Blue Ridge Ioma

prefix Blue Ridge · Maine Coon · line: Blue Eyed Maine Coons (Markiss) · one blue eye · Variant known, this cat untested · also in its ancestry: DBE-ALT, DBE-CEL

Under the variant field this directory proposes, this cat would read DBE 162|163p. A carrier with no result of its own and more than one identified variant above it. One test resolves it. The proposal is set out in full here, and no registry issues this field today: it is computed from the record at each build and is not part of any registration.

How this cat is connected to the trait

1. Blue Ridge Ioma, XLH n 09 69
2. Nikita'l Markiss [Cherkassy, UA], XLH ns 03 68, the sire of Blue Ridge Ioma
3. Nikita'l Seymour, XSH ns 03 23 68, the sire of Nikita'l Markiss [Cherkassy, UA]. DBE-ALT, adopted by this survey; a founder of this survey

That is 2 recorded parent links, and the animal at the end of it carries a variant this survey has adopted, but has not itself been tested. Every step is a parent recorded in this register from a document; none of them is an assumption. The full genealogy is drawn below, and the sources for each animal are on its own page.

Save this cat as a PDF the connection, the genealogy and the source on one A4 landscape sheet, carrying this directory's name and address

More than one variant could be present in this cat

DBE-ALT and DBE-CEL. MORE THAN ONE VARIANT COULD BE PRESENT IN THIS CAT: DBE-ALT, DBE-CEL. It is not established that any of them is, and it is not established that two are. A dominant allele comes from a parent, and this cat's recorded ancestry carries an attribution of each. The attributions above it are on Nikita'l Seymour, Roxi. A CAT HOLDING TWO IS A COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE, which this survey records as the state associated with deaf and dead kittens, and NOTHING BUT A TEST DISTINGUISHES ONE FROM TWO.

Computed from the recorded parentage at every build, counting both the variants this survey adopts and the ones it records a source claiming and does not adopt. IT IS AN UPPER BOUND AND NOT A FINDING: it says what could be here, never what is.

