Markings Changing

[myrottie_chyna]

My girl is almost 10 weeks old. When I picked her out at 2 wks old she had clear sharp markings. When I got her home, they were still nice and clean. NOW its as if someone smeared black paint down the front of her legs from where the black ends and the tan starts. Around her toes are turning black and across her front feet. WHY WHY WHY!!! I dont like this change :(
Is this normal?? why is it happening? Her back legs arent doing it, but the back toes are getting black around them also. Her mom was a darker color. She was a rich dark mohogany brown for her markings. Is this maybe why? Her father was really light on his markings.
Someone please tell me what is happening here.

[bgdawgrr]

That is a great question. Two of my friends from work have litter mates of my girl, and they both turned tan. I call one "Eddie Munster" cause his face is all tan except for a black widows peak. My girl is perfectly marked and you would never know they were related. All looked well marked when we got them at 7-8 weeks old. I tease them cause their tails aren't done and mine is. I called the "disease" tailtananitise. :D
Hopefully someone has an answer that I can share also.

[Judi W]

It's caused by their shirts! Nononono, I meant their jeans, nonono I meant their genes.......

Check with your breeder. That is who knows whether there are some smuggy markings in the background. As far as the dogs who are turning tan, I'd ask for a DNA on them.

[myrottie_chyna]

LOL @ Judi!! That was funny.
I'll ask my breeder then if she knows who in her family bush... I mean vine.. No no wait... Tree! Has that trait.
If she were a show dog, would that be a fault? and can it get worse?
Also, is "Smudgy" the "technical" term for what is happening to her?

[moondog]

It looks like tailtananitise comes from shirts and jeans found hanging on a family's bush and smudgy is a noun....oops, I mean verb.....no, it must be an adjective used to describe it! :)

Aw heck, just love her! :D

[Judi W]

Smuggy- means the demarcation between the colors is not clearly defined. (not an official word)....

It is faulty, but common in some lines. As far as showing goes, there are many many things that are more critical. Perfect dentition, topline, type, eye and mouth pigment, movement .... etc. and not in that order (although without correct dentition, all else goes out the window)

[alexav]

The term I have heard most often by judges is "Sooty". And, as stated above by the ever knowledgable Judi,;) is a fault but not a disqualifying one. I know a Multi V1, Multi Seiger, INT Champion who is SO sooty but beautiful in every OTHER way.

And, bgdawgrr, PLEASE don't tease.... the owners of the pups with tails. If they decide to dock late, it will be horrible for the pups.:(

[Deborah Reid]

From my understanding, can't remember where I learned the word, but lack of markings is called, technically, "melanism".
It is definately genetic and is a fault, tho not a disqualifying fault (unless there are no marking at all).

Our girl Cadey is that way. She had clear, well-defined markings as a young puppy, but her dam is sooty and Cadey is turning more and more "sooty" as she gets older.

From the AKC Standard:

...black with clearly defined rust markings.

Color
Always black with rust to mahogany markings. The demarcation between black and rust is to be clearly defined. The markings should be located as follows: a spot over each eye; on cheeks; as a strip around each side of muzzle, but not on the bridge of the nose; on throat; triangular mark on both sides of prosternum;on forelegs from carpus downward to the toes; on inside of rear legs showing down the front of the stifle and broadening out to front of rear legs from hock to toes, but not completely eliminating black from rear of pasterns; un-der tail; black penciling on toes. The undercoat is gray, tan, or black. Quantity and location of rust markings is important and should not exceed ten percent of body color. Serious Faults--Straw-colored, excessive, insufficient or sooty markings; rust marking other than described above; white marking any place on dog (a few rust or white hairs do not constitute a marking).
Disqualifications--Any base color other than black; absence of all markings.

From the ADRK/USRC Standard:

COLOUR:
Black with clearly defined markings of a rich tan on the cheeks, muzzle, throat, chest and legs, as well as over both eyes and under the base of the tail.

FAULTS:
Any departure from the foregoing points should be considered a fault and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree.

Colour: Mismarking. Smudged, not clearly defined markings. Markings which are too spread out.

DISQUALIFYING FAULTS:
Coat colour : Dogs which do not show the typical Rottweiler colouring of black with tan markings. White markings.

[WorkinDogz]

Gee bgdawgrr... the breeder only docked a portion of the litter?? Or..... did you opt to have a surgery done?

Didn't you hear?? Real dogs have tails ;) :D

[Muckdogs]

Just my .02 ->

I happen to really like a dark, dark Rott. In fact, my ideal (not the standard's ideal) one would be similar to the one on the cover of TRQ a couple of issues ago. Very handsome.

[Judi W]

Good grief! She's cute as a button. Don't pick on slight things, and remember, "pretty is as pretty does"......

[myrottie_chyna]

Dont get me wrong here!! I LOVE My girl. I think she is the prettiest Rottie in the world!! (okay I know she's not.. but I think so!!)
I was mainly curious as to why it happens and if it is a fault.
She will never be a show dog (I wish).. but she is my only baby girl, and I wouldnt trade her for a dozen show dogs.

[Judi W]

That's better!