A Question About Hips and Relatives - Page 2

Thanks to all who posted. I'm now more educated but no less confused than before. I think I'm just going to continue doing my due diligence and choose to err on the side of caution when choosing breeding stock. Had this discussion not taken place, I might have been tempted to take a chance.

Interesting reply- do you feel we are wrong to not put more stock in a higher zw? You said without this discussion you "might have been tempted to take a chance." I kind of thought we were mostly of the opinion that zw is a great tool, but only one tool in determining a good prospect, and tried to give reasons the numbers can be skewed. Very intrigued to hear if you got a different idea from the posts.

Did I miss a particular dog you were interested in? Maybe if you posted it we could give some ideas as to why the numbers could be what they are and whether it is of real concern or not?

Keep in mind- a zw of 100 simply means the dog theoretically should produce the average number of non-passing hips for the breed. Anything below is better than average- I think it becomes some sort of contest to have the lowest zw, when in fact a couple points here or there is not likely to make much of a production difference overall.

Jenni :

Jenni: I apologize for this slow response. I had just sort of moved on. However, I just reread this thread and found your last comment. Since you and Susie offered such good comments, I felt the need to respond to you.

No, I don't think you or Susie were wrong in what you said. Actually, you really confirmed the need for me to do my own due diligence--which I already knew--when considering purchasing breeding stock. I aspire to be a breeder and I want to make sure I do everything right from the start. I guess I'm sort of fortunate in that I'm starting pretty much with a clean slate. I just want to be sure I don't make any missteps.

I mean, I feel like I can evaluate a pedigree reasonably well but I'm more familiar with Czech bloodlines than German ones--but I'm trying to learn them. However, if all I ever look at are pedigrees, then I would just be a "paper breeder" and I want to be more than that. Hence, the desire to make sure the dogs I acquire are free from hip dysplasia and degenerative myelopathy. I favor PennHIP evaluations over OFA when discussing HD. But that's just a starting point.

As you and Susie pointed out, a ZW score is just another tool available to use when evaluating a prospective dog purchase. And, because it is so nuanced, simply having a low ZW score should not be the only factor considered. I'm fortunate that, when I was in business school, we were taught to value qualitative factors as much or more so than quantitative ones. So, I'm on board with you here.

To that end, I place a lot of value on owner's or breeder's comments that talk about a particular dog having a "clear head" (or some comparable comment.) I value comments that talk about a dog having something of an aloof nature. That's part of the breed standard but it's harder and harder to find those types of GSDs. Too many people talk about how "social" their dogs are. It's one thing for a dog to be properly socialized, it's another for him to want to be everyone's best friend--even if he's just met them.

No, you didn't miss the dog in which I was interested. However, it looks like I did. It appears that he has been sold. But, that's okay. He isn't the first dog I've missed out on and he won't be the last. The good news is I know where his breeders are located. I can always approach them, either for a new pup or with my own breeding stock. Either way, I will be confident that I am on the right track.

I thank you and Susie for helping educate me and reinforcing in my mind what I already knew.

I was on the SV-DOXS the other day and came across their own Q/A document trying to explain the value system. You might already be aware of or have already viewed this article. I will add the link for review and so other people that may want to review the information will have access to the link  https://www.sv-doxs.net/page/derhdzuchtwert

[Donnerholz] 29 November 2016 - 21:11

● "To Susie: I understand that the progeny have a significant influence on the ZW score. Theoretically, Nell's ZW score at birth would have been in the mid-80s."

To me, the ZW is the ONLY thing that somewhat "saves" the 'a'-stamp scheme with its far-too-coarse 5 categories (ignoring 'a'-6, which merely accepts a hip pass from anywhere in the world) and - at least in Professor Brass's time - was HIGHLY variable as to what was acceptable in each of 'a'-1, 'a'-2, 'a'-3.


● "Or, maybe I just need to get the Black-Jack/Nell son tested, x-rayed,"

There is NO "maybe" about it! REGARDLESS of who the parents are, THEY must have score-certificates for hips & elbows - and in light of what I am finding out about degenerative myelitis in or from German imports to my nation & Australia, you need at least one parent to be certificated as DM-negative so that you can be confident that although your pup might be a carrier of DM he won't be struck down by DM at about 7 or 8 years old.
Actually, a HUGE benefit of DNA tests, compared to x-rays and eye-examinations, is that they can be done before the pup is sold if they are based on blood; cheek swabs should wait until the dam is no longer feeding the pups, as her milk's DNA could contaminate the sample.


[Jenni78] 1 December 2016 - 04:12

● "Keep in mind- a zw of 100 simply means the dog theoretically should produce the average number of non-passing hips for the breed."

No - that is a misinterpretation of what ZWs are, and gives unwarranted credilibility to the reliability of the DATA on which they are based.
ZW 100 means that SO FAR the progeny officially x-rayed (and have you not discovered how many GSDs are UNOFFICIALLY x-rayed at 11 months old and either euthanased or hidden away as pets if their plates don't look likely to pass?. I haven't seen SV statistics for decades, but it used to be that a good litter had only 1 or 2 pups reach the stage of passing a KKl/Breed Survey) have averaged out as ZW100. And x-rays do NOT reveal the recessives that are carried by only ONE parent but nevertheless passed on to the pooch being x-rayed.
The "due diligence" that [Donnerholz] mentioned on 30 November 2016 at 22:11 is VERY necessary. I haven't had a case of HD since my1983 K-litter, but my 2000 O-litter included ED that I hadn't been expecting.

