So weather/temperature has absolutely zero to do with the growth of thick underfur? Or more fur in general? Both questions refer to complete indepedence from a change in photoperiod.

You are trying to compare apples and oranges sort of. If you take a coyote from montana and a coyote from california (be sure they're not both males considering one is from CA) and subject them to the same artificial light regimen. Each will develop the coat that their DNA dictates. That will be the same coat for the california yote (thin and scraggly) and a normal montana coat ( full and fluffy) You can take the coyote out of his country but you can take the country out of the coyote. At least not in one or two generations.

How about taking 2 montana yotes in june. Subject one to constant 20 degrees for 3 months and the other to normal montana summer temps. Both get identical sunlight. Then measure coat thickness. Will the two be identical?

The fur ain't going to change from one location to another, the animals already have the genes in them for what they get!!

Moving them to another latitude won't change thier coat. They will change when they prime up due to light on the eye's though

I agree. That's not what I was getting at. Say you do what you did, take yotes from 2 regions, and subject them to the same regimen of decreasing photoperiod, but this time gradually increase the temperature in the montana dog's pen at 100 degrees, and slowly lower the temp in the california dogs pen to 0 degrees. I assure you, despite identical photoperiods and genetic differences, the cali yote will have thicker fur than the montana yote.

Ask guys that breed whitetail deer. If they buy a buck from Texas and put in in their minnesota pen, it will make it come fall/winter, (you obviously couldn't do this move in the winter). The maximum or minimum fur density is not genetically determined.

Sorry I don't agree with that, density has to be genenticaly given as your only have so much space to grow in, and the animals don't get any more hair roots for density because of temperature, they are not there to get!!

Besides your not even using the same animal as an example! Which is the same for them as well, an animal only has so many hair roots no matter what species it is.

Density would be more regulated to genetics, diet and stress from other enviromental elements than anything.

It would take a matter of generations for either animal to show any change in hair coverage and root supply.

There is, its called melatonin and you can buy it at any drugstore without a prescription. Just put in your normal bait recipe and start pre-baiting before the season. If the pineal glands hormontal output of melatonin is the sole reason for primness then you should have every expectation that your foxes will be more prime on opening day. Good Luck.

I don't think putting certain chemical surprise's out in the field would be apperciated by most DWR's, one might just want to check the regulations before deciding to do your own fur priming LOL

There are a multitude of variables that impact the process I am sure. What is important is identifying the "trigger" or triggering event that starts proccess. It also must be something that needs to have a certain number of periods or events continuously so that the proccess once started continues. With many furbearers being nocturnal there has to be something other than just an optical sensation to daylight. There may be more involvement with different reflective ray types as the angle of the sun changes etc. The proccess may be more about the lack of something being produced than the increase of another substance produced. With hair being 99% protein it has something to do with protein synthasis and that is interesting as the diets of many fur bearers probably are much higher in carbs in the fall than protein, especially when compared to summer diets or when younger.

Bryce

I hope that hair roots are not a set number, since when I pull a hair out by a root, I really hope one grows back.

What you are referring to are follicles, a cellular structure in the dermis from which a hair grows.

More follicles can absolutely be formed in an individual. Do you know any old women or old men that have much more hair on their chins (women), or ears/eyebrows, I think most would. My grandma has some serious whiskers growing that I assure you were not there previously. Many older men have a great deal more hair growing around their ear openings than they did when they were 30. Did they have genetic mutations? I'm pretty sure not. More follicles are developed in existing dermis that were not previously there, and this is due to physilogic and hormonal changes occuring in the body. You bring me an Arizona desert coyote in july and I keep him in a pen in my yard in MN, as winter approaches that baby will grow fur like he never did before. Might it not be the same as MN resident yote fur, maybe not, but my education tells me it would be there.

Melatonin is not considered a drug. It is defined by the FDA, and is regulated as, a dietary supplement. Thats right, its legally a food and not a drug. You can put it in your bait just as you would any other food product.

Personally I don't advocate doing this. I don't believe that decreasing sunlight, and the resulting increase in melatonin output of the pineal gland is the sole determinate of hair growth, ie primeness. I believe it to be a multifactor process, decreasing light being just one of many necessary factors. If you are one on those people who do, however, by all means give it a try.

