There are some important distinctions worth pointing out when it comes to coat patterns.
Merle is not a naturally occurring pattern in Poodles. Unlike solid, parti, or brindle, which have long documented presence in the breed, there are no verifiable historical records, photographs, or studbook entries confirming merle Poodles prior to very recent decades. The earliest “mentions” floating online tend to be anecdotal and don’t trace back to official registries or breed club documentation.
Brindle/parti is historically documented and though less common, brindle/parti Poodles appear in photographs, paintings, and written descriptions that predate modern kennel clubs. Brindle/parti absence in some registries after 1970 is more likely due to shifting preferences and show standards rather than it being “new” to the breed.
The merle gene (PMEL/M locus) isn’t found in purebred Poodles when tested against breed verified DNA databases (like UC Davis, Embark, or Wisdom). When it shows up in dogs labeled as “Poodles,” it nearly always traces to outcrossing with breeds where merle is established (Aussies, Shelties, Dachshunds, etc.). Plus there are certain dogs in pedigrees where we know that there’s a 99% probability of papers being hung where merle was introduced.
Merle requires just one outcross a few generations back to “sneak in.” Brindle doesn’t require that, it has been part of the breed for centuries, just less popular. The concern with merle isn’t only historical accuracy, but also health risks (when doubled up), which adds another layer to the discussion.
So the difference isn’t that brindle/parti got a “free pass” and merle didn’t it’s that one is historically and genetically supported in Poodles, and the other only shows up after modern outcrosses.
The merle gene is ancient and predates modern breeds. But that doesn’t mean it was present in all breeds. An ancient mutation can exist in a subset of populations and never be carried forward in another.
The fact that merle is “the same mutation across all breeds” actually supports the idea that when it appears in a breed without historic documentation, it was introduced via crossbreeding rather than popping up spontaneously a second time. That’s why DNA databases (UC Davis, Embark, Wisdom) don’t find merle in verified purebred poodle lines.
Mc, Ma, Ma+ alleles can mask visually. But even with genetic testing, large-scale DNA surveys of poodles don’t find those alleles unless the dog has outcrossing in its background. If merle had truly been hiding in poodles all along, we would see a random scatter of it across bloodlines but we don’t. Instead, it appears in pockets tied to breeders known to have used outside merle breeds.
all breeds are man made. But breed standards exist to define and preserve what a breed is. Preservation breeding means working within that framework, not rewriting it. Otherwise, every color or pattern from every other breed could be justified as “diversity,” which blurs breed identity entirely.
Responsible breeding absolutely should focus on temperament, health, structure and many do. But adding a coat color through outcrossing doesn’t improve health or diversity. Otherwise, it’s marketing, not preservation.
At the end of the day, this isn’t about vilifying breeders or dog owners who love their dogs, it’s about accuracy in breed history and honesty with the public. When people are told merle is a “natural, rare poodle color,” that’s misleading.
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:e4644b0e-fbb7-4815-a303-9f37669392ca
https://www.poodleforum.com/threads/the-merle-poodle-by-barbara-hoopes.278997/
https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/dog-breeding/merle-in-dogs/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merle_(dog_coat)?
https://www.thepoodlecouncil.co.uk/say-no-to-merle-poodles?
https://vgl.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/test/merle?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poodle?
Kvali Standard Poodles 