What is flagged on this tree

1. PUSHOK. THE NIKITA'L MATERIAL IS NOW CONFIRMED COMPLETE BY THREE REGISTRY SHEETS READ INDEPENDENTLY. Seymour's own sheet gives PUSHOK, HCL e 22 62, and ELIZA, XSH ns 02 69, and nothing above either. Pheer-Ca's gives ROXI, XXH n 24 68, KZ, and MARCH NIKITA'L, EUR n 03 62, and nothing above either. Markiss's gives all four. ON ALL THREE SHEETS EVERY CELL ABOVE THOSE FOUR READS 'No information in the database' | THE FOUR FOUNDATION ANIMALS ARE THE TOP OF THIS MATERIAL BY REGISTRY RECORD AND NOT BY ABSENCE OF SEARCHING. Taken with the cattery listing, which holds the two founders and no descendants at all, THE WHOLE OF WHAT ANY REGISTRY HOLDS ON THIS CATTERY IS NOW IN THIS REGISTER. Nothing further can be obtained from pedigree material and the prefix should not be chased again | TWO CODES STAND ON EACH SIDE OF MARKISS BEFORE HE IS BORN. His sire Seymour is 68 out of a 62 and a 69; his dam Pheer-Ca is 69 out of a 68 and a 62. THAT IS WHY EVERY LINE DESCENDING FROM HIM CARRIES BOTH, and it is visible on the sheet without any inference at all
2. PUSHOK. Eye and coat, THE STRONGEST EXCLUSION THIS REGISTER CAN MAKE FROM A CODE. This cat is blue-eyed in both eyes and its recorded coat carries NO WHITE SPOTTING CODE AT ALL, is not dominant white and is not colourpointed. NOTHING IN THE COAT CAN PALE AN IRIS. A dominant blue eye is present and it is not the KIT odd-eye case and not the white-cat case. Its registry has entered no dominant eye code on it. WHICH VARIANT IS NOT DEDUCIBLE FROM A COAT CODE and none is adopted: a genotype or a trace to a named founder would name it.
3. ELIZA. HOMOZYGOUS, NOT COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE, IN THE BREEDER'S OWN WORDS, AND THE TWO ARE DIFFERENT CLAIMS. Her page says 'the last thing I expected from that pairing was a HOMOZYGOUS KITTEN'. Chart C4 writes 'DBE-CEL & DBE-ALT' beside him. HOMOZYGOUS MEANS TWO COPIES OF ONE ALLELE; COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE MEANS ONE COPY EACH OF TWO DIFFERENT ONES. This register held the second reading and the breeder states the first. NEITHER IS A GENOTYPE and no laboratory result exists for him | THE WORD HOMOZYGOUS CANNOT BE RIGHT IN ITS STRICT SENSE, AND WHAT IT PROBABLY MEANS IS MORE INTERESTING THAN IF IT WERE. ALT AND CEL ARE ESTABLISHED AS SEPARATE VARIANTS in the published work this register holds: Abitbol and others 2024, 'Different Founding Effects Underlie Dominant Blue Eyes in the Domestic Cat', and 'A PAX3 insertion in the Celestial breed'. His dam KAENA runs to NIKITA'L SEYMOUR, who founds ALT; his sire LAZULI runs to ROXI, who founds CEL. A CAT TAKING ONE COPY FROM EACH IS A COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE, ONE COPY EACH OF TWO DIFFERENT VARIANTS, AND NOT A HOMOZYGOTE. The breeder is almost certainly using homozygous loosely, to mean TWO DOSES OF DOMINANT BLUE EYE rather than two copies of one allele. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CHART C4 SAYS WHEN IT WRITES 'DBE-CEL & DBE-ALT' BESIDE HIM, so the chart and the pedigree agree with each other and the breeder's word is the odd one out | AND IT IS THE CASE THE BREEDING GUIDANCE WARNS ABOUT. Two dominant blue eye variants in one animal is precisely the mating the British Gems article, citing Abitbol, says should never be made. MIYUKI IS SOLID WHITE AND DEAF. Whether that is the consequence of carrying both, or of the white spotting reaching him from three directions, IS THE THING NO ONE CAN SEPARATE WITHOUT A TEST | AND THE COAT SAYS BE CAREFUL, WHICH IS WHY HE WAS TRACED. Four generations above him, WHITE SPOTTING REACHES HIM FROM THREE SEPARATE DIRECTIONS: ELIZA, XSH ns 02 69, A HARLEQUIN and herself coded 69; MARCH NIKITA'L, EUR n 03 62, A BICOLOUR; and NIKITA'L SEYMOUR, XSH ns 03 23 68 on the PawPeds reading, ALSO A BICOLOUR. MIYUKI IS SOLID WHITE AND DEAF. THAT IS ALSO EXACTLY WHAT A CAT CARRYING A GREAT DEAL OF WHITE SPOTTING LOOKS LIKE, and