CARattler40
got good knees?
The facts regarding the buf gene, that I have read, include no evidence that excludes the Caramel gene.
There is a chart that has been posted elsewhere from the originator of the Buf line that objectively details just some of the many breedings that have been performed related to figuring the whole thing out. However, most if not all of the same information is available from the breeder's website.
Total there are at least three crosses that have been performed that logically exclude the caramel gene:
slangenbroed's site said:In 2007... I took a lavender male and bred it with the F1 orange female. 7 eggs: 2 classic, 2 amel, 1 buf and 2 orange animals... This male came from Marc vervest, I bought it as a young animal in 2004, with two sisters, a lavender and a classic het lavender (from these last two I’ve had several clutches and I always only had lavenders and classic het lavenders).
Also that year I bred F1 orange male x lavender female (sister of the lav male from above). 9 eggs: 6 classic, 3 buf.
The above-mentioned lavenders were produced in 2004, meaning their parents were likely hatched around 2001. That far back, there were probably not many crosses done that could have produced F2s carrying both lavender and caramel, and the likelihood of those lavenders being het caramel is low. He also mentions crossing one of the lavenders to an amel het caramel and hatching no caramels, further decreasing the chance that they are caramel carriers.
slangenbroed's site said:Also that year (2008) a Phantom was brought in the game, mated with the F1 orange femal and an F1 buf het amel female. Result in total 26 eggs: 16 classic, 10 buf coloured animals.
Same concept as above... how many phantoms het caramel do you know of produced circa 2005?
In summary, these crosses are no less sufficient than those used to confirm the existence of other genes that have popped up in recent years, and probably have been performed many more times than said genes.