shortstep

Just some comments. I thought the limit of 2 c sections for bitches interesting. Breeders require to get a license must present the license in order register litters. GSD new FCI standard addressing hock and back. Interesting information on Judges and observers grading dogs general appearance of health (at dog shows), observes much harder on dogs than judges. Grades starting with the worse Mastiffs, Neo Mastiff, Bloodhound, Saint, Douge de Bord and more listed. page 14 Page 16 is the list of the problems noted by breed. Several mentioned the dogs were lame, eye were frequent observation, loose skin and overweight dogs. Worth a read. No more removing whiskers on show dogs. Chinese Crested added to the high profile list (dogs that need more monitoring) due to hair being removed for showing. Lots of Hip stats national and international for almost all breeds. Hips page 19 - 24 elbows no breed breakdowns page 25 New plan for syringomyelia for KCS, KCCS and Griffon Bruxellois pg 25 DNA results now on pedigrees and go forward on all generations!!! Irish setter now both parents must be CLAD and GPRA clear to register a litter. Irish Red and white, CLAD and vWD clear for both parents to register a litter. I have questions about eliminating carriers but do not know enough about these diseases, but this population can not afford to lose any dogs if at all possible to keep them. Anyone know why they would not allow carriers? Long list of DNA testing Schemes by breed

•Development of Mate Select, a revolutionary online system that will enable breeders to plan their breeding programmes according to the impact that it will have on genetic diversity. It will also give breeders and potential puppy buyer’s access to available health information for every Kennel Club registered dog. This I will expect to see here, as it was listed on the 10 point plan (EBV) and the uni I would expect would run it. I wonder where/how the The KC is getting their dog information and how they are verifying it, with it being public this is a big step. I think there has already been a push to get some/all the vets hooked up here to the AVA so office visits can be sent automaticly and data banked. I guess they could find the dog by cross referencing Microchip to ANKC registrtion records?? I am going to look at the other link now. Thanks for posting this.

The scheme isn't touted about being about traits it's touted as being about genetic diversity. Typical nonsense talk from people appeasing the lunatic element while actually achieving very little. Genetic diversity in and of itself isn't automatically a wonderful thing that will solve all problems like a magic wand. Most of the lunatic fringe wouldn't know genetic diversity or a COI if it bit them on the butt. Introducing an unknown dog which is almost certainly only one or two generations away from registered ancestors anyway so, in theory, could be a full brother or sister to the sire or dam of the dog or bitch it is mated to, doesn't do a thing to introduce genetic diversity. The blurb states that - it's all about genetic diversity. And the requirement that the dog be approved by 2 ch show judges as being representative of it's breed is a guarantee that the style of dog which is winning in the ring will be the style of dog which is accepted. You have DNA tests to prove this? And has there ever been a definitive study of how high a COI for a SPECIFIC breed is too high? And how do you decide at what point high is 'too high" if there are no ill effects. Some populations of wild animals are highly in bred and if a breeder was to breed that tightly AND cull as strongly as nature then how is this intrinsically harmful?? What is the breed average COI world wide or even country by country for each breed? The scheme isn't touted about being about traits it's touted as being about genetic diversity. Ok. Lets start again the traits to be able to have puppies naturally with out a c section are genetic traits, that have been lost in the bull dog breed for the most part as I understand it. Let us assume it is the genes to make the head small enough to fit through the pelvis. If not fill in the blanks with what every lost traits for natural birthing you like. Sorry I did not make that clear, it is genetic diveristy but with a mission, to fix the problem of bull dogs not being able to deleiver their pups without c sections, not the concept of an in general increasing of genetic diversity is good for the bred. Perhaps you now can see the difference. Typical nonsense talk from people appeasing the lunatic element while actually achieving very little. Genetic diversity in and of itself isn't automatically a wonderful thing that will solve all problems like a magic wand. Most of the lunatic fringe wouldn't know genetic diversity or a COI if it bit them on the butt. If you can only attempt to prove your point by attacking me and saying nasty things about me, have at it. I stop at this point.

To 1st highlighted section But what if there is a breeder who for some reason gets it in their head to breed Bull dogs that can deliver their pups with out c section, and they hunt out an unregistered bull dog that is doing that, and they want to try to bring in the traits that make that possible in to their lines. The goal in this case was not to increase COI, it was to go after some traits. Why not? It will not 'make' the other registered bull dogs be able to have normal births nor will it give them some hidden problem, as no one else has to use their lines if they do not want to. However we may find that the bull dog that can have it's pups naturally may not fit the standard or perhaps really does fit the standard, in either case it leaves much room for thought. I think that the reasons could be so many things, it really can be something that breeder is after and this gives a way for them to find it. It does not need to suit everyone. To 2nd highlighted secton Basenjis, The answer is the two populations are are very different. In short, a population of thousand and thousands of dogs, being bred for working traits (village hunting dogs) where inbreeding on certain pedigrees is not the practice, you will have a very very wide number of different possible genes in the population, the more different genes the less likely any 2 dogs with the same mutation will be matched up. Any 'bad' genes will be lightly and slowly dispersed through the population never building up to any great levels in the breed. So the population has a low COI reflecting a large population of dogs loosely related to each other (not inbred tightly) . As compared to a population in closed stud book, which almost always begins with a small number of dogs, often less than 20. These dogs are then inbred to each other over and over again, selection being based appearance and fixing as many desired visible traits as possible. This is actively and rapidly reducing the number of available genes on offer in the population, a population that is closed, with the only new genes on offer being random mutations. Another words the inbreeding is making dogs not only look the same on the outside but also on the inside at the genetic level. In the Basenjis case, I think he said a total of 30 dogs made up the entire breed and were inbreed to each other for the last 70 years. This is very intense inbreeding over a good period of time and the result would be the loss of gene choices in every generation as each genertion becaomes more and more inbred. Increaseing the chance of fixing recessive unwanted or mutant genes through out the population. (example, Shar pei, line bred to fix the mutation for wrinkles and accidently fix the mutation for the fever disease at the same time) In any dog at any time can have a mutation and if it is recessive it will not be seen in that dog. In the closed inbred gene pool, when a mutation occurs in a dog, that is then bred, the mutation starts to be passed around. Even worse if the gene pool is small and inbreeding is routine, the gene will pass faster to a larger % of the breed and sooner or later his mutated gene will travel through much of the population. Then it starts to happen, 2 dogs that have the gene are bred together and the disease appears. The race is then on to control it. Usually at first by culling affected dogs and any dog that are thought to carry the mutation. This however reduces the gene pool (reduces the number of available dogs each with a chance of having different genes) which in turn will cause a greater risk of another mutation getting spread through the population. It is a spiral that just keep going. There are other factors that can also have dramatic effects on dog populations. One is popular sire syndrome. This occurs in almost any population where there are contests, be it show ring, racing, trials of any sort. Dogs that win are often selected more often than other dogs in the population to be sires. This can lead to a significant number of dogs being related to that one dog and as the generations go by, all of a sudden it may be almost impossible to find a dog that does not have their stud in the pedigree. This effect then will increase rapidly over the next generations, and soon you are counting how many time he shows up, 10 20 30 times. If this dog had a recessive mutation not only has it had opportunity to have been spread though most if not all of the population, but now you are breeding back to that opportunity over and over again in each breeding. An open stud book can give the breeder the ability to reach outside of this population and find a dog that does not have this popular sire in their history. Bottle neck is another problem in closed gene pools along with genetic drift and others.

Well I could be all wrong. I think it may well be the breeder (not breeders) who will decide. Though there may well be some welfare isses that are addressed by some sort of controls. For example, let say a breed has a 70% affected rate, then there might be a plan to reduce that rate and everybody has to follow the rules, and I hope this is under consultation with experts outside of the breed club (see below). But I do not see the normal breed having those sorts of outside restrictions. I think if a breeder, say me, thinks oh that dog is a great working dog, really works in a very classic manner, is strong, is 9 years old, has all these great pups I have seen also working very well, and he is the perfect match for my bitch I have been looking for. I even find out he is registered in the working registry and there is even a pedigree. Hey my choice and why not give it a good look. Then if this dog meets the looks like a duck test, and passes the normal health testing that we only wish all ANKC breeders did, they hey way not let the preson use the dog. It is there breeding program. This is how I see it working. Why is this good? For example that cardigan breeder who got so frustrated by the KC, he would have stayed if he could have done what he wanted (BTW it was mostly the rule that he could not use a carrier to a normal dogs (all carriers had to be desexed) which flys in the face of using genetic testing and also is the worse thing they could have done to a gene pool with almost no dogs left) the man was right. So anyway he would have stayed, started his new breeding plans and promoted his ideas about working corgies all i nthe KC. All the new members he has in his club now, would have been in the KC, including all the dogs they have found and imported to use for breeding. The only people who really think this would have been a bad outcome are the handfull of show breeders controlling the 40 or so kennel club pups born each year, making sure none of them can be bred from. I just don't understand that sort of thinking.

I believe the idea or thinking is, That there is never a time when a closed stud book in 'good' for a breed. There is never a time when limiting genetic diversity is in the best interests of a breed. I do not think that anyone is going to imply that opening the stud books by it's self is all that is needed to change breeding habits of the last century, nor will it change many breeders habits. But it is a very big step towards saying, it is time for change. But where does new stock come from? imo new stock that is tempered by the same conditions as their registered counterparts is more risky than a closed stud book. Admittedly I'm blinded by my own bias and limited to what I know from my group of dogs, eg: I see how the terrain / environment forces say dogs from kazakhstan to be healthier and more robust than the average dog in Australia - Kazakhstan volkodavs have to have strong immune systems, they have to free whelp, they have to fight their own infections or they simply die. But what does an unregistered dog in Australia have over a registered dog? [excluding working kelpies or dogs that rely on their physicality to pass on their genetic material ie Kelpies, hunting dogs etc] Registered dogs, you know their lineage and the health of that lineage - the good and the bad. Lilli I am far from an expert on this subject. I was waiting for some experts to chime in. I do think you are on the right track about the working dogs, being tested by their life style and therefore would by an over all health, robost and vigorouse. In most cases close inbreeding in the working dog populations I know about is not practiced, or if it is it more a one off. The lines I know of that have been inbred over generations have all failed. I think this explains why working population often have very low COI, yet if you asked the breeder if they were breeding for low COI they would not be, might not even know what COI means. It is also true that in most cases where breeds really are maintained as working dogs, that they are seldom in the KC. they either function in some other registry for their breed or they do not even have a registry per say and just keep records. If you speak to these people they feel they cannot function in the kennel club, often due to restrictions on the choice of allowable dogs to breed to (must be KC registered). For example in the WCK they have aprogram that allows for breeding out to border collie or other working dogs, and after I beleive it is 3 generations they are back to being purebred. Some may say, well these dogs really not purebreds and do not really display what the breed is suppose to look like. I would argue that any kelpie in the back of ute is instantly recognizable. They really are proof that form follows function. Yet there will be often wide variation in the working dogs as to size, often colours, maybe ears or other traits that the working breeders do not value as needed or important for fit for function. Yet that kelpie is still instantly recognizable. So what does a dog outside of the kennel club offer? It could be anything, better temperament, different genes, better working ability or even just a recent long term history of work which could be viewed as bringing in vigor and strength. As with all things dog, it really is a matter of what is in the mind and thoughts of the breeder choosing the dogs. What any dogs offers toa breeding program is choice. I guess what it means to all of is that we may need to loosen up the restrictions real and perceived that we put on all breeders. To allow for others as well as for our selves, to make decisions they want to make. That this diversity, not only in genetics but also in breeding program ideals and freedom, really is in the best interest of the breeds over all future. Think of it this way, freedom works in both directions. I am polishing my crystal ball as we speak, I am sure a picture of the future till appear any second!!! Maybe if a squint I will see it?

I believe the idea or thinking is, That there is never a time when a closed stud book is 'good' for a breed. There is never a time when limiting genetic diversity is in the best interests of a breed. I do not think that anyone is going to imply that opening the stud books by it's self is all that is needed to change breeding habits of the last century, nor will it change many breeders habits. But it is a very big step towards saying, it is time for change.

I thnk we need to stretch ourselves a little bit, atleast we need to know what others think of our actions. Are our pats on the back really well thought out and deserved? http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/...go-terrier.html A single breed - the Congo Terrier - sums up the history of dogs. Have you noticed that in the world of dogs, names and places never quite line up? Look at Welsh Terriers. I know digging men in Wales, but none that use a Kennel Club Welsh Terrier to hunt fox to ground. I know digging men in Scotland, but none that use a Scottish terrier. Afghans? There are no Kennel Club Afghan dogs coursing in South Central Asia. Show line German Shepherds? Not too many of those herding sheep in Germany! And in central Africa, the locals are not using "Congo Terriers" that have Kennel Club papers. A Congo terrier? What on earth is that? The Kennel Club's Pariah Dog The “Congo terrier” was discovered by explorer Georg Schweinfurth on an expedition to Africa in 1869. He called the dogs "Niam-niam dogs," which described the tribal region where they were found, and he noted they were often quite fat, as the Niam-niam people loved dogs so much they thought nothing of tossing them into the stew pot for dinner! The dogs themselves were spitz-like and barkless, with erect ears and curled tails, as is often the case with primitive dogs. Where the Niam-niam dogs were different was in their relatively small size, their short coat, and the fact that they often featured a white band of fur around their neck. Though Schweinfurth called them Niam-niam dogs, similar animals were found across a wide belt of central Africa, stretching from Liberia in the West, to Sudan in the East. Like many other primitive landrace pariah dogs, the Niam-niam dog had only one estrus a year and rarely barked, but instead vocalized with howls, yodels, and whines similar to those of the wolf, coyote, dingo, or jackal. Of course, a largely silent dog in thick cover is not necessarily an asset. No matter; this deficit was corrected by African hunters who attached a wooden "bell" or clapper to the necks of their dogs so they could more easily drive small game out of thick cover. In 1895, the Niam-niam dog was displayed at the Crufts dog show as the "Congo terrier." The name did not last too long. In the late 1930s, the Congo Terrier was formally brought into the Kennel Club and renamed the "Basenji" -- a Bantu name that meant "village dog." The first order of Kennel Club business was to craft a narrow appearance-based "standard" for the Basenji. This was not hard to do, as only seven dogs were initially admitted. Clearly these seven dogs were perfect specimens of their type! Inbreeding to Failure Seven dogs, of course, is not much of a gene pool. In fact, the gene pool of the Basenji never grew much bigger than this. Over the course of the next 60 years, no more than 30 dogs comprised the entire founding stock of the breed in the U.K., the U.S., and Europe. Inbreeding within this small stock of foundation dogs quickly led to a crushing genetic load and a rise in disease. The first issue to raise its head was Hemolytic Anemia. When testing was started, twenty percent of all Basenjis carried this recessive gene. What to do? The answer: Cull. And cull they did, with about 18 percent of Basenjis weeded out of the American Kennel Club gene pool over the course of a decade. Of course, this deep reduction in an already narrow gene pool sped up the inbreeding merry-go-round. Within a decade, another health problem had popped up: Fanconi syndrome, a type of kidney failure. A health survey found 10 percent of all American Basenjis had Fanconi syndrome, and of these dogs, 76 percent were being bred. What to do? The Outcross Solution The solution, of course, was an outcross. The good news was that there were was no shortage of excellent dogs in Africa. After a 1988 visit to the Congo, AKC judge Damara Bolte reported that: "In five days and 800 kilometers of driving, we saw at least 200 dogs of which only three were not Basenjis." Could anyone driving down the road see the same number of Welsh Terriers in Wales, or Scottish Terriers in Scotland? Impossible! In 1990 the Basenji Club of America successfully petitioned the American Kennel Club to open the AKC registry to African dogs, and 12 were admitted. The addition of 12 African imports helped, but it was not enough. With popular sire selection, inbreeding within the Basenji gene pool continued. And how could it not, with less than a dozen dogs comprising over 95% of the Y chromosomes in Kennel Club dogs across the U.S., Europe and the U.K.? Form, Function and Fantasy As noted earlier, Basenjis have always been found across a wide swath of central Africa. The early dogs came from the Sudan, Sierra Leon, Liberia, the Cameroon, and the Congo. In 1998, an American Peace Corps worker in Benin reported the country was awash in Basenjis, and that they could be acquired for as little as a dollar. In 2004, an American imported six of these dogs, and they were shown at the 2004 Basenji Club of America Nationals. By then, however, the AKC registry had once again closed. The Basenji Club petitioned the AKC to reopen the registry. This was done in January 2007, with a new closing scheduled for 2013. Will opening the AKC Basenji registry a second time really matter? Yes and no. It will not matter to the Basenjis in Africa, which have never needed saving. The hunting dogs of Africa are protected by those who hunt them. In this regard, they are no different from the working terriers of Wales and Scotland, the coursing dogs of South Central Asia, or bird dogs the world over. But the Basenji community will not be dissuaded. They insist they are "saving" a breed. But what is it that they saving, and who are they saving it from? One thing is clear: Basenji enthusiasts are not trying to save hunting dogs in Africa. You cannot save dogs in Africa by removing them from the continent, and you cannot save a hunting breed by not hunting them at all. So what are the Kennel Club enthusiasts really trying to save? Mostly, they are working to preserve a romantic notion of their own making. For their breed to be special, a Basenji has to be more than another village dog, even if the word "Basenji" means just that in the Lingala language of the Congo. And so, Basenji owners tighten down on what they see as the “special essentials” of their breed. They insist no Basenji should ever bark, and never mind if some always have, and that a barkless dog is such a liability that the Africans themselves bell their dogs when they hunt. And, of course, all Basenjis must have a tightly curled tail, and no matter that a tightly curled tail serves no function in the field. Function? The American and European Basenji is not about function! This dog is about form and fantasy. Hunting? What does hunting have to do with the Basenji? Nothing! Why should Basenjis be held to a working standard when the Kennel Club Welsh Terrier and Scotty are not? This is the Kennel Club, not the African bush. Form trumps function; everyone knows that. And form is maintained by inbreeding right up to the edge of genetic failure. Why should the Basenji be any different in this regard? And so Kennel Club Basenji enthusiasts hold tightly to a breed standard invented in England based on seven dogs. And when shown pictures of small hunting dogs in central Africa that do not quite conform to every aspect of "the standard,” they sniff disdainfully. “Those aren’t Basenjis. Those are nothing more than village hunting dogs." Right. No irony there! Just ask any Welshman with mud on his boots, calluses on his hands, and a terrier at his heels. What does he know of Welsh terriers? Not a thing! And so we come to the ultimate irony: What are Basenji enthusiasts trying to protect their American and European dog from? Why inbreeding within the closed registry system of the Kennel Club, of course! More reading if interested http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/...magic-meat.html

Microchip, tattoo (and even DNA if contested) should be able to identify the dogs already in the KC and sold on limited? But big part of the reason the kennel club is failing is there are far too few dogs sold with breeding rights. There has to be a source for the next generation of dogs and the gene pool adn population needs to be expanding instead of shrinking. Right now to say that next generation will only come from a few dogs owned by show breeders is just not acceptable to society, it is only adds fuel to the welfare issues be changed against kennel club dogs. That's a breeders decision and one that I strongly support. I can't see how introducing mongrels into the pedigree data base and making them available is going to help with any "welfare issues". It will be a case of use them at your peril. Besides the " relevant " breed health checks, the rest will be entirely unknown. I think the point of this is, that change is coming, be it by choice or driven by parliament enquiry and government direction. Sure seems to me it is time to start addressing these issues before it is thrust upon us. I am saying, if we want choice we better start acting now. Frankly I do not think there will ever be a system that will suit everyone.

Well, maybe if Canada had been welcoming to Dr. Jeffery Bragg's Siberians he would not have written Purebred Dogs in to the 21st Century http://www.netpets.com/dogs/healthspa/bragg.html#toc Which was fuel to a whole new generation of dog breeders and dog breeding culture. I admire him greatly, even more so of late, as he did not condone PDE as a method to be used to drive change he believes in. He now seems a moderate. How the world has changed in just a few years.

The health survey is still open and information is collected every day. Will there ever be a report that we can read? and if so when? As a breeder how do I find out about what it says about my breed?

Microchip, tattoo (and even DNA if contested) should be able to identify the dogs already in the KC and sold on limited? But big part of the reason the kennel club is failing is there are far too few dogs sold with breeding rights. There has to be a source for the next generation of dogs and the gene pool adn population needs to be expanding instead of shrinking. Right now to say that next generation will only come from a few dogs owned by show breeders is just not acceptable to society, it is only adds fuel to the welfare issues be changed against kennel club dogs.

I am pretty sure this was driven by the pressure of the activity going on from the Parliament inquiry on welfare issues in pedigree dog breeding. This is one of the actions they are taking to demonstrate their commitment to addressing health issues in KC dogs and to show that they will follow the advise being given to them on the welfare issues of purebred dogs. From what I understand this open stud book plan will apply to all breeds in the KC. It will mean that the KC will be an open stud book for all breeds. It really is a direct statement about about a change of ideas on dog breeding in the KC. But as was mentioned in the Cardigan Corgi post http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=218457 The current kennel club culture of, "I only breeding for my next show dog and only to better the breed and as I am an ethical breeder so I place all pups with limited registration unelss they go to a show home", is taking a heavy toll on the KC in more than one way. It has lead to far more purebred dogs being bred outside of the kennel club than in the kennel club, and not necessarily poor quality dogs. It is making membership and registration in the kennel club seem irrelevant at best and not good at worst, the public is starting to believe that the best place to find 'healthy well bred' dogs is not in the kennel club. Just like in ANKC, UK membership is declining and so are dog registration numbers, they are not too far from being considered in freefall. New dog breed groups are popping up, with different goals (such as the cardigan folks in the link above) and in no time they have more dogs and members than in the kennel club. It is an interesting time of change.

I have always believed it open (public access and avialable) databases for heatlh test results. For the life of me I do not know why all purebred dogs registries do not offer this information to the public (which would include other breeders). So Ihope the idea is to make this public and useful for everyone. BTW what every happened to the health survey that anyone could report medical information to. I have not heard any reuslts, have I missed the results or is the information not avialable to the public?

The Kennel Club Pilot scheme for registering dogs of unverified parentage 19-Apr-11 A pilot scheme which could enhance genetic diversity has been announced by the Kennel Club. It will allow purebred unregistered dogs to be registered on the Breed Register on a case by case basis. This is a return to the position which existed forty years ago when similar rules were in force. Enhancing genetic diversity The move, approved by the Kennel Club General Committee last year, will if used, enhance genetic diversity by widening breed gene pools and allowing new bloodlines to be introduced within breeds. Under the new pilot scheme, every successful application will be admitted to the register with three asterisks next to its name. Asterisks will be applied for three further generations, in order to identify the fact that there is unknown or unregistered ancestry behind a dog. How to apply Applications will need to be accompanied by a letter of explanation of how the applicant acquired the dogand will then only be considered on the proviso that the dog: a) is verified by two Championship level judges appointed by the Kennel Club who should agree that the dog is representative of its breed. b) is DNA profiled. c) has relevant health tests (equivalent to that required and recommended under the Kennel Club Accredited Breeder Scheme) for the breed. Breed specific health requirements under the ABS can be viewed at www.thekennelclub.org.uk/breedhealth. To ensure that only genuine applicants apply, strict requirements have been put in place that will need to be completed before an application is finally approved by the Committee, and in addition there will be an administration fee of £100 per dog. Every application will be considered on a case by case basis. Whilst the Kennel Club is keen to open up its register, it should be noted that there is no guarantee that dogs so registered (and their progeny) will be accepted for registration by overseas registering bodies. That will depend upon their local regulations. Application forms are available direct from the Registration Office on 0844 4633 980 ENDS [125.11] 19th April 2011 Notes to Editors If a dog of unknown origin is accepted on the Breed Register, the dog’s registration will be annotated by three asterisks to indicate unverified origins. If it is bred from and mated to other fully registered dogs of the same breed (with no asterisks next to their name), their progeny, the F1 progeny, will also be annotated with three asterisks. If the F1 progeny are bred from, and mated to other fully registered dogs of the agreed breed (with no asterisks against their name), their progeny, the F2 progeny, will be annotated with two asterisks. F2 progeny mated to fully registered dogs of the agreed breed (with no asterisks against their name), will produce F3 progeny that will be registered with one asterisk. The F4 and subsequent generations will have no special annotation. http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/3672/23/5/3

Thanks for posting that, I learned a lot. I know this will be a stupid question, but in the photo with the label Ptosis. It looks like that dog has a very deformed nose and lips, like it is swollen and inflamed. I am guessing this is the trait called meat mouth (Or if not what is it??). Is this selected for? Why would a swollen disfigured looking nose be a trait people would breed for? Is this disfigured skin on the nose also the same skin gene disease/mutation/defect that causes the excessive wrinkles? Does this defect cause the skin to be really thickened and disfigured all over the body?

Sorry I do not have a link. I just read that in the Irish kennel club, the Irish Red and white setter in Ireland will now have it's stud book open for outcrossing, due to low numbers and high inbreeding levels. They stated that Irish born Irish red setters will be allowed to be used to increase genetic diversity in an effort to save the breed. I hope I repeated all that correctly, if not please correct as needed.

Just wanted to add that there has been several face lift stories due to breeding for excessive skin and wrinkles in the UK press as of late, not just sp but all some of the mastiff breeds. Some prety shocking photos in the news stories too.

I posted this recently about the excessive wrinkle gene being connected to the fever disease A New Wrinkle on Why Shar-Peis Suffer Fevers by Elisabeth Pain on 17 March 2011, 5:00 PM | Permanent Link | 0 Comments Email Print | More Previous Article Next Article Enlarge Image The same mutations that wrinkle Shar-Peis make them susceptible to fevers. Credit: ThinkstockA mutation responsible for the characteristically wrinkly skin of Shar-Peis may also make them sick, according to a new study. The finding could eventually help dog breeders produce healthier Shar-Peis and may offer a new explanation for why some people are plagued with periodic fever. Originally from China, Shar-Pei puppies have seduced the Western world with their wrinkles, encouraging breeders to select for dogs that would keep the trait as adults. (In the original breed, puppies lose most of their wrinkled skin as they grow.) Underlying the breed’s thick and extensive crinkles and furrows is the accumulation of a common skin component called hyaluronic acid (HA). Also characteristic of the breed is a disorder known as Familial Shar-Pei Fever (FSF), which causes apparently unprovoked yet recurrent episodes of fever and inflammation. Even though the canine disease has long been thought to be hereditary, a genetic cause remained to be found. In a study in which they compared the DNA of 24 Shar-Peis having FSF with 17 ones that don’t (not all of the breed suffers the fevers), an international team of researchers recently identified a region on chromosome 13 associated with increased susceptibility to the disease. In parallel, the same team, led by Kerstin Lindblad-Toh of Uppsala University in Sweden and the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, screened the Shar-Pei genome for signs of what gives the breed its characteristic wrinkles. A comparison of 50 Shar-Peis with a control group of canines from 24 other breeds pointed toward a location, near a gene that codes for an HA-producing enzyme called HAS2, that overlapped with the FSF susceptibility region. Looking more closely at this area, the team then identified a mutation—duplications of a DNA segment—that was present in highly wrinkled Shar-Peis but not in control breeds. The researchers next looked at whether this same mutation was associated with FSF susceptibility, comparing 28 affected and 16 healthy Shar-Peis. A large number of the duplications appears to predispose animals to FSF, the team reports today in PLoS Genetics. Lindblad-Toh says she suspected that the genetic causes for the thickened skin and for the fever syndrome would be near each other but not that they “would be the same mutation.” Further studies on Shar-Pei skin cells by Lindblad-Toh’s team showed that the more times the duplicated DNA segment is repeated, the more HAS2 is produced. The findings are “really exciting news,” says Anna Simon of Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre in the Netherlands, a clinician-scientist who specializes in fevers. FSF resembles some of the hereditary periodic fever syndromes in humans, a group of rare autoinflammatory disorders whose most common form affects between 10,000 and 20,000 patients in the world, Simon estimates. Although mutations affecting inflammatory molecules have been identified in some cases of the syndromes, more than half remain unexplained. “Hyaluronic acid was outside of the scope” of fever researchers, in spite of its already-documented ability to stimulate the immune system, Simon says. It may now help explain some of the cases that had no known genetic cause, she suggests. As for Shar-Peis, the study offers a good example of “the unintended consequences of selective breeding,” says genome scientist Joshua Akey of the University of Washington, Seattle. While selecting for excessive wrinkling, breeders “were also selecting for Shar-Pei fever and increasing that in frequency. That’s probably generally true of a lot of traits that were selected for in dog breeding.” http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011...s-s.html?ref=hp

My dogs are registered with ANKC and the two video dogs are also registered in the The Kennel Club in the UK. So not sure what you are talking about. Sorry if you do not enjoy seeing border collies do what they are suppose to do, work sheep and work sheep in ISDS trials which is the standard of work and the founding registry for the breed. Do you show your tris then? Go back and read my post I was not talking about tris in the show ring, did not mention the show ring at all. Got it? I will try again, I was talking about tris in the general population of border collies around the world and most importantly about tris at some of the best sheepdog trials in the world. Isn't it lovely to see them working to the standard for the breed. My goodness they are a wonderful and talented breed. You go back and read Dancinbcs post then as she was saying she wanted a SHOW tri. Stop trolling. Yes I read that, that is what made me think about tri coloured dogs. I think that is fantastic and I hope she finds one one day. OK? Now these guys really need a good border collie, and I dare you to not at least smile, oh come on, have a laugh!

My dogs are registered with ANKC and the two video dogs are also registered in the The Kennel Club in the UK. So not sure what you are talking about. Sorry if you do not enjoy seeing border collies do what they are suppose to do, work sheep and work sheep in ISDS trials which is the standard of work and the founding registry for the breed. Do you show your tris then? Go back and read my post I was not talking about tris in the show ring, did not mention the show ring at all. Got it? I will try again, I was talking about tris in the general population of border collies around the world and most importantly about tris at some of the best sheepdog trials in the world. Isn't it lovely to see them working to the standard for the breed. My goodness they are a wonderful and talented breed.

My dogs are registered with ANKC and the two video dogs are also registered in the The Kennel Club in the UK. So not sure what you are talking about. Sorry if you do not enjoy seeing border collies do what they are suppose to do, work sheep and work sheep in ISDS trials which is the standard of work and the founding registry for the breed.

About 1/2 to 1/3 of all border collies are tri colour (in the world wide population of ISDS and associated dogs. ISDS is the founding registry for the breed since 1906 in the country of origin the UK). About 1/3 of the International Supreme Champions have been tris, including Red tris (would be called chocolate tri in the ANKC but not an allowed colour) in fact there was a red tri not too many years ago that won the supreme. Here is tri coloured Dewi Tweed International 2009 Supreme Champion. Semi smooth coat, black tri with mottleing and blue eyes, white faced and pricked ears. http://www.kinlochsheepdogs.com/Dewi%20Tweed.html Working video this is excellent to watch! Just to be fair here is a black and white. I have a dog closely related to this dog. What a dog this one is! I know you would not let them in your back yard as they are certainly not bred to be show dogs, they are working border collies, but I could not think of a greater honor than to have any one of the International Supreme Champions at my home and to see them on my paddocks, gives me goose bumps to think about actually! Well on that note I think I will go out and enjoy the morning and work my dogs, even the tris.

The old pulling an elephant out of your hat trick! Well done! Here are some links to some recent information about Zimbabwwe and their elephants. http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...-flip-test.html and http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...iving-room.html and http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...human-over.html Enjoy! You refer me to someone's blog??! You'll need to be more specific than that. What is with you, does everybody have to take a kicking from you? Anyway this 'blog' that is not good enough for you to bother to look at is full of facts links and opinion that might not be exactly just like yours. Have a chat with him if you disagree. So enjoy or don't enjoy, your choice. I'm on the floor belly up waiting for you to kick me again.

The old pulling an elephant out of your hat trick! Well done! Here are some links to some recent information about Zimbabwwe and their elephants. http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...-flip-test.html and http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...iving-room.html and http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/...human-over.html Enjoy!