deafness is the classic consequence of white over the ear. HIS WHITENESS AND HIS DEAFNESS ARE NOT BY THEMSELVES EVIDENCE OF A HOMOZYGOUS EYE VARIANT, and a homozygous white-spotting cat and a homozygous eye-variant cat cannot be told apart by looking | WHAT ELSE HE COULD CARRY, ASKED AND ANSWERED. He could carry heavy white spotting from Eliza, March Nikita'l and Seymour. He could carry the 69 that Eliza and Pheer-Ca both show. NOTHING IN HIS RECORDED ANCESTRY SUGGESTS DOMINANT WHITE: no animal above him is coded w. NOTHING SUGGESTS THE POINTED GENE: no 33 anywhere. His four grandparents are Seymour, March Nikita'l, Roxi and an unnamed female the charts draw as '??' | HIS LITTERMATE MOCHI IS THE CONTROL AND IS NOT DEAF. Mochi is mostly white with a coloured patch, the Topaz panda pattern, and hears. TWO KITTENS OF ONE LITTER, BOTH LABELLED THE SAME BY THE CHART, ONE DEAF AND ONE NOT. If the label were a genotype they should not differ, and the amount and placement of white is the obvious thing that does differ | HE WAS NEUTERED AND PLACED, so no offspring will ever settle it. ONLY A TEST ON HIM WILL
4. ROXI. BREEDING RECOMMENDATIONS THE PAGE ATTRIBUTES TO PROFESSOR MARIE ABITBOL OF THE VETAGRO RESEARCH LABORATORY. THE RESEARCHER AND THE SUBJECT ARE REAL AND THIS REGISTER ALREADY HOLDS HER WORK: Abitbol and others 2024, 'Different Founding Effects Underlie Dominant Blue Eyes in the Domestic Cat', Animals 14(13):1845; Abitbol and others 2024, 'A PAX3 insertion in the Celestial breed and certain feline breeding lines with dominant blue eyes', Animal Genetics 55; Abitbol and others 2024, 'PAX3 haploinsufficiency in Maine Coon cats with dominant blue eyes and hearing loss resembling the human Waardenburg syndrome', G3; and Abitbol and others 2025, 'Dominant blue eyes in Maine Coon cats: new PAX3 variant and updated phenotypic data', Animal Genetics. BUT THE LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS BELOW IS THE BREEDER'S RENDERING OF THEM AND THIS REGISTER HAS NOT CHECKED IT AGAINST THOSE PAPERS. A real researcher being correctly named does not make a lay summary of her advice accurate. RECORDED AS THE BREEDER STATES IT, ATTRIBUTED AS THE BREEDER ATTRIBUTES IT, AND NOT ADOPTED. WHERE THIS REGISTER NEEDS THE SCIENCE IT CITES THE PAPERS DIRECTLY. THE LIST: do not breed DBE bloodlines with colourpoint or colourpoint carriers; with cats that have white, meaning bicolour, harlequin or van; with pure white cats; with cats born from DBE marriages that are born LATENT with orange eyes; or with recessive odd eyed. AND: 'Mixing, accidentally or not, a dominant cat to another dominant cat EVEN IF LATENT, can cause severe health issues in the first or future generations and should never be done' | THE DANGERS NAMED: 'Deafness (Altai, Topaz), CRANIAL MALFORMATIONS (Ojos Azules, a breed abandoned by the LOOF and TICA in 2004 because of issues). Other things commonly seen in dominant odd eyed is a KINKED TAIL or NOSE SHAPES THAT ARE STRANGE, of form and small or not equal nostrils.' And: 'DOMINANT TO DOMINANT ALSO SEEMS TO PRODUCE KITTENS WITH A LARGE AMOUNT OF WHITE EVEN IF THE PARENTS ARE SOLID' | THAT LAST OBSERVATION BEARS DIRECTLY ON MIYUKI OF AERLIN. He is out of Kaena and Lazuli, both of dominant lines, HIS BREEDER CALLS HIM HOMOZYGOUS, and he is SOLID WHITE AND DEAF where both parents carry only a chin patch. THE PAGE PREDICTS EXACTLY THAT OUTCOME FROM EXACTLY THAT MATING, and it predicts it as a harm | THE REGISTER RECORDS THIS AS A BREEDER'S STATEMENT OF PRACTICE AND AS A HEALTH CLAIM ATTRIBUTED TO A NAMED RESEARCHER. It does not endorse it, it has not verified the attribution, and it makes no recommendation about breeding
5. ROXI. Line and variant. The line Blue Eyed Maine Coons (Markiss) holds more than one variant across its records (DBE-ALT, DBE-CEL).
