by Pirschgang on 03 September 2020 - 09:09
"isn't Staatsmacht mainly specialized in field of sport utilization of dogs?"
What does this even mean?
by Rik on 03 September 2020 - 09:09
I was though, fascinated by and spent a lot of time studying how people were successful. and my point is that it does not really matter what field they were successful in. I found that they fell pretty much into the same categories:
1. the lucky breeder. I have seen this one so many times in ASL that I lost count. one had a 2x Grand Victor. others many selects and AKC/CKC Champions. they are easily recognizable as they cannot repeat this success consistently.
2. the mass breeder, these have knowledge of the dogs, access to dogs, they breed lots of puppies from dogs that are successful in their chosen field.
if one wants to produce say a couple hundred puppies a year from dogs that do well in (name any area or field of pursuit) then just by default, there are going to be a few able to get to the top of that field and make the breeder look genius.
3. the breeder that is really an "artist" in their field. they generally work with the dogs and have access and exposure to a large number of dogs. they are able to recognize the traits that make a dog successful and incorporate those traits in breedings that produce some dogs people feel are suitable to produce the next generation.
breeding is prioritizing traits, what difference does it make if those traits are prioritized to get a dog for show, sport, LE, hunting,
or catching frisbee. successful dogs have the best opportunity to produce successful dogs.
by duke1965 on 03 September 2020 - 10:09
by Rik on 03 September 2020 - 10:09
well, yep there is that duke. :), but no need to over complicate things.
by ValK on 03 September 2020 - 10:09
by duke1965 on 03 September 2020 - 12:09
by Rik on 03 September 2020 - 15:09
ok, no more off topic for me. sorry xp.
by Nans gsd on 04 September 2020 - 13:09
by hexe on 08 September 2020 - 08:09
Mitochondria are provide the bulk of the energy for neurons, and as such are integral to neurological development, neurotransmission and the plasticity of synapses; additionally, it plays a role in the control of how the body uses nutrients and expends energy; muscle contraction; cellular respiration and in the body's thermoregulation abilities. These are all traits that are highly desirable to get established in one's program. Since males don't inherit their mother's mtDNA, they don't benefit from those traits that their mother's mitochondrial influence. These things allow a solidly reliable foundation to be constructed from the daughters of a breeder's starting females, and provide the ability to diversify within the dam's offspring by choosing wisely when selecting stud dogs.
Breeding on a great male can create a good single bloodline, but there predictability as to what the breedings done in such a program will produce, so you aren't capitalizing on the most predictable traits, since the male will not receive the mtDNA from his mother...and as such, those offspring will be far less likely to uniform in phenotype or working traits.
by Hundmutter on 08 September 2020 - 11:09
Hexe I would love that to be accurate, but I have to query some aspects of your post: male animals might not be able to provide mitochondrial DNA to their sons and daughters (though there appear to be some animal species where even that is questionable - see 'heteroplasy', I think it's called ?), but as I understand this, both sexes inherit MtDNA from their mothers, even if male offspring do not then carry their mothers' MtDNA on. Since MtDNA is a tiny part of the total DNA inherited, and since much of that tiny quantity is anyway tied up in energy production, I am left wondering if it is really all that clear, yet, which of the remaining MtDNA is proven to pass on such elements as 'strength' or 'correct quality' ? And why those elements would only go to their female pups ? [Obviously I see where you are going with only the females would pass on this 'legacy' to future female generations ad infinitum; but it surely would not be wasted on the individual males along the way ... would these be the (male) critters that exhibit some marvellous behaviours or characteristics themselves, but which they can not pass to the offspring which later follow them ?]