Amen

johnsD16, those follicles were already in place and were not placed there from diet, enviorment or habitat, and are not actuated by light, they are prompted to grow with as you stated with hormonal changes in people. Just not light!! All your examples given have roots established already some people they take off others they don't, it's a gene thing!! You can help them take off by manipulating the genes thur hormone intake and diet as well. Same with animals

How about when people go bald, you can transplant them to the head from behind the head or from a different part of the head and they will grow again. Mainly cause they are genetically predisposed to grow longer than where the baldness follicles were. You ever see bald people having transplants from the same bald area, it would fail in short order. The gene matrix is written already with that follicle.

Same with animals they are only given a certain amount of follicles to work with, one is not going to stimulate more follicle growth where there is none to grow.

Growing any more is only a result of stimulating exsisting ones already there. Which is the argument, how does one stimulate for a heavier density fur when it's not there to begin with!!

Your description of what happens is baldness is not at all acurate. But that is a whole other issue.

What I'm saying is that new follicles can be formed where none existed previously if they are prompted to biochemically. In addtion a single follicle may produce two hairs, making the hair/fur more dense.

In older people, those are not all previously established roots, some are new and hence the increased density and lenght of the hair around the ears and in teh eyebrows.

New hairs= increased density.

They can't be prompted to if they are not there LOL, those older people you speak of with no previoulsy established roots, have the roots there already they just have not been activated to grow. We all have a certain amount of follicles not stimulated or triggered to grow, yet the roots or follicles which ever you decide to use are still there until we pass.

I agree if you can stimulate new follicle growth where there is none you have heavier density. Provided your not losing the same amount of fur/hair some where else, probably would eqaute to a status quo, really.

Only thing is the stimulations occurs with follicles already in place and not activated, which would create heavier fur density.

However this is not createing new follicles where none exsisted before, they were already inplace and just activated!

Yes some follicles will indeed grow two hairs, although that is a low precentage of the fur/hair.

Lenght in fur has no bearing on density, or people, it's just longer is all.

I've never seen or heard of new actual follicles being created in a bald person where they have lost the follicles. I have heard of and seen re-generation of old follicles though, with chemical and diet controls. As well as transplanted hair which is a lot quicker process to attain.

I never said anything about what happens to cause baldness, though most of that is genetics as well, other conditions which could apply are accidents, chemical imbalances and cancer treatments,i.e. chemo-therapy

Wow!!!! Photosynthesis too protein synthesis who'd a thunk it.

The "trigger" for the onset of "primness" is the amount of daily light, or better, the lack of daily light. The quality of primness is a function of energy (health status; age, diet and caloric intack) and the individual's genetic compliment (population characteristics). ALL of which are under hormonal control via specific secretory activities and feed back mechanisms among interacting hormones. BUT it IS the amount of daily light that TRIGGERS the onset of "primness".

Roots and follicles are two very different things. Roots are part of a hair, made of keratin, a protein. Follicles are a structure in the dermis layer of the skin made of acutal living cells. I'm a little confused at what you are getting at, but yes, new follicles can arise where there was not one before, and existing follicles can become hyperplastic.

What I'm saying is that fur primeness has alot to do with photoperiod, but there is absolutely no way that that is the only factor.

Also, fur density is not genetically predetermined, it is to some extent but not to the point that it would inhibit survival in the event of a large northward migration or dramatic climae change. A texas coyote could survive a MN winter if he moved north in July.

All I know is that I'm glad I live in MN and the fur is pretty good all season.

Ok so we agree on the point of primeness being activated by light LOL, thats enough for me!!

I think a coyote could survive most anywhere if he had things to eat!!

Melatonin implants are small rubber pellets that are implanted in the back of the neck of ranch mink and ranch fox. There is a time limit on when this can be done. The best time to do this is between July 4th and July 21st. Anytime before and after causes more of the animals to not be prime.

Our mink will be prime before mid-October which is when we will start pelting them. Implanted animals should not be kept for breeding stock. Implants make the animals bigger and saves a month or better on the feed bill.

Humans use melatonin as a sleep aid.

Have to disagree there.Working with fox and mink in the artificial breeding genetics has pretty much everything thing to do with density and fur quality.