6. MARCH NIKITA'L, ALSO GIVEN AS MARTA. HOMOZYGOUS, NOT COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE, IN THE BREEDER'S OWN WORDS, AND THE TWO ARE DIFFERENT CLAIMS. Her page says 'the last thing I expected from that pairing was a HOMOZYGOUS KITTEN'. Chart C4 writes 'DBE-CEL & DBE-ALT' beside him. HOMOZYGOUS MEANS TWO COPIES OF ONE ALLELE; COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE MEANS ONE COPY EACH OF TWO DIFFERENT ONES. This register held the second reading and the breeder states the first. NEITHER IS A GENOTYPE and no laboratory result exists for him | THE WORD HOMOZYGOUS CANNOT BE RIGHT IN ITS STRICT SENSE, AND WHAT IT PROBABLY MEANS IS MORE INTERESTING THAN IF IT WERE. ALT AND CEL ARE ESTABLISHED AS SEPARATE VARIANTS in the published work this register holds: Abitbol and others 2024, 'Different Founding Effects Underlie Dominant Blue Eyes in the Domestic Cat', and 'A PAX3 insertion in the Celestial breed'. His dam KAENA runs to NIKITA'L SEYMOUR, who founds ALT; his sire LAZULI runs to ROXI, who founds CEL. A CAT TAKING ONE COPY FROM EACH IS A COMPOUND HETEROZYGOTE, ONE COPY EACH OF TWO DIFFERENT VARIANTS, AND NOT A HOMOZYGOTE. The breeder is almost certainly using homozygous loosely, to mean TWO DOSES OF DOMINANT BLUE EYE rather than two copies of one allele. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CHART C4 SAYS WHEN IT WRITES 'DBE-CEL & DBE-ALT' BESIDE HIM, so the chart and the pedigree agree with each other and the breeder's word is the odd one out | AND IT IS THE CASE THE BREEDING GUIDANCE WARNS ABOUT. Two dominant blue eye variants in one animal is precisely the mating the British Gems article, citing Abitbol, says should never be made. MIYUKI IS SOLID WHITE AND DEAF. Whether that is the consequence of carrying both, or of the white spotting reaching him from three directions, IS THE THING NO ONE CAN SEPARATE WITHOUT A TEST | AND THE COAT SAYS BE CAREFUL, WHICH IS WHY HE WAS TRACED. Four generations above him, WHITE SPOTTING REACHES HIM FROM THREE SEPARATE DIRECTIONS: ELIZA, XSH ns 02 69, A HARLEQUIN and herself coded 69; MARCH NIKITA'L, EUR n 03 62, A BICOLOUR; and NIKITA'L SEYMOUR, XSH ns 03 23 68 on the PawPeds reading, ALSO A BICOLOUR. MIYUKI IS SOLID WHITE AND DEAF. THAT IS ALSO EXACTLY WHAT A CAT CARRYING A GREAT DEAL OF WHITE SPOTTING LOOKS LIKE, and deafness is the classic consequence of white over the ear. HIS WHITENESS AND HIS DEAFNESS ARE NOT BY THEMSELVES EVIDENCE OF A HOMOZYGOUS EYE VARIANT, and a homozygous white-spotting cat and a homozygous eye-variant cat cannot be told apart by looking | WHAT ELSE HE COULD CARRY, ASKED AND ANSWERED. He could carry heavy white spotting from Eliza, March Nikita'l and Seymour. He could carry the 69 that Eliza and Pheer-Ca both show. NOTHING IN HIS RECORDED ANCESTRY SUGGESTS DOMINANT WHITE: no animal above him is coded w. NOTHING SUGGESTS THE POINTED GENE: no 33 anywhere. His four grandparents are Seymour, March Nikita'l, Roxi and an unnamed female the charts draw as '??' | HIS LITTERMATE MOCHI IS THE CONTROL AND IS NOT DEAF. Mochi is mostly white with a coloured patch, the Topaz panda pattern, and hears. TWO KITTENS OF ONE LITTER, BOTH LABELLED THE SAME BY THE CHART, ONE DEAF AND ONE NOT. If the label were a genotype they should not differ, and the amount and placement of white is the obvious thing that does differ | HE WAS NEUTERED AND PLACED, so no offspring will ever settle it. ONLY A TEST ON HIM WILL
7. NIKITA'L SEYMOUR. BREEDING RECOMMENDATIONS THE PAGE ATTRIBUTES TO PROFESSOR MARIE ABITBOL OF THE VETAGRO RESEARCH LABORATORY. THE RESEARCHER AND THE SUBJECT ARE REAL AND THIS REGISTER ALREADY HOLDS HER WORK: Abitbol and others 2024, 'Different Founding Effects Underlie Dominant Blue Eyes in the Domestic Cat', Animals 14(13):1845; Abitbol and others 2024, 'A PAX3 insertion in the Celestial breed and certain feline breeding lines with dominant blue eyes', Animal Genetics 55; Abitbol and others 2024, 'PAX3 haploinsufficiency in Maine Coon cats with dominant blue eyes and hearing loss resembling the human Waardenburg syndrome', G3; and Abitbol and others 2025, 