The other side of the coin - Page 4

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 Ibrahim on 09 January 2010 - 18:01

 personally I think Prager point of view is correct as a single stud has more influence on the breed as a whole compared to the female as the stud breeds more and produces more puppies than a female does and this is common sense.
Steve has a valid point of view if theoritically a male and female influence genes of puppies 50-50 which I personally doubt as I think the influence of male genes should be actually more !! but according to steve adding the influence of mother raising the children and feeding them adds up to its influence on the puppies and this could be true as the male plays no role on the puppies after they are sold, but in real animal life the influence of male would be much more than the female in the pack and here is how correct Prager is in the example of wolves pack.
Here are more to think of, in human race a family tree does not include females, it includes only males. One carries his or her father's family name not the mother's family name, see also Kings and their heirs etc.
Now some breeders list the bloodline of their dogs in males decending not females, this implies that the influence of studs is logically and could be scientifically more, in the end nothing is against females or women here.

Ibrahim

steve1

by steve1 on 09 January 2010 - 20:01

Both Prager and Ibrahim are missing the Point completly
I said if i had to choose  between a Top Producer Male or Female it would be the Female. The Male does not pass on any more genes to its offspring than the Female does
Now i have said as Prager and others that the Male produces more Pups not  Genes
And as i have said  there are a lot of top Males but not so many top Females and If i own a really Top Female i can get a Top Male to breed with her much easier than you Guys could get a Top female to breed with your Top  Male  that is the point of this for me,  so look back i said if i had the choice then i would prefer a Producing Female over a Male simply because there are less really Top Females around and when you get one you treat it like Gold,
There are plenty of good Males about to use why bother owning one unless you are into breeding in the first place, for if you want to use it as a Stud then that is a different ball game altogether, If you own a really top Female you can go anywhere to get her served
Look at Race horses they want top producing Males of course but when they get that Golden Female then they are some happy people
Steve1


by Ibrahim on 09 January 2010 - 21:01

Steve1,

1. Is it for sure from pure science  that a male shares equal influence genes wise with the female on the puppies? Is it proved and something beyond doubt? As I thought male animals had more influence genes wise than females on offspring.

I understand what you are saying and I agree with you, I would also choose the same as you argue under same circumstances.

2. If puppies remain with their parents, in early age they will be influenced by their mom, but don't you think in advanced stages of their lives they will be influenced more by their daddy especially if he is top of the pack?

3. Why do breedrs, some of them, list the bloodlines by male dogs, no account of females? Just wondering.

Ibrahim





 


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