The importance of genetic diversity - Page 6

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Gustav on 19 August 2012 - 19:08

Duke, give me an example of an outcross SL dog today so I can make the comparison.....I consider a dog like Javir an outcross in SL ( definition of SL for me being he is successful in the showring), and his genetic diversity is much stronger than typical black and rad SL, and his work ability and his ability to produce work ability is much stronger than typical SL dog. I believe it is due to genetics, obviously others see it differently....so we can agree to disagree.

darylehret

by darylehret on 19 August 2012 - 21:08

Daryl is saying there is NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF of inbreeding depression. And that, my friends, is, as Daryl puts it, 'a crock of hooey!'


Sunsiler, it shows how LITTLE you're reading comprehension skills are.  I did not say inbreeding depression does not exist, I said it occurs on different traits in ALL organisms, at the same time outbreeding depression ALSO occurs.

I also said "backmassing" is a BS made up term, which it is, but since you're so smart please define it for me.

So, again... There is NO scientific evidence that PROVES genetic diversity is critical to the fitness survival of a species.

In fact, there are examples where outcrossing an endangered species with another population has accelerated it's demise, on account of outbreeding depression.


by beetree on 19 August 2012 - 22:08

Very interesting, genetic drift as relating to GSD breeding would seem to be exactly what the diverging Show and Working lines have been doing. Isn't that right? When the two lines no longer exchange genes, and depending on the environmental pressures, in this case the type of work being required, ie. running around a show ring vs. tending sheep or tracking down bad guys, what you are saying is you don't believe there is a need in the future whereby the both types, should they crossbreed, would have the abiltity to form newer, successfully advantageous compinations of genes.

Do I have that right? Now I need to do a little self education on inbreeding depression and see if I can understand that one, too.
------------------------------------------
Okay, then inbreeding depression is not a given. It all depends on the originating quality of the breeding pairs. It is only when individuals or populations with heterozygous alleles are overdominant, and bred with homozygous genotypes, that the resulting progeny wiil be less able to succeed in their environment.

-----------------------------------------

The problem seems to me to be, that inspite of all this, when the bad recessive genes do combine, the tragedy of the reality of the animal that results is just too hard to take, for some of us.

_________________________________


Please correct me if I've drifted off in the wrong direction, if one feels inclined. Thanks.

darylehret

by darylehret on 20 August 2012 - 04:08

Genetic drift is the reduction of variety that occurs when selection pressures do NOT affect a given trait.  So, if working abilities aren't favored in showlines, or if conformational standards are ignored in workinglines, they can dissapate entirely from the lines.   Genetic drift is what occurs in the absence of selection, traits fade into oblivion.  Selection builds consistency in trait production, consistency ensures preservation of traits.

Outbreeding depression is an effect of outcrossing that combines traits which then become less suitable to either environment.  It also refers to beneficial polygenic combinations which had been inherited in-full now pass on broken or conversely, new deleterious polygenic combinations previously not existing (or long ago bred out) are formed.

by duke1965 on 20 August 2012 - 04:08

beetree wrote

The problem seems to me to be, that inspite of all this, when the bad recessive genes do combine, the tragedy of the reality of the animal that results is just too hard to take, for some of us. 


the result of bad genes combining is 100% identical if you are inbreeding or if you are outcrossing , example, bad hips is the same as bad hips, now the only difference is that if you are linebreeding with dogs with good hips, and linebreeding on dog with good hips, you are having far less chance producing bad hips, and that will improve every next generation, as you will SELECT the  good ones to continue with, so IF there is a problem it will most likely surface, and you can select it out

I know bad hips is more than genetics, but its only example

now on the other hand,if you are outcrossing it might look like you produce healthyer dogs, but if problems dont surface in your first generations doesnot mean they are not there, and with every new combination you breed you are again playing the russian roulette, which bad genes will mach this time, and what will pop out now

@ gustav, it is all a matter of what you would call outcross, if you call javir outcross, fine, but than how do you keep this kind of outcrosses available in the future,and if you breed a showdog to javir, fine and what is the next step for the outcome of this generation,, where do you breed them to, what  will be the next available 100% outcross, and what will be your guarantees on health.type and caracter










by Gustav on 20 August 2012 - 11:08

There are no guarantees of health, temp, structure in your way or in mine!!! At the end of the day the end result of what you think is all that matters, you are happy with what you have done and I am happy with my path. We both have produced good functional GS, there's room for both of our views,. At least in my world.

Rik

by Rik on 20 August 2012 - 11:08

All the scientific analysis just makes my head hurt trying to digest it.

IMO, it's not so much the selecting for positive traits whether inbreeding/linebreeding/outcrossing that cause issues. It's the willingness to ignore poor traits or the complete ignorance of poor traits, in the pursuit of the desirable.

The s/l has been mentioned. Did the s/l earn it's reputation because of breeding for color or because strict guidelines for character were "loosened" or ignored to more quickly produce the color.

Rik

by Gustav on 20 August 2012 - 11:08

One last thing Duke, I don't breed a SL to Javir in my scheme until the SL have introduced new genetics to their lines thus keeping the kind of genetic openness I like to see. ( which does not mean a dog I use cannot be either linebred or inbred, there is a big difference in using a linebred dog to strengthen an area in your program, and to use only dogs from exact same genetics for 15 straight generations at the exclusion of many many other genes in the pool who are not used. Why people can't understand that baffles me). So there are dogs of other genetics that have nice V structure to take Javir to so I maintain good structure and fit working ability. This is not new....Winning Show dogs in the 50's, 60's, and early seventies DID NOT have the linebred saturation that the show dogs today have and they did both....my thinking is not new.....show breeders just moved away from sound practices, (IMO), and a deterioration in health/working aspects resulted. Some of you don't attribute this to the saturation of the genes, I DO! But we are friends and should not get too caught up in this....whatever you are doing I like your dogs, but they don't have the breeding pattern of the practices you are defending....smile!

by duke1965 on 20 August 2012 - 13:08

dont worry gustav the next generations will

by Gustav on 20 August 2012 - 14:08

I'll still get a dog from you....cause you breed for the right things first!





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top