'Dominant blue eyes in Maine Coon cats: new PAX3 variant and updated phenotypic data', Animal Genetics. BUT THE LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS BELOW IS THE BREEDER'S RENDERING OF THEM AND THIS REGISTER HAS NOT CHECKED IT AGAINST THOSE PAPERS. A real researcher being correctly named does not make a lay summary of her advice accurate. RECORDED AS THE BREEDER STATES IT, ATTRIBUTED AS THE BREEDER ATTRIBUTES IT, AND NOT ADOPTED. WHERE THIS REGISTER NEEDS THE SCIENCE IT CITES THE PAPERS DIRECTLY. THE LIST: do not breed DBE bloodlines with colourpoint or colourpoint carriers; with cats that have white, meaning bicolour, harlequin or van; with pure white cats; with cats born from DBE marriages that are born LATENT with orange eyes; or with recessive odd eyed. AND: 'Mixing, accidentally or not, a dominant cat to another dominant cat EVEN IF LATENT, can cause severe health issues in the first or future generations and should never be done' | THE DANGERS NAMED: 'Deafness (Altai, Topaz), CRANIAL MALFORMATIONS (Ojos Azules, a breed abandoned by the LOOF and TICA in 2004 because of issues). Other things commonly seen in dominant odd eyed is a KINKED TAIL or NOSE SHAPES THAT ARE STRANGE, of form and small or not equal nostrils.' And: 'DOMINANT TO DOMINANT ALSO SEEMS TO PRODUCE KITTENS WITH A LARGE AMOUNT OF WHITE EVEN IF THE PARENTS ARE SOLID' | THAT LAST OBSERVATION BEARS DIRECTLY ON MIYUKI OF AERLIN. He is out of Kaena and Lazuli, both of dominant lines, HIS BREEDER CALLS HIM HOMOZYGOUS, and he is SOLID WHITE AND DEAF where both parents carry only a chin patch. THE PAGE PREDICTS EXACTLY THAT OUTCOME FROM EXACTLY THAT MATING, and it predicts it as a harm | THE REGISTER RECORDS THIS AS A BREEDER'S STATEMENT OF PRACTICE AND AS A HEALTH CLAIM ATTRIBUTED TO A NAMED RESEARCHER. It does not endorse it, it has not verified the attribution, and it makes no recommendation about breeding
8. NIKITA'L SEYMOUR. Line and variant. The line Blue Eyed Maine Coons (Markiss) holds more than one variant across its records (DBE-ALT, DBE-CEL).
9. NIKITA'L PHEER-CA. A NAME SWEEP FOR NIKITA ACROSS THE BRITISH SHORTHAIR RETURNS NOTHING, AND THAT IS WORTH RECORDING. A PawPeds search on the given name Nikita, supplied 25 August 2026, returns SIXTY-SEVEN British Shorthair, British Longhair, Scottish Fold, Persian and Selkirk animals across fifty-odd unrelated prefixes. NOT ONE CARRIES 68, 69 OR 61. The eye codes present are 62 on four dominant white cats, 64 on two, and 33 or 03 white codes with no eye code at all. NIKITA IS A COMMON GIVEN NAME AND NONE OF THESE CATS CARRIES THE NIKITA'L PREFIX, which is a Ukrainian cattery breeding experimental shorthair and longhair and not British Shorthair. THE SWEEP IS ENTERED AS A NEGATIVE RESULT: the Nikita'l material is not hiding under this name in the British Shorthair, and the document still wanted is the CATTERY LISTING FOR THE NIKITA'L PREFIX, not a name search | THE NIKITA'L PREFIX LISTING HOLDS TWO CATS AND THEY ARE THE TWO FOUNDERS. Nikita'l Pheer-Ca XSH n 24 69 and Nikita'l Seymour XSH ns 03 23 68, AND NOTHING ELSE. Not one offspring is registered under the prefix and NIKITA'L MARKISS HIMSELF IS NOT ON IT. THIS WAS THE HIGHEST VALUE OUTSTANDING DOCUMENT IN THE SEARCH FOR A SECOND CROSSING OF THE ALT AND CEL LINES, because both founders demonstrably stood in this cattery together and any further litter of theirs would have been a crossing the register could not see. THE ANSWER IS THAT THERE IS NOTHING TO SEE: the registry holds no descendants of this prefix at all | WHAT THE REGISTER ALREADY HOLDS IS THEREFORE THE WHOLE OF THE RECORDED MATERIAL. Seymour by Pheer-Ca gives NIKITA'L MARKISS, the first crossing. Seymour by March Nikita'l gives KAENA, who was mated to LAZULI and gives the second. Seymour by Silva gives NIKITA'L DAISY. All three parentages come from pedigree sheets and breeder charts and NONE OF THEM FROM THE PREFIX LISTING, because the prefix listing has none | THE