inbreeding, great article - Page 2

Looking into the peds you mostly only need to go back up to - 8 generations for even a linebreeding between show/workinglines...

ibrahim, different selection criteria can make a huge difference in just one or 2 generations

Duke, according to essence concept in above article, the sooner you come to the show the better for you

Seriously speaking, I understand your thinking, do not mind it, thinking of those on the other side of the stream is also valid

an outcross is made to introduce genes/qualities that your dogs are missing or that you want to improve on in your dogs, I dont think either one of the sides of the stream is willing to cross the stream or find something they want on the other side, 

dont make mistake, I bred my czech IPO3 male to a showline female once to produce an IPO3 FH2 competitiondog, and I think I have been running around more showrings worldwide than you can even imagine, my previous breedings won over 200 showchampionshiptitles and 3 FCI worldchampionship titles so I am not talking bad about showdogs at all, just drawing some conclusions 

Nothing new or different about this article. It's what breeders have been doing for many generations. You establish certain lines, find out which line clicks with which, and go from there. If you're using fairly close line-breeding, you outcross every few generations to avoid inbreeding depression. It's not rocket science.

What I feel is necessary is avoiding the 'popular sire' trap, which is what happened in the American lines with Lance of Fran-Jo and with the Q litter Arminius in the showlines. Practially every single showline out there traces back to the same handful of dogs. No wonder dogs are dropping dead at very young ages!

True Sunsilver, though what I understood is that the article is discussing, actually it is more of a study than a simple article, it is actually discussing inbreeding in a more wider sense. Inbreeding of/in a bigger group than that of one or a few cooperating breeders. A group of a relatively bigger population like for example Czech GSD, Slovak GSD, German GSD and so on, though it is also good for smaller groups as indicated in your above post. My personal understanding of the study/article.

Ibrahim

sunsilver, genetic problems in dogs are mostly result of genetic problems in parents,grandparents etc, not by the way they are bred, a dog with genetic defect can pass it on to its offspring, bred to related or unrelated dog, outcrossing doesnot make genetic defects dissapear, it can at best hide it for some  time 

Duke, I have a degree in biology. I understand how it works. All animals carry a percentage of lethal/harmful recessive genes. Crossing closely related animals brings those genes to the surface as double recessives. You cannot eliminate all the harmful genes from the genepool...there are too many of them. So, what you have to do, is know what defects have cropped up in certain lines, and avoid line-breeding on those lines. The genes will still be present, but in heterozygous form, which hides them.

If you think you can totally get rid of harmful recessive genes, you don't understand just how many genes there are. Attempting to 'purify' the gene pool by close inbreeding/linebreeding will only cause more problems to pop up, and result in inbreeding depression.

And outcross is done to strengthen/bring in a trait that has become weak or lost, it is effective when done after enough search and study so as not to loose or affect long established traits in the strain of dogs of a breeder.

That is why work line breeders do not see a sho dog can benefit their strain of dogs in any way, because they do not think show dog has better type/structure than theirs, and since the work dog has stronger temperament and better work ability, then what is the use of a show dog genes for them ?! their thinking