Backyard Poultry Forum • View topic - Gallus giganteus

Backyard Poultry Forum

Chickens, waterfowl & all poultry - home of exhibition & backyard poultry in Australia & New Zealand
Login with a social network:
It is currently Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:08 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 9:42 pm 
Offline
Dapper Duck
Dapper Duck

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:20 pm
Posts: 64
Location: Queensland
Point taken CP, but KazJaps links are of great interest, on point or off and I'm glad they were posted here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 10:50 pm 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 118
I agree, it is of interest. Other theories of chicken evolution and other ancestral Gallus species are relevant, because the past existence Gallus giganteus is up for debate.

Cheers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:28 am 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 544
Currently, I am forced to conclude that, from a molecular genetic viewpoint, there is no evidence to support the existence of Gallus giganteus:at least not insofar as such a species being the ancestor of the 'Malayoid' breeds (if by 'Malayoid' breeds such as the Malay proper, Shamo and Ko-Shamo are included).

I draw this conclusion from the various molecular phylogenetic studies that have been conducted in attempt to trace the origins of domestic fowl as a whole. Admittedly, until very recently, almost all studies have been based only on mitochondrial genes (which trace only maternal lineages): examples of such studies include Fumihito et al's early work (which remains one of the most widely quotd) in the PNAS (1994) 91:12505-12509: "One subspecies of the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus gallus) suffices as the matriarchic ancestor of all domestic breeds" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 7-0160.pdf which specifically included examples of the Malay breed in its analysis (which inferred molecular phylogeny based on molecular restriction fragment length polymorphism types)

Malay game demonstrated the most commonly found RFLP type (Type V), along with the following:

WHITE LEGHORN (HIROSHIMA VAR.)1/2
BARRED PLYMOUTH ROCK 3/3
TOHMARU 1/2
WHITE PLYMOUTH ROCK 1/1
WHITE SILKY 1/1
RHODE ISLAND RED 1/1
DARK BRAHMA 1/1
LIGHT SUSSEX 2/2
HOUDAN 2/2
BUFF COCHIN 2/2
FAYOMI 1/1
PARTRIDGE COCHIN 2/2
SILVER GREY DORKING 2/2
SUMATRA GAME 2/2
JERSEY BLACK GIANT 2/2
AYAM BANGKOK 2/2
BROWN LE6HORN 1/1
AYAM BEKISAR 2/4
LA FRECHE 1/1
AYAM CEMANI 1/2
ARAUCANA 1/1
AYAM KEDU 2/9
AYAM PELUNG 1/5

along with the following RJF specimens

THAI RED 7/14
INDONESIAN RED 3/5

in all cases, the first number is the number of individuals showing the RFLP V pattern out of the total number of individuals of that type tested.

Similarly, more recent (and more direct) mitochondrial molecular genetic evidence has come from a study examining the origins of Brazilian fighting breeds (by Rodrigues et al (2006):Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic. vol.8 no.2 Campinas Apr./June 2006 which can be found at http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script= ... 6000200003) which used direct mitochrondrial gene sequence analysis (rather than RFLP typing of mitochondrial gene patterns). This found that Shamo formed a subgroup (or 'clade') with other 'typical' 'bankivoid' breeds such as white leghorn and barred plymouth rocks. The relevant figure is as follows:

Image

However, at this point it could be (legitimately) argued that 'bankivoid' hens remained as the maternal ancestor but that repeated paternal contributions were made from "Gallus giganteus" sires (perhaps similar to the way in which Grey junglefowl have been shown to have contributed the yellow skin gene to domestic fowl).

But more recently, a study has been published by Sawai et al in PloSOne "The Origin and Genetic Variation of Domestic Chickens with Special Reference to Junglefowls Gallus g. gallus and G. varius" http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi ... ne.0010639 .

This study utlised genetic sequence information from a variety of nuclear genetic loci (which covers both paternal and maternal genetic contributions), and simlarly found that Shamo formed a clade with typical bankivoid breeds such as White leghorn and Ukkokei (Japanese silkie).

Image

This latest study is also interesting in that is postulates that domestic chickens diverged from RJF several thousands of years before what is believed to be the earliest date for domestication of RJF - suggesting that perhaps domestication occurred at a rather earlier date, or that domestic breeds were derived more recently from a RJF subspecies that no longer exists. This no doubt will form the basis of much future debate in the literature.