PREFIX IS CLOSED AND SHOULD NOT BE CHASED AGAIN. What remains unanswerable from paper is not whether more litters were registered, but whether any were bred and never registered, AND NO DOCUMENT CAN SETTLE THAT | THE NIKITA'L MATERIAL IS NOW CONFIRMED COMPLETE BY THREE REGISTRY SHEETS READ INDEPENDENTLY. Seymour's own sheet gives PUSHOK, HCL e 22 62, and ELIZA, XSH ns 02 69, and nothing above either. Pheer-Ca's gives ROXI, XXH n 24 68, KZ, and MARCH NIKITA'L, EUR n 03 62, and nothing above either. Markiss's gives all four. ON ALL THREE SHEETS EVERY CELL ABOVE THOSE FOUR READS 'No information in the database' | THE FOUR FOUNDATION ANIMALS ARE THE TOP OF THIS MATERIAL BY REGISTRY RECORD AND NOT BY ABSENCE OF SEARCHING. Taken with the cattery listing, which holds the two founders and no descendants at all, THE WHOLE OF WHAT ANY REGISTRY HOLDS ON THIS CATTERY IS NOW IN THIS REGISTER. Nothing further can be obtained from pedigree material and the prefix should not be chased again | TWO CODES STAND ON EACH SIDE OF MARKISS BEFORE HE IS BORN. His sire Seymour is 68 out of a 62 and a 69; his dam Pheer-Ca is 69 out of a 68 and a 62. THAT IS WHY EVERY LINE DESCENDING FROM HIM CARRIES BOTH, and it is visible on the sheet without any inference at all
10. NIKITA'L MARKISS [CHERKASSY, UA]. THE FOUNDER HIMSELF SPLIT A LITTER 68 AGAINST 69, AND THIS IS THE EARLIEST SPLIT IN THE REGISTER. BLUE RIDGE IOLA, XLH n 09 68, AND BLUE RIDGE IOMA, XLH n 09 69, ARE BOTH GIVEN 26 APRIL 2018 OUT OF NIKITA'L MARKISS AND CELEBRITY. One litter, one sire, one dam, and the registry wrote 68 on one kitten and 69 on the other. CELEBRITY IS MCO n WITH NO EYE CODE, and neither A'Mars nor Blue Ridge Ingrid above her carries one, nor does any of her four recorded great-grandparents. THE DAM CONTRIBUTES NOTHING AND THE SPLIT IS THE SIRE'S | THIS IS THE THIRD SPLIT LITTER DOCUMENTED IN THIS CATTERY AND THE OTHER TWO ARE BY HIS GRANDSON BLUE RIDGE URBAN, on 22 June 2020 and 24 October 2020. THE PATTERN IS PRESENT AT THE FOUNDER AND STILL PRESENT TWO GENERATIONS BELOW HIM. A SINGLE VARIANT SEGREGATING FROM ONE ANIMAL IS SUFFICIENT TO PRODUCE BOTH CODES, and no second source is available in any of the three matings | THEIR SHEETS ALSO SHOW WHY MARKISS CANNOT BE TRACED FURTHER: every cell above Nikita'l Seymour, Eliza, Roxi and March Nikita'l reads 'No information in the database'. NOTHING IN THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GENOTYPED | A NAME SWEEP FOR NIKITA ACROSS THE BRITISH SHORTHAIR RETURNS NOTHING, AND THAT IS WORTH RECORDING. A PawPeds search on the given name Nikita, supplied 25 August 2026, returns SIXTY-SEVEN British Shorthair, British Longhair, Scottish Fold, Persian and Selkirk animals across fifty-odd unrelated prefixes. NOT ONE CARRIES 68, 69 OR 61. The eye codes present are 62 on four dominant white cats, 64 on two, and 33 or 03 white codes with no eye code at all. NIKITA IS A COMMON GIVEN NAME AND NONE OF THESE CATS CARRIES THE NIKITA'L PREFIX, which is a Ukrainian cattery breeding experimental shorthair and longhair and not British Shorthair. THE SWEEP IS ENTERED AS A NEGATIVE RESULT: the Nikita'l material is not hiding under this name in the British Shorthair, and the document still wanted is the CATTERY LISTING FOR THE NIKITA'L PREFIX, not a name search | THE NIKITA'L PREFIX LISTING HOLDS TWO CATS AND THEY ARE THE TWO FOUNDERS. Nikita'l Pheer-Ca XSH n 24 69 and Nikita'l Seymour XSH ns 03 23 68, AND NOTHING ELSE. Not one offspring is registered under the prefix and NIKITA'L MARKISS HIMSELF IS NOT ON IT. THIS WAS THE HIGHEST VALUE OUTSTANDING DOCUMENT IN THE SEARCH FOR A SECOND CROSSING OF THE ALT AND CEL LINES, because both founders demonstrably stood in this cattery together and any further litter of theirs would have been a crossing the register could not see. THE ANSWER IS THAT THERE IS NOTHING TO SEE: the registry holds no descendants of this prefix at all | WHAT THE REGISTER ALREADY HOLDS IS THEREFORE THE