it´s strange that in the last 5-6 yrs that I became aware of kakariki, there aren´t any new mutations, other than the ´gezoomd´ in yellow fronts.
In Belgium and Netherlands they are bred in reasonable numbers and I was expecting new mutations to eventually pop up, but not even rumors or anything. The kakariki scene seems to be very quiet, at least for an outsider like me. _________________ AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
Peter is correct in all aspects as far as I can asertain also.
Rod Morris is also a long time highly respected Conservationisat in many areas and projects with no effective interest in capitive breeding or mutations with in the comercial or hobbist in regards to the 'pet' or bird club shows.
As a professional photographer it doesnt materr if it is birds landscapes, portrate or a wedding, photos have been touched up..in the old days was a air brush, today digitally 'photoshoped'
I have seen a blue in Aussie, in poor condition, did not reseemnle this one, and I believe even more so now it was a envoromental comdition not a genetic condition.
I do not know the full background as to how this bird become captured and stuffed....but if it was along similar lines as all our other species it is very very unlikely the mutation existes in NZ, and due to the rareity it would bew very likely the rest of the flock was exterminated at the time anyway.
If the flock happened to be 1 of a handful of 100s of 1000s that where being exterminated, and any survivers 'of interest nursed back to heath from shot gun blast to be shiped back to Europe via Aussie, it is unlikely...and if it was a a wild colour carrring the gene, it would not be of interest
And then to survive the trip....
The odds of any gene suriving from this blood line I like is very slim. _________________ My Spelling is Not Incorrect...It's 'Creative'
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum