This is a placeholder text
Group text
by VomMarischal on 12 March 2010 - 22:03
Why do we limit the analysis of linebreeding to five generations? Is there any science to support the idea that a sixth generation or more doesn't contribute as much to the dog? Or is it just convenience or tradition?
by Wildmoor on 12 March 2010 - 23:03
Maybe if people complete COI on 10 generations they would find out that their dogs are more inbred than they realise!
take Yasko is COI is 10% that equates to great uncle or aunt/great niece or nephew cross
Some of the English dogs are 15% + yet 12.50% equates to half brother/sister, grandparent/grandpup, or double first cousins crosses
and if you look on some of the pedigrees you will see half sister half brother matings on a regular basis on both English and German dogs.
People need to be looking at mating two low COI together to reduce the risk of doubling up on unwanted genetic traits.
take Yasko is COI is 10% that equates to great uncle or aunt/great niece or nephew cross
Some of the English dogs are 15% + yet 12.50% equates to half brother/sister, grandparent/grandpup, or double first cousins crosses
and if you look on some of the pedigrees you will see half sister half brother matings on a regular basis on both English and German dogs.
People need to be looking at mating two low COI together to reduce the risk of doubling up on unwanted genetic traits.
by Silbersee on 13 March 2010 - 01:03
Yes Wildmoor, it has been done for decades! Inbreeding depression! The funny thing is that showlines and workinglines are not even that far removed from each other when you take this under consideration.
by Wildmoor on 13 March 2010 - 02:03
One of my dogs has Palme 40xs in 9 generations he was born on 2004, I have seen some with 63 & 65 lines
Why do people not learn from history, the English made the mistake of linebreeding/inbreeding on bad genes in the late 50s/60s/ 70s with drastic results still being shown epilepsy still following through, even cataracts in the 90s from some of these dogs the German followed in the 70s/80s with show lines, The Americans in the 60s/70s no doubt the work lines are going the same route!
Why do people not learn from history, the English made the mistake of linebreeding/inbreeding on bad genes in the late 50s/60s/ 70s with drastic results still being shown epilepsy still following through, even cataracts in the 90s from some of these dogs the German followed in the 70s/80s with show lines, The Americans in the 60s/70s no doubt the work lines are going the same route!
by darylehret on 13 March 2010 - 05:03
I generally disagree in the comparison of workingline to showline inbreeding. Inbreeding is not the culprit in itself, but what you're inbreeding on, is. Inbreeding coefficients are mostly relevant where selection pressures are present. Otherwise, independant assortment occurs, a roughly random 50/50 variation of genes, both "good" and "bad". If you're inbreeding like to like (i.e. good hips to good hips), your improving the consistency of quality for future generations. This, is provided the genes associated with good hips aren't located closely on the dna strand to something detrimental, or recently mutated in that particular line. The list below of the very best SV hip producers of all time contains how many "showline" producers? Workinglines are selected for their functionality, and less so on appearance, and IMO less succeptible to poorer selection choices in breeding. This doesn't however, excuse the workingline "washouts" that are utilized for the pet-peddling market, where pigmentation and blocky structures take a front seat in breeding decisions made. Linebreeding on fabulous grandaddy so-and-so isn't going to mean much at all when the producers themselves are duds.
by Jeff Oehlsen on 13 March 2010 - 09:03
Quote: Yes Wildmoor, it has been done for decades! Inbreeding depression!
So can you tell me your experience with this ??
I don't want to rehash previous threads, but prefer to have your personal experience with "inbreeding depression".
Maybe there is someone out there that has actually done this type of breeding. I hear a lot of hearsay, with little actual experience on this board.
When you inbreed, you will find out what is plaguing your lines as far as recessives. I have always wondered if this is what people are calling inbreeding depression. Hart wrote a book and talked of this with his parakeets if I remember correctly, it has been years since I read that book. He then went on to say that the following generations were much stronger and larger.
This is something that takes a true breeder to accomplish. You have to have the guts to make this type of commitment and go the distance. I see a lot of people breeding dogs, but maybe some of you know people that have their own line of dogs, not BOB STUD DOG from whatever popular country every few years.
This is a tough one to discuss on a forum, last time I thought a few people were gonna drop dead from stress, or the fact that they had nothing to argue with. Don't know, all I remember was a few "they" arguments, and a couple of "troll" arguments.
Not saying it is the be all end all of how to do something, but I am curious to see if anyone had the guts to see what could happen, and what the results were. Maybe someday, right ??
So can you tell me your experience with this ??
I don't want to rehash previous threads, but prefer to have your personal experience with "inbreeding depression".
Maybe there is someone out there that has actually done this type of breeding. I hear a lot of hearsay, with little actual experience on this board.
When you inbreed, you will find out what is plaguing your lines as far as recessives. I have always wondered if this is what people are calling inbreeding depression. Hart wrote a book and talked of this with his parakeets if I remember correctly, it has been years since I read that book. He then went on to say that the following generations were much stronger and larger.
This is something that takes a true breeder to accomplish. You have to have the guts to make this type of commitment and go the distance. I see a lot of people breeding dogs, but maybe some of you know people that have their own line of dogs, not BOB STUD DOG from whatever popular country every few years.
This is a tough one to discuss on a forum, last time I thought a few people were gonna drop dead from stress, or the fact that they had nothing to argue with. Don't know, all I remember was a few "they" arguments, and a couple of "troll" arguments.
Not saying it is the be all end all of how to do something, but I am curious to see if anyone had the guts to see what could happen, and what the results were. Maybe someday, right ??
by darylehret on 13 March 2010 - 12:03
Inbreeding depression is a catchy term that many will use, but few actually know what it means. "OUTbreeding depression" is a term they're either unaware of or they'll never bring up, the "dilution of genes associated with local adaptation", which results in perpetuating those deleterious genes so that they become prolific throughout the population.
by Lief on 13 March 2010 - 12:03
I think they do denote the 6th gen sometimes with an asterisk but it really becomes less relavent that far back, Linebreeding and inbreeding are whats required to ''fix a type'' in dogs Just because dogs are unrelated does not insure they do not carry the same recessives and outcrossing does nothing in the case of autosomal dominant genes.In the wild animals inbreed ALL the time
by Silbersee on 13 March 2010 - 12:03
darylehret,
I want to clarify what I meant with the showlines and workinglines being not so far removed. It was not meant as a comparison to anything - temperament, structure, etc. I wanted to say that behind the 8th or 9th (in some dogs even closer), you will find the same dogs in the pedigrees. That was all! Nice list, thereever it came from. But a list is only as good as the reports it relies on. And we all know that only people who actively do something with their dogs will get dogs x-rayed. And if I can take that further I can now argue that in Germany, a lot of showlines go to private homes, never to be seen again. Please keep in mind that I am completely neutral. We own both!
Jeff,
what personal experience do you want to know? Again, it was a neutral statement. If you analyze how the GSD was created (or any other breed for that matter) you will see that only a few select dogs were used. Right there, you limit a gene pool. Acording to old records, a lot of old herding lines (females) were used with Horand and his sons. About half of them are now extinct (or maybe even more). That is what I call inbreeding depression. Breeders look at "creating" certain traits and usually go for an easy fix. They start using the same lines. More genetic material is lost that way. Inbreeding depression! Narrow minded people look down on breeders who outcross too much but breeding is thinking in generations. It should never be an easy fix!
But I am not a doomsayer. Inbreeding per se is not bad. Looking to nature, there is a lot of inbreeding. Outcrosses are rare since animals live in their herd/packs. But nature selects by weeding out weak links. People tend not to do that. Therefore, we have genetic problems. Trying to recognize them and eliminating them is the only way to select. But at the same time overzealous selectiveness can further damage the breed's overall health and longevity. This is why it is imperative to have a strong breed organization to overlook the development. Breeders can loose sight due to demand and placements and ranking.
Chris
I want to clarify what I meant with the showlines and workinglines being not so far removed. It was not meant as a comparison to anything - temperament, structure, etc. I wanted to say that behind the 8th or 9th (in some dogs even closer), you will find the same dogs in the pedigrees. That was all! Nice list, thereever it came from. But a list is only as good as the reports it relies on. And we all know that only people who actively do something with their dogs will get dogs x-rayed. And if I can take that further I can now argue that in Germany, a lot of showlines go to private homes, never to be seen again. Please keep in mind that I am completely neutral. We own both!
Jeff,
what personal experience do you want to know? Again, it was a neutral statement. If you analyze how the GSD was created (or any other breed for that matter) you will see that only a few select dogs were used. Right there, you limit a gene pool. Acording to old records, a lot of old herding lines (females) were used with Horand and his sons. About half of them are now extinct (or maybe even more). That is what I call inbreeding depression. Breeders look at "creating" certain traits and usually go for an easy fix. They start using the same lines. More genetic material is lost that way. Inbreeding depression! Narrow minded people look down on breeders who outcross too much but breeding is thinking in generations. It should never be an easy fix!
But I am not a doomsayer. Inbreeding per se is not bad. Looking to nature, there is a lot of inbreeding. Outcrosses are rare since animals live in their herd/packs. But nature selects by weeding out weak links. People tend not to do that. Therefore, we have genetic problems. Trying to recognize them and eliminating them is the only way to select. But at the same time overzealous selectiveness can further damage the breed's overall health and longevity. This is why it is imperative to have a strong breed organization to overlook the development. Breeders can loose sight due to demand and placements and ranking.
Chris
by ALPHAPUP on 13 March 2010 - 14:03
Considering this is a world wide forum ........ with respect to all and from curiosity .. how many people that have replied to this thread .. have taken a Genetics course ?? and how long has your involvement in the GSDs been ? in reference to myself ... I have had over 20 VA [Germany] and mostly VA1 ] progeny myself a, have had wrking line GSDs and also malinois, have been involved with the GSD for over 40 years.. i have taken a more than a Genetics course , and have heard from countless people throught the USA about the GSD ....some of the comments here.. well .. let's say interesting , for now........IMO there's a lot more to the thread and that meets the eye !!.. i await others of their input .... {BTW .. i have seen many a recapitualted Dominant / Recessive trait / and a vast expression and a small expression of phenotypes / genotypes ... but what i see well overlooked ... are the Latent Genes.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top