WHOLE OF THE RECORDED MATERIAL. Seymour by Pheer-Ca gives NIKITA'L MARKISS, the first crossing. Seymour by March Nikita'l gives KAENA, who was mated to LAZULI and gives the second. Seymour by Silva gives NIKITA'L DAISY. All three parentages come from pedigree sheets and breeder charts and NONE OF THEM FROM THE PREFIX LISTING, because the prefix listing has none | THE PREFIX IS CLOSED AND SHOULD NOT BE CHASED AGAIN. What remains unanswerable from paper is not whether more litters were registered, but whether any were bred and never registered, AND NO DOCUMENT CAN SETTLE THAT | THE NIKITA'L MATERIAL IS NOW CONFIRMED COMPLETE BY THREE REGISTRY SHEETS READ INDEPENDENTLY. Seymour's own sheet gives PUSHOK, HCL e 22 62, and ELIZA, XSH ns 02 69, and nothing above either. Pheer-Ca's gives ROXI, XXH n 24 68, KZ, and MARCH NIKITA'L, EUR n 03 62, and nothing above either. Markiss's gives all four. ON ALL THREE SHEETS EVERY CELL ABOVE THOSE FOUR READS 'No information in the database' | THE FOUR FOUNDATION ANIMALS ARE THE TOP OF THIS MATERIAL BY REGISTRY RECORD AND NOT BY ABSENCE OF SEARCHING. Taken with the cattery listing, which holds the two founders and no descendants at all, THE WHOLE OF WHAT ANY REGISTRY HOLDS ON THIS CATTERY IS NOW IN THIS REGISTER. Nothing further can be obtained from pedigree material and the prefix should not be chased again | TWO CODES STAND ON EACH SIDE OF MARKISS BEFORE HE IS BORN. His sire Seymour is 68 out of a 62 and a 69; his dam Pheer-Ca is 69 out of a 68 and a 62. THAT IS WHY EVERY LINE DESCENDING FROM HIM CARRIES BOTH, and it is visible on the sheet without any inference at all
11. CELEBRITY. THE FOUNDER HIMSELF SPLIT A LITTER 68 AGAINST 69, AND THIS IS THE EARLIEST SPLIT IN THE REGISTER. BLUE RIDGE IOLA, XLH n 09 68, AND BLUE RIDGE IOMA, XLH n 09 69, ARE BOTH GIVEN 26 APRIL 2018 OUT OF NIKITA'L MARKISS AND CELEBRITY. One litter, one sire, one dam, and the registry wrote 68 on one kitten and 69 on the other. CELEBRITY IS MCO n WITH NO EYE CODE, and neither A'Mars nor Blue Ridge Ingrid above her carries one, nor does any of her four recorded great-grandparents. THE DAM CONTRIBUTES NOTHING AND THE SPLIT IS THE SIRE'S | THIS IS THE THIRD SPLIT LITTER DOCUMENTED IN THIS CATTERY AND THE OTHER TWO ARE BY HIS GRANDSON BLUE RIDGE URBAN, on 22 June 2020 and 24 October 2020. THE PATTERN IS PRESENT AT THE FOUNDER AND STILL PRESENT TWO GENERATIONS BELOW HIM. A SINGLE VARIANT SEGREGATING FROM ONE ANIMAL IS SUFFICIENT TO PRODUCE BOTH CODES, and no second source is available in any of the three matings | THEIR SHEETS ALSO SHOW WHY MARKISS CANNOT BE TRACED FURTHER: every cell above Nikita'l Seymour, Eliza, Roxi and March Nikita'l reads 'No information in the database'. NOTHING IN THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GENOTYPED
12. BLUE RIDGE IOMA. THE FOUNDER HIMSELF SPLIT A LITTER 68 AGAINST 69, AND THIS IS THE EARLIEST SPLIT IN THE REGISTER. BLUE RIDGE IOLA, XLH n 09 68, AND BLUE RIDGE IOMA, XLH n 09 69, ARE BOTH GIVEN 26 APRIL 2018 OUT OF NIKITA'L MARKISS AND CELEBRITY. One litter, one sire, one dam, and the registry wrote 68 on one kitten and 69 on the other. CELEBRITY IS MCO n WITH NO EYE CODE, and neither A'Mars nor Blue Ridge Ingrid above her carries one, nor does any of her four recorded great-grandparents. THE DAM CONTRIBUTES NOTHING AND THE SPLIT IS THE SIRE'S | THIS IS THE THIRD SPLIT LITTER DOCUMENTED IN THIS CATTERY AND THE OTHER TWO ARE BY HIS GRANDSON BLUE RIDGE URBAN, on 22 June 2020 and 24 October 2020. THE PATTERN IS PRESENT AT THE FOUNDER AND STILL PRESENT TWO GENERATIONS BELOW HIM. A SINGLE VARIANT SEGREGATING FROM ONE ANIMAL IS SUFFICIENT TO PRODUCE BOTH CODES, and no second source is available in any of the three matings | THEIR SHEETS ALSO SHOW WHY MARKISS CANNOT BE TRACED FURTHER: every cell above Nikita'l Seymour, Eliza, Roxi and March Nikita'l reads 'No information in the database'. NOTHING IN THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GENOTYPED

