When Line Breeding Where Do you Cross The Line: - Page 4

[Hundmutter] 10.10.2016 - 16:10

● "TIG: Les resides in New Zealand (hence the Kiwi). (At least I think he's still in NZ)."

Nah - not IN NZ - on it. And my Will says I'm to be scattered, not buried.

 
[susie] 10.10.2016 - 18:10
● "TIG  English written official reports are very difficult for me to read ( obviously because of my lack of English ) - I tried to understand   http://www.canine-epilepsy.net/cerc.html  "
It wasn't [TIG] who supplied that link - I did. And apart from the table of results-so-far, you don't need to understand anything in it unless you & your dogs are in the USA.

 

● "Did they ask for samples of affected dogs and their immediate family members or did they use ANY samples? That´s a major difference..."
Yes and no. I'm assuming that the reason for wanting  SIBLINGS of afflicted epileptics is so that there will be fewer "different" alleles to worry about, even though only "mirror twins" (that used be called "identical twins") actually have identical genomes.

 

[Hundmutter] 10.10.2016 - 19:10
● "Susie, ...(snip)... such studies should ALSO look at a number of UNaffected dogs as a 'control',"

During the MEDICATION TESTING process, controls (for taking placebos aka being left un-medicated) ARE essential (especially when the cases involve impressionable humans!) so that the responses can be compared/contrasted. But THESE researchers are still at the stage of trying to identify individual ALLELES - that "needle in a haystack" thingy - that are likely culprits. With 20,000 to 25,000 different GENES in the genomes, many of them having half a dozen or more alleles possible (especially at loci that are very susceptible to mutation, which appears to be the situation with the genes so far identified for human epilepsy), anything that reduces the heterozygosity reduces the number of alleles that MIGHT be implicated in the disorder is a HELP!

[Hundmutter] 10.10.2016 - 19:10

● "The footnote about: - numbers in each breed studied should not be taken to indicate the level of epilepsy in that breed, but rather the degree of breeders' interest in finding out more about and tackling it - is all very well ... but seems a little disingenuous to me given that one of the highest totals sampled was Red Setters, and they have a distinct history of quite a lot of cases of fitters, going back a long time!"

Which is a STRONG incentive for any DEVOTEE of that breed (the only breeder of Irish Setters that I knew used to ask: "What has 20 feet, an IQ of 10, and is red all over?" His answer involved the number "5"...) to develop a "degree of interest in finding out more about and tackling it". I know that when a pup in our first litter developed HD at 3 or 4 months old, Jeannie & I took our brood to the veterinary university (it was trialling ways to detect HD, but the scheme took another 4 years to be finalised - our Zacki easily passed all the physical tests but the xray showed that she had dreadful hips) and I read the very little literature available - basically the 1958  Swedish Royal Veterinary College in Stockholm study, under the direction of Professor Sten-Erik Olsson, using the German Shepherd Dogs in the large kennel of the Swedish Army Dog Training Centre. It established that the disorder is genetic, with a heritability between 0.4 and 0.6 (meaning that there is between 40% and 60% relationship between parentage & dysplasia).

 

[Hundmutter] 11.10.2016 - 06:10

● "On the breed-specific one I would always go for the most recent date I could find, since it includes a greater number of more modern dogs/lines and the more recent findings in genetic information. The more info included, the more practical use it is to latter-day breeders and owners."
True, but only to a limited extent.
#1: Most modern writers are NOT like Nem Elliott and, to some extent, Malcolm Willis. Malcolm followed Nem's inclination to maintain records and to present the negatives as well as the positives - and in Nem's time the negatives were HUGE! But modern writers don't mention the negatives.
#2: Most modern writers aren't writing about genuine GSDs - they have grown up thinking that their local AlsatiOns, Banana Backs. German Crouchers, Hinge-Backs, NAmerican Ski-Slope Dogs, Prick-Eared Bassets, Teeth-on-Feet, and/or Titanic Tail-Tuckers are REAL GSDs. Even the German judges do! The 2015 & 2016 BSZS Sieger's AVERAGE height was stated to be 66.1cm - which means that he was measured as OVER-sized more often than he was measured the Standard (ideally 60-65cm, limits being 59-66cm) for a male. Yet "everyone" was told that as of the 2016 BSZS, GSDs over the limit would NOT be allowed in the first so-many places.... So how come Ballack was 2016 Sieger?


[Hundmutter] 13.10.2016 - 07:10

● "Yes, ...(snip)... - although I am signed on to the website, I am not the owner or breeder of any dog I have tried to look for on there, I don't know if that automatically locks one out ?)
Also the advantage of Malcolm Willis's tables was the at-a-glance comparisons one could make between co-temporaneous sires;  when you use KC records, its looking at one dog at a time ..."
Actually, the only figures worth checking are (a) the number of partners, and (b) the WORST score. With the "culprit" alleles being recessive, it is possible to get a pup with PERFECT hips from a stud (or dam) whose own hips are so bad that he/she has to be supported by a "sling". A partner who has at least one copy of the DOMINANT at each locus in HD will block the effect of the recessive from the dysplastic partner. Of course, with a heterozygous parent, that "block" works for only the pups who inherit the dominant at that locus. A homozygous parent with ALL the relevant dominants passes them on to EVERY pup so will NEVER produce a dysplastic pup. A heterozygous pooch (eg:  A a  B b  C c  D d  E e, were those the genes for HD) won't have HD and won't produce dysplastic pups UNTIL mated to a partner carrying some of the same recessives as him/her-self.

 

From your "looking at one dog at a time" comment, I wonder whether you are using the Mateselect 
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/services/public/mateselect/Default.aspx 
correctly. I'm not signed in to their web-site, I just GO there - I own nothing in that tool, and I am not locked out. Clicking
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/services/public/mateselect/test/Default.aspx
then typing in  Philipp aus der neuen Hauffstrasse  will bring up NO scores for Philipp, but if you look to the right you will see a Compare with Progeny label. Clicking IT will show about 6 screens of the hip & elbow scores of Philipp's British-born progeny. It's not as convenient as the analyses done (complete with Willis's OVER-detailed analysis layout), but as you aren't an ANZAC, few of the GSDs analysed by the GSDCAu are relevant to you.

T(hank) Y(ou) Les, I'll try that when I next remember to try to use Mateselect !

 

Its ALWAYS 'one dog at a time' though, until you can GET the button to check the progeny;  and you cannot see Philipp's progeny results on the same page as you could looking down a Willis table for the current other popular sires of that time period, right ?

Les the whatever wrote:
" This 2013 article   http://www.canine-epilepsy.net/cerc.html   showed that much work still needed to be done! And that 71% of the ridiculously small sample of GSDs actually HAD epilepsy."
 

I wondered about your conclusion, because of that I asked...
 

 Susie: " TIG

English written official reports are very difficult for me to read ( obviously because of my lack of English ) -
I tried to understand http://www.canine-epilepsy.net/cerc.html  .

Did they ask for samples of affected dogs and their immediate family members or did they use ANY samples? That´s a major difference..."

 

And Les again:
[susie] 10.10.2016 - 18:10
● "TIG  English written official reports are very difficult for me to read ( obviously because of my lack of English ) - I tried to understand   http://www.canine-epilepsy.net/cerc.html  "
It wasn't [TIG] who supplied that link - I did. And apart from the table of results-so-far, you don't need to understand anything in it unless you & your dogs are in the USA.
 

Sorry, but whenever I think about a statistic, I want to know at least about the basics - do you really think you are the only one "allowed" or "able to" think?
Besides that, I today came back from Missouri/USA - does this make me "worth" to think about a table of results, published in the US ?

● "Did they ask for samples of affected dogs and their immediate family members or did they use ANY samples? That´s a major difference..."
Yes and no. I'm assuming that the reason for wanting  SIBLINGS of afflicted epileptics is so that there will be fewer "different" alleles to worry about, even though only "mirror twins" (that used be called "identical twins") actually have identical genomes.
 

"Yes and no." You are "assuming" ?
What´s your personal conclusion out of your calculating earnings ?  " And that 71% of the ridiculously small sample of GSDs actually HAD epilepsy."