In either case, Shamo appear to cluster with 'typical' breeds and do not show evidence for high genetic divergence from them (and hence are most likely derived from a common ancestor as opposed to a separate ancestor such as Gallus giganteus).

Whilst the above does not completely rule out the possibility of 'Malayoid' breeds having evolved from a separate ancestor (new evidence may always come to light that may not be entirely consistent with our current understanding), I find it strong evidence that all of these domestic breeds (both 'Malayoid' and "bankivoid') evolved from a common ancestor.

Personally, I don't see the need to invoke the existence of separate ancestral species to explain the phenotypic variation between a Malay and an leghorn any more than the need to invoke the existence of a specific ancestral "Pekingnese wolf" to explain the phenotype variation between a Pekingnese and a German shepherd. In both cases, extreme phenotypic variations can be explained by artificial selection pressures over hundreds/thousands of years of domestication. The pea-comb for example would seem to naturally mimic the state of combs of fowl subject to that practice beginning with "D" that is now verboten from discussion. Hence, there would have been a selective pressure favouring such a comb type in fighting fowls where the "D" practice was not undertaken.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 2:36 am 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:26 am
Posts: 429
Location: N.E. NSW, Australia
Thanks RyaRod for the link. That is what I was looking for - any evidence to date on prehistoric Gallus species & early domestic chickens.

chickenPox wrote:
I, find your above link is almost off topic because the purpose of that link’s literature is to explain the history involving the (pheasants family group) used in cockfighting and how these popular breeds like the Spanish game, American game, Oxfords, and O’E’G’s varieties became as we know them today.

At no point that web site mentions breeds or any ancestry fowl breeds from African, Persia, Afghanistan, Iran… Nor at any point it mentions anything to do with the family Gallus Giganteus.

It will be bias to compare that sites literature with this thread.


Then what you are saying is that Bill Plant's research was biased & off topic, as what I did was to look up papers he cited in his Part 3 essay (eg Harrison, 1978, etc), & then continued to find further archaeological research on early domesticated chickens & prehistoric Gallus species (the first link was a good summarisation, used only as a reference to where I got the prehistoric Gallus species list). What I was curious about was whether any scientific evidence had been gathered on the theory of Gallus giganteus, since Bill Plant's research (which is exactly what Bill was doing - gathering scientific evidence).

Personally I think Bill Plant would have been over the moon to see all the recent research & archaeological findings (sadly since his passing).

And I'm sure he would have been interested in all the genetics research too (with citations in his essays).

If you want generalised world wide research on domestic chicken breeds & genetic relationships, the following two fit the bill:

Characterizing Genetic Diversity of Contemporary Pacific Chickens Using Mitochondrial DNA Analyses
Dancause KN, Vilar MG, Steffy R, Lum JK
PLoS One 6: e16843. (2011).
full paper

Chicken domestication: an updated perspective based on mitochondrial genomes
Miao et al.,
Heredity (2013) 110, 277–282
Full Paper
*Samples were taken throughout the world (including Middle East, Africa, Madagascar, etc).

And there are many other recent papers for specific countries throughout Asia, Africa, Europe, South America, the Pacific, etc.
-------------------------------------
The following is interesting research, genetically comparing traditional Dutch breeds with Chinese breeds & commercial brown & white layers, plus broilers. No big surprises though, eg commercial brown layers & broilers are more closely related to Chinese breeds than to traditional Dutch breeds (ps. they included genetic markers from the BCDO2 W locus - white/yellow skin).

Signatures of Selection in the Genomes of Commercial and Non-Commercial Chicken Breeds
Martin G. Elferink, Hendrik-Jan Megens, Addie Vereijken, Xiaoxiang Hu, Richard P. M. A. Crooijmans, Martien A. M. Groenen
PLoS ONE 7(2): e32720. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032720. 2012
Full Paper

---------------------------------------
P.s. - In that Rosecomb paper -Table 2 lists various breeds DNA tested for R1 & R2 rose-comb alleles.

The R2 Rosecomb allele was found mostly in Russian & Eastern Europe chicken breeds (except 1 French breed), including the Russian Orloff (which has Malay ancestry too).
Some test breeding indicated that the R2 allele didn't have the reduced fertility issues of homozygous R1/R1 allele. If homozygous Rosecomb fertility issues in males was having an impact on natural selection, one might think that R2 allele would eventually win in the evolution stakes.

--------------------------------------
P.s.s - Something to keep in mind....
In under 200 years of domestication there have been over 30 spontaneous mutations recorded in Budgerigars (ie not from species hybridisation).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 11:07 am 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 118
Thanks RyaRod, KazJaps and Htul,

There is a lot of good information there.

Cheers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 1:57 pm 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 9:04 pm
Posts: 564
Location: Australia
Malanoid crowing.
ImageImage

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 2:08 pm 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 9:04 pm
Posts: 564
Location: Australia
Unfortunately all the literature we currently have is based on same experiments/research from same localities, it’s all from same habitats inhabited with the family/Genus pheasants species..
Searching/browsing the web for information is basically always same literature copied from same books with same scientific tests results.. With these findings facts are limited secluded from the same fairyland with results rotating from one web site to the other.. All this literature is missing a major part for the poultry world because it doesn't go further red/green/grey/ jungle-fowl or Asils/Aseels being hybridized with those species.

To be able to find anything to do with the Genus Gallus Giganteus you need to broaden your horizons and go directly to where their natural habitats started from being Africa and surroundings to Madagascar.

Unless all parts of the planet are researched and analysed properly this saga history involving poultry evolution will never be completed, therefore it would be prematurely to suggest anything at this stage until research is completed world wide.

Africa and surrounding has a lot of hidden history waiting for discovery, local people have stories from their regions about Melanoids varieties roaming free, some became domesticated others became wiped out.. Verbal history is not recognized to conclude evidence, scientist already agreed these strains existence, hence giving this group a name “Gallus Giganteus”, they know one day there be species names included in this family group.. So far hardly any research been done were Malanoids roamed free in their natural habitats, they came in different sizes, being hard feathered often cocks were partial exposed/naked, much stronger spurs from the Pheasant varieties shaped differently with a robust appearance, ran for cover or stood their ground and fought for life from above flighty predators, lived on a major diet of dung beetles and other large insects scabbing on dead carcases rarely stopping in same location (similar to our native Emus).. Their combs came in pea, triple pea, walnuts, strawberries and cushion, most locations had two different combs roaming together.

Native Africans possible were the first people to domesticate Melanoids, some of these varieties still exist being used for cockfighting and for their eggs/meat purposes in isolated countries.

Persia and Afghanistan were among the first people to distribute these fowl to other countries during having wars with their neighboring countries, this is how Melanoids species/varieties reached the Genus Gallus Galus (The Pheasants varieties) and the first Reza was created with many other Asil breeds to follow, including most of the soft feather breeds.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:01 pm 
Offline
Dapper Duck
Dapper Duck
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:40 am
Posts: 92
Chickenpox, it is good to see you have an open mind to the evolution process.
and what is the basic evolution process for all avian species?
the most probable ancestor of a flying group is a bipedal cursorial(running) form, therefore flight evolved from the ground up.
so there is a runner(malay), they evolve to a glider/low flyer(RJF), which evolve to a full flyer(yet to be seen in gallus species)
why would RJF revert back to a running form such as the malay.
malay that have escaped from their domesticated habitat thousands of years ago may have bred with various local pheasant populations and evolved into the RJF forms. then domestication of these forms have reduced the speed at which the RJF would evolve to be a full flight(similar to pheasant) form of bird.
to look at the basic evolutionary process this would explain why genotypes from malay can be traced back(or in my view, forward) to RJF.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 3:42 am 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:26 am
Posts: 429
Location: N.E. NSW, Australia
Thanks for the oral history Chickenpox. So I take it not only has Gallus giganteus the wild species died out, but most of domesticated ancestors in Africa? I was just reading a couple of papers on African chickens, & one (Leroy et al., 2012) mentioned that the traditional landrace fowl were white skinned, but proposed yellow skin were recently introduced from commercial lines. This was for north, west & central Africa.

Chickenpox wrote:
Verbal history is not recognized to conclude evidence, scientist already agreed these strains existence, hence giving this group a name “Gallus Giganteus”


I don't know, are there any modern geneticists that believe in Gallus giganteus vs Gallus bankiva? I mean, I'm not a geneticist, but it is driving me crazy just using this terminology for today's domestic chickens (especially after reading this 1833 book "The naturalist's library", where many domestic chicken traits (silky, frizzle, etc) are named as separate Gallus species). I would feel easier about something like Gallus domesticus malanoid . Ie, they are not a separate species as Malay & similar phenotype breed easily with other domestic chicken phenotypes - they are all domestic chickens.

Gallus = genus, Phasianidae = the family that Gallus belong in , and Phasianidae is commonly referred to as 'The family of Pheasants' (pheasant species also belong to this family). So if you want to use Gallus giganteus - it is also in 'The family of Pheasants'. And they are all terrestrial in Phasianidae.

Genetics knowledge on chickens is growing & growing for specific traits/mutations, eg the following:

Wright D, Boije H, Meadows JRS, Bed'hom B, Gourichon D, et al. (2009) Copy Number Variation in Intron 1 of SOX5 Causes the Pea-comb Phenotype in Chickens. PLoS Genet 5(6): e1000512. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000512
Full Paper
Quote:
Here we report that Pea-comb is caused by a massive amplification of a duplicated sequence located near evolutionary conserved non-coding sequences in intron 1 of the gene encoding the SOX5 transcription factor.

The study provides novel insight into the nature of mutations that contribute to phenotypic evolution and is the first description of a spontaneous and fully viable mutation in this developmentally important gene.


This research strongly suggests that the Pea-comb trait is a spontaneous mutation that happened in domestic chickens.

And they continue to DNA research these individual traits in chickens, determine causal effects (already sequenced yellow skin, dwarf, rosecomb, crest, henny-feathering, rumpless, frizzle, naked-neck, Fibromelanosis, Silver, Barring, Db - Dark Brown, E locus & others - see Wiki table).

So you can go through what has been DNA sequenced, & see what was the likely origins (eg yellow-skin Grey Junglefowl, Silver spontaneous mutation (not from Grey Junglefowl) E -Extended Black & ER spontaneous mutations (not the same alleles as in Green Junglefowl, nor Grey JF or Ceylon JF) etc).

There has been other DNA research on broilers for specific commercial traits. Probably some common mutations in Malay.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 4:33 am 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:26 am
Posts: 429
Location: N.E. NSW, Australia
Forgot to add this recent one:

Mwacharo, J. M., Nomura, K., Hanada, H., Han, J. L., Amano, T. and Hanotte, O. (2013), Reconstructing the origin and dispersal patterns of village chickens across East Africa: insights from autosomal markers. Molecular Ecology, 22: 2683–2697. doi: 10.1111/mec.12294
Full paper


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 4:12 pm 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 9:04 pm
Posts: 564
Location: Australia
hensbyshenhouse wrote:
Chickenpox, it is good to see you have an open mind to the evolution process.
and what is the basic evolution process for all avian species?
the most probable ancestor of a flying group is a bipedal cursorial(running) form, therefore flight evolved from the ground up.
so there is a runner(malay), they evolve to a glider/low flyer(RJF), which evolve to a full flyer(yet to be seen in gallus species)
why would RJF revert back to a running form such as the malay.
malay that have escaped from their domesticated habitat thousands of years ago may have bred with various local pheasant populations and evolved into the RJF forms. then domestication of these forms have reduced the speed at which the RJF would evolve to be a full flight(similar to pheasant) form of bird.
to look at the basic evolutionary process this would explain why genotypes from malay can be traced back(or in my view, forward) to RJF.

Hensbyshenhouse, I respect your opinion everything is possible.

You mentioned you owned Malays, can I asked you same question, I’m interested to see what answer you give.