A flag is not an error. It marks a place where two sources say different things, or where an attribution cannot be made on the evidence held.

The record

Register id

bem-16

Sex

female

Cattery prefix

Blue Ridge

Breed, as stated

Maine Coon

Line

Blue Eyed Maine Coons (Markiss)

Eye status

odd: one blue eye

Eyes, in the source's words

odd

Relations named by the source

out of Nikita'l Markiss [Cherkassy, UA] and Celebrity

Litter key

blue-ridge-2018-04-26

Country

Russia

Year

26 April 2018

EMS code

XLH n 09 69

The code read out

experimental longhair; black; unspecified amount of white; dominant odd eyes, written in the 68 series

The description held

CODED 69, AND HER LITTERMATE BLUE RIDGE IOLA IS CODED 68. Her sire Nikita'l Markiss is coded 68 and her dam Celebrity carries no eye code at all, SO THE 69 ON HER HAS NO SOURCE BUT THE SAME ANIMAL THAT GAVE HER SISTER A 68

Note

The code and the description do not use the same words for this coat. Both are recorded and neither is reconciled to the other.

Evidence grade

Reported asserted, with neither a test nor a traced descent

In the register

• Parents: Nikita'l Markiss [Cherkassy, UA], Celebrity
• Littermates (blue-ridge-2018-04-26): Blue Ridge Iola

This directory is a working aid compiled from published charts, registry documents and breeder statements. It is not a register and it has no standing of any kind. The grade attaches to the animal, not to the line: a cat whose ancestor was genotyped is line-traced, not genotyped.