And here I come with the next bunch of confusing colours :)

[Tjigra]

I'll start this off by revisiting one I posted previously. We agreed that he doesn't look dun, but very probably is. Now he is all grown up and has stumped me even more. I KNOW these are sooty dapples, but how??
Ronnie C


This one isn't dun, right?
Quick Times C


Is this pretty palomino hiding flaxen, or are the very light legs down to the hooves due to pangare?
Phoenix Luck C


And last (but not the least) - what is THIS?? Looks an extreme plume, but why?
Stormhush C

[BlackOak2]

I'll start this off by revisiting one I posted previously. We agreed that he doesn't look dun, but very probably is. Now he is all grown up and has stumped me even more. I KNOW these are sooty dapples, but how??

This one isn't dun, right?

Is this pretty palomino hiding flaxen, or are the very light legs down to the hooves due to pangare?

And last (but not the least) - what is THIS?? Looks an extreme plume, but why?

Ronnie - You either have a new monitor or you're getting used to seeing these colors! Ronnie does have dapples along the topline of his back. I can see them too. All of our dapples do appear to have the exact same pattern, with only the heaviness being the determining factor of if we see them or not. Plus, sooty is the only one (aside from an oddly graying gray horse), that can have different weights of dapples appearing across the body, visible on the topline, invisible on the underside.

Quick Times - I see no signs of dun.

Phoenix Luck - pangare. There could be flaxen as well. The only way I can really tell (aside from breeding) if a palomino or cremello definitely has flaxen is if those lower legs grow upward with bright light. But it stops there along the lower legs. Of course, just because they don't have that, doesn't mean they don't have flaxen.

Stormhush - affected by pangare too and the plume is known to affect just the mane to a stronger degree at times. It's a recessive, buildable style gene, which means both parents would have needed to carry the plume, but may not have shown it.

[Tjigra]

Ronnie - You either have a new monitor or you're getting used to seeing these colors! Ronnie does have dapples along the topline of his back. I can see them too. All of our dapples do appear to have the exact same pattern, with only the heaviness being the determining factor of if we see them or not. Plus, sooty is the only one (aside from an oddly graying gray horse), that can have different weights of dapples appearing across the body, visible on the topline, invisible on the underside.

Stormhush - affected by pangare too and the plume is known to affect just the mane to a stronger degree at times. It's a recessive, buildable style gene, which means both parents would have needed to carry the plume, but may not have shown it.

Ronnie - dapples are supposed to be dominant, right? At least I've read that in one of the dapples project threads somewhere round there. But Ronnie's dam is from very old lines, from before dapples were introduced, I believe, and his sire doesn't have dapples, even though he shows nice sooty. His last picture is from ~15 years old - surely they would have shown by then? I owned that stallion for a while, he was over 15 years old when I sold him, and I didn't see any dapples. And both his parents are nice sooties with no dapples too.
(I've been more and more doubting the dominant nature of the dapples gene. I've been trying to breed them into my Arabs for ages now, and they don't breed well. I have a heavily dappled mare who has given me 10 foals, and the only one dappled is from a dappled sire too (but she herself is from a dappled sire, and [old line x AC Arab] mare herself - the only dappled one I've managed to get by this kind of breeding). If dapples are indeed simple dominant, then it should be an extreme string of bad luck on my side. I don't get dapples when I breed my non-dapple line mares to dappled stallions from well established dappled lines too.)
(And here I am, complaining about not getting dapples into my Arabs, and having a dappled random Arab cross )

Stormhush - I was under belief that plume is dominant too. Thanks for clearing that up. Even though, when I look at his dam now, she does show a bit of "salt and pepper" look into her mane and tail, especially in her foal pictures. But there is very little salt, and not even that much on the sire. Hush however blew it out of proportion

[BlackOak2]

Ronnie - dapples are supposed to be dominant, right? At least I've read that in one of the dapples project threads somewhere round there. But Ronnie's dam is from very old lines, from before dapples were introduced, I believe, and his sire doesn't have dapples, even though he shows nice sooty. His last picture is from ~15 years old - surely they would have shown by then? I owned that stallion for a while, he was over 15 years old when I sold him, and I didn't see any dapples. And both his parents are nice sooties with no dapples too.
(I've been more and more doubting the dominant nature of the dapples gene. I've been trying to breed them into my Arabs for ages now, and they don't breed well. I have a heavily dappled mare who has given me 10 foals, and the only one dappled is from a dappled sire too (but she herself is from a dappled sire, and [old line x AC Arab] mare herself - the only dappled one I've managed to get by this kind of breeding). If dapples are indeed simple dominant, then it should be an extreme string of bad luck on my side. I don't get dapples when I breed my non-dapple line mares to dappled stallions from well established dappled lines too.)
(And here I am, complaining about not getting dapples into my Arabs, and having a dappled random Arab cross )

Stormhush - I was under belief that plume is dominant too. Thanks for clearing that up. Even though, when I look at his dam now, she does show a bit of "salt and pepper" look into her mane and tail, especially in her foal pictures. But there is very little salt, and not even that much on the sire. Hush however blew it out of proportion

I have tried to keep my quicklinks updated.

The color links are near the bottom, I'll link them here for convenience and meanwhile, look over them again, to make sure I didn't give you the wrong information on the sooty dapples.

Plume:
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=17777
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=24301
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=18167

Sooty Dapples:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1601
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4511
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=9466

Hint: The breed carrying the Dapple Master Switch is one which rarely appears sooty itself. 1 in 4 horses will carry the gene, but it's a Simple Dominant so only one copy is needed. The gene has been in the game since the beginning so it's possible there could be a horse living now with sooty dapples.

You're right, it is a simple dominant. That quote was direct from Larissar, here's the rest of it (found on the third link I think). Had I also looked at my notes, instead of relying on my [obviously] faulty memory, I wouldn't have given you the wrong information. Sorry about that.

Sooty Dapples are available in the game right now, and are more challenging than Appaloosas to find.

A Quick Summary:
Sooty Dapples Master Switch (turns on the appearance of dapples on sooty)
- only available in one breed

Sooty Dapples Strength (3 main genes, in same breed as master switch gene)

In order for dapples to appear on Sooty then Sooty must also appear.
Sooty Summary:
- 4 Master Switch genes found in 3 breeds, and very rarely in 4 other breeds
- 4 expression genes (help to determine over what areas of the horse the sooty will appear), found in 3 breeds and very rarely in 4 other breeds)
- 4 strength genes (help to determine how much sooty appears in the areas where sooty has been determined to appear) found in most breeds to varying degrees
- 1 progression gene (helps to determine how quickly the sooty effect will progress, some breeds will appear sooty faster while others could take their entire life for sooty to appear), Fast Sooty found in 5 breeds, while Old Sooty found in all breeds.