● "in fact a couple points here or there is not likely to make much of a production difference overall."

THAT's because the ZW is not a reliable tool, and CANNOT be, because it is based on an even less reliable test - the x-ray plates.
X-rays are VERY reliable at indicating how long a pooch's own joints are likely to last under normal wear-&-tear, but do NOT indicate how many solo recessives are present, waiting to be mated to another carrier.

The "Because there is no better HD rating than HD free" in #6 of

https://www.sv-doxs.net/page/derhdzuchtwert
is genetically ignorant propaganda.
Using x-rays will NEVER allow us to declare any pooch "HD free". The properly accurate term for what they display is "No visible sign of HD".
Although the original Swedish study (1958, by the Royal Veterinary College in Stockholm, under the direction of Professor Sten-Erik Olsson) into HD postulated that HD was caused by a single dominant allele with variable penetration. further statistical evaluations revealed that it is polygenic and due to recessives. Sadly, the search for the causative genes is proving very slow so far. On 31 March 2008 the Hannover Veterinary University (Stiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover) claimed to have identified the main gene for HD, but my occasional web-searches have revealed very little that is DEFINITE identification of it or any other gene (whether for bone density, digestive efficiency, joint shapes, muscle & ligament firmness, synovial fluid, synovial membrane, or whatever else you suspect will affect the durability of the joint) that would make DNA testing for HD feasible yet. Fingers crossed!

X-rays can NOT detect recessives that are partnered by their dominants. A dominant prevents its partner from taking effect.
So at present the ONLY useful x-ray results are those of the WORST-AFFLICTED offspring of a breeding pair. THAT result "incriminates" BOTH parents as having passed on the same recessives to that son or daughter. But mating either parent to a DIFFERENT partner can result in progeny with perfect hips, thanks to the next partner NOT carrying the SAME recessives.
However, regardless of who they are mated to, each parent of the severely afflicted progeny will still pass their OWN deleterious recessives to about half of their other progeny (actually, because the disorder is POLYgenic, it could be that EVERY pup inherits some of its parent's recessives).

So what do the "brilliant" (NOT!) OFA and SV organisations do?

OFA allows owners of Fails to NOT have their scores published. The SV doesn't publish ANY Fails (admittedly that prevents Fails from having litters registered in the SV system - but doesn't prevent the pooch being exported and bred from elsewhere. And in countries with no LRLs (Litter Registration Limits) ANYTHING can - and often DOES! - have litters registered).
At present, Australia is the only English-speaking nation with LRLs, although late last year the Labrador clubs persuaded the NZKC to set up LRLs for their breed..

I am not a fan of the PennHIP system - it relies almost exclusively on a single aspect, and apart from that %-laxity score their certificate is as uselessly UNinformative as the OFA certificates - but in NZ I lost my argument-by-monthly-magazine-correspondence with Professor Worth and so the NZVA dumped the expensive BIF-scoring system (which has 2 separate radiologists measure 9 aspects per hip then grades 16 of the aspects on a 0-to-6 scale, the other aspect per hip on a 0-to-5 scale - see  

https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiQ2O2PhtXRAhWIjZQKHfBtAe8QFggxMAU&url=https://www.bva.co.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Canine_Health_Schemes/Interpretation-and-_use-of-BVA-KC_Hip-Scores(1).pdf&usg=AFQjCNHSqQMFOsTfz4G--y3BhWlM401ePw   if you want diagrams & explanations of the scoring system used in Britain and Australia) and REPORTS on all 18 aspects, so that each hip has a total from 0 (perfect physically) to 53 (oh the poor THING!). You can see an example of a BIF report in the

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/galleries.html?gallery=55297   
album of my Bea.
And so Kiwi GSD breeders have mostly transferred their allegiance to the GSDCAustralia, which issues "A" and "Z" stamps to GSDs with suitable scores (see

http://www.gsdcouncilaustralia.org/hip-elbow-control-scheme/ ) and continues the Progeny Analysis tables (see

http://www.gsdcouncilaustralia.org/hip-elbow-control-scheme/statistics/ ) pioneered by the late genetics professor Dr Malcolm Willis.

😟 I am unlikely to get time to re-visit this thread, so if someone has a query please send it via the pdb personal mail system and INCLUDE your REAL e-address - I detest the clumsiness & unpredictable variability of the CKEditor so almost never respond via pdb mail unless it is from a moderator.

 

A bunch of BS ... all BS such as OFA, SV, ZW blah, blah, blah predict what is or was but do not predict the future offspring health or bone structures. The OFA is a self serving con job based on 1960's simplistic genetic knowledge correlation models which have been proven outdated and have been replaced by the doubling or tripling of genetic knowledge which has occurred in the last 50 years. Genetics based on correlation does not work except in some huge population based hocus pocus while genetics based on causation can serve the needs of the individual.

To Lex and Bubba: Thank you for your comments. I realize Lex may not see this posting but I do appreciate his expertise in this matter. Since I freely admit that I am still learning about HD, ED, and DM, I need all the help I can get.

I had two daughters of Hessel from ODonnels who was a member dog on the Netherlands WUSV team and had a ZW of 36. The two females are from different mothers.  Most of Hessels puppies were crazier than hell as was he. Titles and ZW scores don't tell the real story. I had grand puppies from Hessel from my two females and they were great dogs but still too much for most people to handle. It took two generations to breed out the crazy.  Hessell's offspring are physical specimens.

36 zw?