After reading ( and rereading ) MY understanding is that they asked for samples of "affected" dogs AND ( if possible ) for samples of as many not affected siblings/parents/grandparents as possible.

My conclusion: Either German Shepherd Dog owners are too stupid to read, or are selling their dogs everywhere, so they don´t have access to any "samples", or the breeders don´t care at all, and most only owners of affected dogs sent samples...

 

Out of the text:

The objectives of our investigations into hereditary canine epilepsy are:

1. Recruit samples from a large number of affected individuals and their immediate family members (siblings, parents, and grandparents), from many breeds of dogs.

Samples from potentially useful families of any breed are still needed, and we encourage owners to participate by sending samples from epilepsy-affected dogs and their normal close relatives (see SAMPLE SUBMISSION page for instructions and forms).

Another question: How do they count the dogs in this statistic ???

Take a look at the Labrador Retriever...
Total sampled: 380
Males: 103
Females: 137
That´s 240 ? 140 are what?
Affected total: 206
Males: 58
Females: 46

It´s not only the Labrador...

 

Sorry for all these colors and quotations, I´ll never do it again, but I am afraid otherwise our beloved New Zealand member will misunderstand my post.

 

TIG you need to back off and rethink your comment directed to me as it was NOT nice and I was needing some information. Just because I know so much information, I certainly do not know everything. Maybe I will reach through this thread and smack your hand. Me being so very Irish, I sometimes like to stir people up and that was what I was doing to the other person and indirectly to you.

Come to think of it, I think I have found a way to reach through this thread and smack your hand and then maybe you will cry. Now do not go and get all bent out of shape or your panties in a bunch. Think on things before you get all angry and say wrong things and wait a few days before you are again saying those unpleasant lecturing type things. It does you no good and it is getting near Christmas time. Santa Claus hears you when you are naughty and say unpleasant things to other GSD owners and he does not like that. But you will not listen to me and as soon as my finger is off this post, you'll do it! Bet you do! Would bet you that book if you had one, but you don't and l'd win if you did have that darn book!!!

Off to do good things to nice people with nice dogs and that will be me [correct wording].

Just remembered that someone made several expensive copies of some of your old dogs' pictures' and that has not made you happy I guess.

 

 

@ Alamance: You are "Off to do good things TO good people" ? (my emphasis).
I sort of hope not ! I don't think even Santa does things TO people, good or not.

Look, if you were deliberately trying to "stir people up" IMO you probably deserved what TIG said.
Yes I was clearly trying to make a joke out of the missing book; if that misfired, I am sorry (but even sorrier about your apparent lack of a sense of humour, if your immediate snap back at me was any indication) - and I really don't think I deserved your response. Before I could reply, TIG wrote what she did; and I thank her for that defence !

Now can we get back 'on Topic' please ?

does anybody remember the camp fire song [ Boy Scouts, 1960 to 1970] " I 'm my own Grand Pa?'' Now that would be too close inbreeding

Well mirror twins are identical but identical twins are not mirror as I once had identical twin brothers who were not mirror twins.

Oh and I now have two 1977 versions of Willis' gene book that ended up costing me a pretty penny. So Santa Claus has been good to me before Christmas. One person asked if I'd send one to her. Sorry, I only sent it to myself. And if I deserve the lashing, then should that person get my second book which is also in perfect condition like my first, naw she can just drool. There are others but very expensive! Plus taxes!

Bye, bye and drool. Am finished.

Nobody else wondered about the addition of the dogs listed in the statistic?

Am I stupid?

I am wondering as to what some of you think about an Inbreeding coefficient of 2-3 or 3-2 (6.25% Wright's) among German Shepherd Dogs? Isn't this as close as it should get, or is this too close? In the world of English Setters and Pointers many of them have been line bred much closer. I know of a particular line of English Pointers that undershot mouths started showing up in. Wouldn't this be a direct result of too close line breeding? I won't mention the line of English Pointers as I don't want to bash a person's lifetime of work. Plus, he is well thought of in the world of bird dogs, had several national champions, and wrote many books on English Pointers (hunting dogs). He is no longer with us as he passed away. Thank you, in advance, for your opinions.