What birds would you cross to get a malay :?: ?
from overseas choice, and from the current Australia breeds choice.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 9:14 pm 
Offline
Dapper Duck
Dapper Duck
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:40 am
Posts: 92
the only 2 birds you can breed together to get a malay are 2 malays without any outcross in their gentic makeup. any outcross will show in comb, leg color or most notably size and shape.
the malay form is not a human invention. it is an evolutionary process.
as William Plant has studied and written the long legs, small wattles, cushion comb and hard feathers are all naturally selected form of a runner. why would man breed this? something that may lay an egg and can out run you if you want to eat it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 11:56 pm 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 544
hensbyshenhouse wrote:
the only 2 birds you can breed together to get a malay are 2 malays without any outcross in their gentic makeup. any outcross will show in comb, leg color or most notably size and shape.


You could equally say the same of silkies - yet, few would entertain the notion that silkies were the product of a separate domestication event from some sort of hairy flightless extinct proto-silkie that was a completely different species from a RJF.

Similarly, you could say the same of Pekingneses or Chihuahuas...

hensbyshenhouse wrote:
the malay form is not a human invention. it is an evolutionary process.



Human selection IS an evolutionary process (just an 'artificial' rather than a 'natural' form of selection -though since humans are themselves 'natural' it could be argued that such a distinction is itself arbitrary and artificial).

hensbyshenhouse wrote:
as William Plant has studied and written the long legs, small wattles, cushion comb and hard feathers are all naturally selected form of a runner. why would man breed this? something that may lay an egg and can out run you if you want to eat it.



As to why humans would selectively breed such a fowl?

Consider the following extract from the Poultry Club of Great Britain's website (http://www.poultryclub.org/breed-galler ... d-feather/)

"The Asil is probably the oldest known breed of gamefowl, having been bred in India for its fighting qualities for over 2000 years. The name Asil is derived from Arabic and means ‘of long pedigree’. In different dialects it can be spelled ‘Asil’, ‘Aseel’ or ‘Asli’. In its native land the Asil was bred to fight, not with false spurs, but rather with its natural spurs covered with tape, the fight being a trial of strength and endurance. Such was the fitness, durability and gameness of the contestants that individual battles could last for days. This style of fighting produced a powerful and muscular bird with a strong beak, thick muscular Neck and powerful legs, together with a pugnacious temperament and stubborn refusal to accept defeat."

I believe therein lies your answer...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 5:50 pm 
Offline
Proud Rooster
Proud Rooster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 10:58 pm
Posts: 360
Location: Central Highlands, Victoria
hensbyshenhouse wrote:
William Plant has studied and written the long legs, small wattles, cushion comb and hard feathers are all naturally selected form of a runner. why would man breed this? something that may lay an egg and can out run you if you want to eat it.


Still beats small bird that can fly into trees and bushes.
Htul wrote:
Human selection IS an evolutionary process (just an 'artificial' rather than a 'natural' form of selection -though since humans are themselves 'natural' it could be argued that such a distinction is itself arbitrary and artificial).


Human selection is artificial as it bends the form of the original species to fit a role. (Using dogs as an example) So characteristics and traits that would hinder a wolf can be focused on until a desired form is achieved to fit a new role wolves couldn't do.
If you look at a greyhound its body is not dissimilar to a cheetah; both have a long flexible body and tail, long thin muscular legs for covering flat ground quickly and small head as the target small prey. A wolf has a 'general' build for endurance, larger feet to keep it stable as it manoeuvres over unstable ground, muscular head and jaws to bring down large prey.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gallus giganteus
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 10:25 pm 
Offline
Dapper Duck
Dapper Duck
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:40 am
Posts: 92
Htul wrote,
Quote:
You could equally say the same of silkies - yet, few would entertain the notion that silkies were the product of a separate domestication event from some sort of hairy flightless extinct proto-silkie that was a completely different species from a RJF.


William J Plant did entertain the notion that the asiatics should be classed as a separate species and be called gallus pluma cruris refering to feathering of the leg shank or shin.
with feather evolution it shows plumaceous(downy)feathers are the predecessor to pennaceous(vaned- flight feathers)
the chinese silkie could be the oldest pure breed in existence today.
I have taken malay/silkie crosses to auctions, where people with poultry knowledge are astounded when they are told they are not langshan crosses.
with the ease of domestication of the chicken by man we may well be the reason for slowing or ceasing the basic evolution process from runner to glider to flyer .
evolution needs to be looked at with a very open mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yandex Bot and 6 guests


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 post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
©2004-2014 Backyardpoultry.com. Content rights reserved
freestone