The Bottleneck of the Century - Only one bloodline left! - Page 4

"A outcross dog  is all around the better for it something the above poster will agrue of course."

Of course...

This study is on dogs achieveing a V score in protection with at least SG overall in large national and international events by Louise

• BSP 1999 - 2006
• WUSV 1999 - 2006
• USA Nationals 1999 - 2006

.....and more than half of them have some degree of linebreeding.  Any study including last year's figures would include very few dogs that even qualify to be added to this listing.

Darylehret, you're spitting into the wind. It's a mindset you will never change. 

Not a mindset a learning experience that everyone as a breeder should do is learn. Besides the common sire syndrome also is breeding dogs that are not suitable out crosses or not. That is apparent and rampant in most kennels. Results are tangable I have them and did not line breed to achieve them. When you think super dog is coming out of a 2/2 breeding is when you get all the issues of health and temperament and lower intelligence and I suggest anyone buying from a breeder who does this get a good health guarantee.

Marlene

There is a "big difference" between linebreeding on two dogs in the 3,4,5, generations of two dogs that are from different lineage(as workinglines do), and the linebreeding of two dogs in which "both of the dogs are already linebred on the same dogs maybe 4 or 5 times. In the latter example you have a cuminative effect that creates the type of bottleneck that the post is speaking about.  95% of all 16 lines in a showline pedigree will go back to the L litter Winereau(sp). This is the problem with showlines...the "cuminative effect" of all this canvassing on Quanto/Canto has put the breed in a situation that you will "NEVER" improve these dogs healthwise(that is physical and Mental), unto you introduce new blood for many generations. You must sacrificr type and color to do this and the people won't do it,sooooo time moves on, the excuses abound for performance and health issues, and these dogs become less and less capable of doing what they were created to do. I have preached this for years because I saw the Marko/Bodo/Bernd/Mutz's of the world who were show dogs that were top working dogs......we lost our way in the show ring for money and looks and I am glad somebody has detailed it factually so some of the stubbon diehards can at least "grasp it". 

Marlene, using only the best dogs in any breeding program would make the most sense to anyone. Certainly no one would continue to use the same dogs over and over and  expect to get different results. I believe that's the definiton of insanity. The mindset I see here is that ONLY outcrosses are good and that outcrossing generation after generation is the only way to go. From a genetic standpoint, that is voodoo science and just  not true.  You MIGHT get a larger gene pool, but you will also continue to introduce more and more undesirable traits and genes determine traits. Instead of getting, for example, a litter where 25% have poor pigment and the rest are OK,  you might end up with a litter of one with poor pigment, one with a gay tail, one that can't work, one with  missing teeth, one with flacid ears,  and so forth. There won't be nearly as much consistency as there is in a linebred or hybrid litter. Sure you need to start with the best and build on that. I think we'd all agree that workingline breeders select  against traits that showline breeders consider desirable and vice versa.  I see that as a good thing in the big picture since it brings more diversity to the gene pool.

Also, applying the COI as Louise has suggested may yield some surprising results to those who have thought they were outcrossing for these many generations. Your dogs may be related closer than you realize. Unless you (meaning everyone, not just Marlene) have traced every single dog in all  your pedigrees back to the beginning of the breed and know for certain that all the foundations dogs in your pedigree were different dogs and  unrelated,  your COI results may give you a very different take on your breeding program. Some dogs thought to be outcrosses may well be 50% or better the same dog.

Agree, Gustav. It seems a given that sooner or later the breeders of showlines will have to start to bring in some workinglines, Czech dogs, whatever and they will lose the current type for 3, 4 generations. IMO that might not be a bad thing. Getting back to the athletic and agile GSD sounds like a good idea to me.

A few questions. How many foundation dogs are there in this breed? Do workinglines and showlines go back to the same or different foundation dogs?

Also, applying the COI as Louise has suggested may yield some surprising results to those who have thought they were outcrossing for these many generations. Your dogs may be related closer than you realize. Unless you (meaning everyone, not just Marlene) have traced every single dog in all  your pedigrees back to the beginning of the breed and know for certain that all the foundations dogs in your pedigree were different dogs and  unrelated,  your COI results may give you a very different take on your breeding program. Some dogs thought to be outcrosses may well be 50% or better the same dog.

EXACTLY, Blitzen! Everybody who breeds should be calculating the COI of their litters, but how many do YOU know who actually DO it?

I know one, and she was very, very shocked at what she found when she started calculating the COI!

I"ve been reading Fred Lanting's book, the Total GSD, and was surprised to find that in the earlier days of the breed in N. America, not all breeders were linebreeding. Some bred type-to-type, and had excellent results with doing this. As with linebreeding, you still have to do lots of research on the ancestors, to see what else is hiding in the gene pool, other than what you want.

I offered calculating COI as an adjunct breeding tool--assuming that Jantie' hypothesis has universal validity.
 

When attempting an outcross, in order to maintain any uniformity and predictability options, I recommend type-to-type breedings rather than compensatory breedings.

However, am I opposed to judicious (IMO, of course) linebreeding? Absolutely not! I'd much prefer this to the introduction of new genetic variables solely for the sake of "hybrid vigor".

The most important consideration is for a breeder to have an intimate, knowledge of longitudinal heritable traits within a give dog "family" for multiple generations. Kind of hard to do this if one consistently chooses to buy from brokers, to breed abroad or to recent imports, and/or to breed only to VA or spitzen-V rated dogs.

Even with the advent of new DNA testing, we cannot eliminate occasionally breeding two dogs of "carrier" status for various heritable disorders. Considering that only 1 in 10 GSD's may be capable of completing all the usual credentials (tltles/sound nerves/working drive, clear hips/elbows, correct dentiton, erect ears, breed surveys, decent gait/structure, etc.) that make them breedworthy, we are already eliminating up to 90% of the genepool.

So, yes, we should genetically screen parents in order to deterimine their genetic components so that we may, in turn, carefully screen the progeny of litters from "carriers" in order to determine which offspring are likely to be "affected" and must be removed from the breeding population.

When I say close linebreeding it is the 2/2 or 2/3 on the popular sire syndrome just keep it in context...outcrossing is healthier no question this is why so many show lines have health issues today it is not rocket science...this is why you hear Fero free in workinglines because they over bred and closely breed Fero until the ruined the qualities of the dog and  made them unhealthy and nervy. . One of the best breeders in my opinion with dog after dog after dog  for decades with clear heads, good drives, intelligence and balance is Jon Sevens in Belgium and he did not achieve this by doing any 2/2 breeding but type matching as above and only the best dogs and the results are impressive to say the least. Breeders think they can create the next wonder dog by doing this insane type CLOSE linebreeding I have no patience for it is the animals who suffer from chronic problems both health and temperament  .  You may not produce the next WUSV dog but at least try and  produce a healthy dog with decent temperament.

Marlene .

I have also been doing work/show crosses for a few years now. With good success. The best success is with a pair that have V Sagus Buescker Slosse in the back, if I remember correctly ,6/4,5 So not actually a line breeding and far enough out to not be traditionally thought of as significant. BUT, I believe this background is what gives consistancy, not found in other total out crosses. It is hard to find but it may be part of the solution? This breeding has been repeated with the same consistancy.

Here is the example of what this breeding produced.

Debby

http://castlebrookshepherds.net