Indeed there are pure gamefowl
Why the ever present debate on whether there are pure gamefowl or none? Clearly it depends on how you define pure or to what you apply the term pure. Are we talking of breeding?
In breeding and genetics, definitely there is pure. Pure or homozygous of certain genes; pure strains; pure breeds; pure sub species; pure species, etc. Therefore there are pure bloodlines and there are pure gamefowl.
But first we have to define what we mean by pure. Pure individuals are those that carry in homozygous state or in fixed form the traits that are characteristics of the bloodline. In short true-to-type and prepotent of these traits.
For example: We know that American Game is a breed, like asil, Spanish game, English game, etc. And, we know that roundhead and hatch are not breeds but strains of the breed American Game. Now if we cross a roundhead and a hatch it is an outcrossing of two different strains of American Game it is no longer pure as a strain. However, if the offspring still possesses the breed characteristics or standards of the breed American Game, then it is pure as a breed American Game, because both roundhead and hatch (again assuming both carry the breed standards) are American Game.
Another example: Roundheads are called roundheads because they are roundheads or pea combs. But why are there pure roundheads that are straight comb? Because they are pure only by name roundhead but are not even carrying the genes of a pea comb. Otherwise, they would have been pea comb, because pea comb is dominant and will manifest.
However, we cannot argue with the breeder who originated these straight comb roundheads because he is entitled to the bloodline standards of his own bloodline. Being straight comb might be the standard of his own strain of roundhead.
In gamefowl breeding, many are confusing the term pure with purity of bloodline names, not breed traits. They relate the term pure with pure roundhead, pure hatch, pure kelso, etc. In this vein they argue that there are no pure bloodlines. Right, if talking of bloodline names because all new bloodline names are formed out of mixing other different bloodline names. But homozygosity of traits is a different story.
In gamefowl breeding pure of a bloodline name is an over rated term. Many believe that when a gamefowl is pure of a bloodline name it is a prepotent individual. Not necessarily. There is no guarantee that an individual that is pure in bloodline name is prepotent or will make a good seed fowl. Yes, regardless how inbred it is. A good seed fowl is an individual that is pre-potent for these desirable traits. A seed fowl can be a pure of a bloodline or a blend; an in-bred or a crossbred. It doesn’t matter as long as it has great chances of passing the desired traits to the offspring.
When a real breeder say that an individual is bred pure, it means it is pure of particular traits that is the type of the breed. But in gamefowl breeding the purity of an individual is judged by the composition of its bloodline name. If one breeds a white legged straight comb kelso to a yellow legged pea comb kelso, then the offspring is pure. It is pure by name kelso, although it is heterozygous in leg color and comb type, or whatever other unlike alleles this offspring individual possesses.
In true breeding what is important is not the name, but the desirable traits. We judge a bloodline’s purity by the homozygosity of simple traits and preponderance of polygenic traits in the said bloodline as defined by its bloodline standards.
Being pure of a name is nothing. Being pure of the good traits is everything in gamefowl breeding. Indeed there are pure gamefowl.
.
.
.
.
.
