Another question about linebreeding - Page 3

Sweet Jesus, this thing is going to be hard for an English major to accomplish. Well, good thing Spring Break is around the corner. Give me something to do that doesn't cost money. 

The free one above looks tedious but not difficult, it if actually works right.  I only got to 6 generations typed up before I tried it, but the info is just typed up as a list in a word processor, then opened with that program.  

Heather

Here's a browser-based calculator that will go back 8 generations.

http://www.czerwonytrop.com/inb/index.php?full=ok&lng=en

2-2 linebreeding would be a COI of 12.5%
2-3 linebreeding would be a COI of 6.25%.
3-3,4 linebreeding would be a COI of 4.875%

So that other program gave me back a 1.9% on a 4,5 linebreeding with 6 generations;  probably accurate then? 

Heather

 Quote: Jeff -- was your question for me ??

It was for anyone. This thread is going pretty well, and with breeding, for me at least, you have to take emotion out of it. 

I am seeing with VM that she is experiencing what a lot of breeders deal with, and that is getting a dog and not getting the whole story on what might be problem recessives in the lines. Inbreeding can at least show you what you are dealing with. Obviously, it is not the best way EVER, but it is a good way because you will see results one way of the other. 

Lets say you find a male that is all that you have ever wanted, and more. In YOUR opinion, which will shift all over if you are like me as you go on. You need to find out if this dog has hidden time bombs, and then see if there are very few, or a bunch of them. 

So you breed him to his daughter, and then you take a look at what you have produced. If they are either or as far as what you are looking for, or are fuck all, then you can say that this dog is or is not going to do you justice if you were to use him to create your own line. It is not easy, and not fool proof, but it is a hell of a good start. People will know you are really serious about doing the breeding correctly.

I think it takes too long for most, but how cool would it be to resolve those recessive issues, and to be producing solid working dogs with consistancy, not two or three out of a litter.

Now if you know lines really well, and can do this without all the inbreeding, then of course please go on. No one has all the answers, but too many write shit off way too easily for my taste. 

It is always good to have conversations where you can say that this dog or that dog or whatever produces this really well, but has this occasionally. This is always good information to have. A LOT easier to go that way, but for me, if I am going to to try and start my own line of dogs, I am going to breed really stinking tight. 

Jeff,
I could only accept that idea of "breeding really stinking tight" (to quote you lol) if you are willing to keep all puppies, cull if necessary and/or spay/neuter the ones which need to be placed else there. Just sit back for a moment and think about this realistically: If more breeders would do the same and sell or give these puppies away it could be disastrous for the breed in general. I think we can all agree that there is no such thing as a perfect dog and every one of them carries defective genes as well for something. That is a lot of responsibility I personally would not be willing to take on.
Chris

Heather how the heck did you do it so fast? I feel like it's going to take me all week to enter these names into the program. :)

Chris, I think if you 'did the math' on what the results would be comparably, when you take into consideration a single litter that requires some culling, compared to an exponentially growing genepool of 'hidden detrimental recessives' producing endless mutitudes of what should be culled (but never knowing for fact), it might help to see inbreeding in a different light.  Sacrificing a few, to better the lives of thousands, at the same time improving the overall quality and consistency of the breed.  Not just in regards to inherited health conditions, but also in respect to working talent.

I opened the pedigree in a seperate window and typed them in a word processor with the pedigree open to look at whie I was typing.  You don't have to type them into the spreadsheet program page.  Just a plain old list in a word processor with three names to a line:

Dog, Sire, Dam
Sire, grandsire, grandam
Dam, grandsire, grandam

etc. 

It is tedious to keep track of where you are in the pedigree but doesn't take too long.   When you are finished typing the list, save it as a .txt file.    OH I only used first names unless a name repeated.  I don't think it needs the kennel names and prefexis, etc. since it's just couting and calculating the number of times it occurs.  As long as it's typed/spelled the same way each time.

Then open the program that calculates the COI.   Choose the button that I think says "open" and then pick your text file.  It will plug all the names from your word processor document right into it for you alphebetize it, etc.  

Does that help??

Heather

Daryl,
I am not concerned about a single litter and a breeder who would keep all puppies. My concern is with the dog populators who just breed for fashion and extra income. That is where an organization like the SV comes in and has to give permission. Otherwise, there will be no papers for such puppies!
Also, if such a practice is done more often and justified with "bringing out recessives", it will have a huge impact, also on the overall genepool.
Tell me, is that really necessary in your opinion? Are the most successful dogs really that inbred? I think not! Especially workinglines have less inbreeding/linebreeding than showlines.
Chris