Dna Clear By Parentage

[shortstep]

However this does not change the fact that we will all now have to repeat DNA disease tests ( 3 DNA tests in my case) on 2 dogs every other generation, (not to mention hips and elbows every generation), when the ANKC could keep records and help out the breeders so we do not have to keep testing and waisting money on something we already know.

But like I said you guys must have a lot more money then I have.

This is a really important topic and there are several facets to it. This whole DNA testing thing is a brave new world, which in a way has gotten away from us and I'm not sure whether we will ever be able to catch up with it and get it back under our control. As soon as we think we may have it under control, the goal posts get shifted or the technology changes or one of the testing companies goes feral and we're back to square one

Firstly, the ANKC Conference in October passed a set of Protocols for the use of DNA disease testing:

ANKC Regulations

Part 6 The Register and Registration

ANKC Protocols for DNA-based Disease Testing (Added 10/10, 6.7.1)

The DNA Program

2.10 The program focuses on DNA testing to determine genetic status of breeding stock.

It is vital that ANKC confirms effective protocols to ensure that:

a) There is scientific validity and accuracy in test results:

the test must be published and/or peer reviewed;

there must be no room for fraud on the part of owners;

there must be no room for unknown/accidental matings.

b) Breed councils and clubs are aware of the requirements should they wish to

introduce Litter Registration Limitations.

The Protocols

2.11 DNA collection

DNA collection is by approved, independent, trained collectors, including

veterinarians. Owners/breeders cannot collect from their own dogs.

Approved collectors would be those accepted by State CC’s or nominated by breed

clubs.

2.12 Positive identification

Identification of the dog by microchip or unique (as part of a recognised Australia

wide based tattoo system) tattoo is required, it must be verified by the collector at the

time of DNA collection and recorded on the form.

2.13 Collection method

DNA sample collection is via non-intrusive buccal swab, or blood collection.

Blood samples if required, should be collected by a registered veterinarian.

2.14 Parentage testing

For verification of parentage, both parents and the offspring concerned must have

DNA profiles.

2.15 Clear by parentage (CBP) for a Specific Disease

Where both parents are clear for a specific disease-causing gene, their offspring may

be assumed to be clear of that disease. Where specific LRLs are in place, those

offspring that go on to become breeding stock, parentage must be confirmed either

by parentage test or disease test prior to breeding.

Where litter registration limitations in a breed require disease testing of breeding

stock, after a number of generations with no reported cases of the disease, the breed

council (or in the absence of a council, the majority of breed clubs) may declare the

Australian population of the breed to be clear of the disease. The litter registration

limitations may then be altered to require only imported animals, imported semen and

stored frozen semen to be tested.

[The number of generations would be decided in conference with the relevant breed

club(s) and the CHWC. Additional advice to be sought from geneticists/advisory

breed council.]

So, basically, the ANKC recognises Clear By Parentage for the purposes of Litter Registration Limitations, as long as the protocols are followed. That sounds really easy, however when you consider the Border Collie situation, things take a turn for the worse

The Border Collie community chose to introduce LRLs for three diseases, CL, CEA and TNS. These LRLs are supposed to take effect on Jan 1 2011. However they don't conform to the requirements of the ANKC DNA protocols. The TNS test has never been published or peer reviewed, so it can't be put in an LRL. That doesn't say that you can't keep using the test.

The LRLs that were agreed to also don't conform to the Clear By Parentage protocols. Parentage must be proven to claim Clear By Parentage. I know there are many BC people that have three or four generations of clear by parentage, however most, if not all, haven't done the profiling to prove parentage. Some have tested CL with Alan Wilton, some with GTG. Alan Wilton's markers for parentage don't match GTG's - it's a minefield!! And to really put the icing on the cake, GTG have now decided they won't do more than one generation Clear By Parentage !!!!!! Bloody hell.......

The Litter Registration Limitations that were voted on can't be put into practice on January 1st, 2011. The new company that's doing DNA testing, ASAP Laboratories, will do Clear By Parentage for as many generations as you like, however they can't do the CEA test, as GTG has the licence from Optigen. They will recognise results from other laboratories, which GTG won't!

I don't know what the answer to all of this is; as I said above I think we've lost control of DNA testing

If anybody has any real concerns about all of this, I'd be happy to talk to them about it.

Cheers,

Sylvia Power

Chair, Dogs Vic CHC

Thanks Slyvia!

I was aware of all the lab confusion with the different tests.

I agree about the TNS, recommending it would be the best that could be asked for until it it is published and reviewed.

I was not aware that we are not required to do profiling, for some reason I thought that was part of the new year protocal, so I started doing it with my last litter.

But you are right, I have several generations of clear by parentage and have not profiled all of those dogs.

But they are still with me and it is not a problem to do so, if the lab results can be used. Frankly I can not see how you can do Clear by Parentage with out profiling.

So is nothing going to happen when we try to register a litter after Jan 1? Same as today and they wilnot be requesting lab results?

I do hope that ANKC does come up with a method to record health testing on the pedigrees and a method to carry forward Clear by parentage. There are registries that do this now, so it can be done.

Edited December 17, 2010 by shortstep

[zenchel]

But you are right, I have several generations of clear by parentage and have not profiled all of those dogs.

But they are still with me and it is not a problem to do so, if the lab results can be used. Frankly I can not see how you can do Clear by Parentage with out profiling.

You can do it easily then - just go back and start with the dogs that have test results, profile them and do CBP down the generations.

Sylvia

[dancinbcs]

But you are right, I have several generations of clear by parentage and have not profiled all of those dogs.

But they are still with me and it is not a problem to do so, if the lab results can be used. Frankly I can not see how you can do Clear by Parentage with out profiling.

You can do it easily then - just go back and start with the dogs that have test results, profile them and do CBP down the generations.

Sylvia

Impossible if the tested dogs are dead which is the case for many breeders.

The LRL for Border Collies were voted in by the Border Collie owners and breeders before the ANKC came up with this new list of rules and therefore should stand as they were. If those ANKC rules had been in first we would not have even bothered with the LRLs. As someone that worked for over 20 years on the development of the tests and over two years to get the LRLs introduced I am extremely angry that the ANKC could shift the goalposts after the event and stuff the whole thing up. The whole point was to have the results put on the pedigrees with each generation marked clear by parentage where appropriate. This was to eliminate the need for breeders to keep having to test any clear dogs for disease or parentage. If a registration application is good enough to register a litter it should be good enough to declare an animal clear by parentage and that dog should then be treated the same as a tested one. During the development of the CL and TNS tests hundreds of samples were checked for parentage as part of the research. There was not one case of wrong parentage so where is the justification for requiring profiling now?

We will still have to test progeny of carriers forever and that is going to be expensive enough but there was never any intention of trying to eliminate carriers from the gene pool. To do so would be idiotic and destroy the breed, so the point about populations being clear of a disease is stupid beyond belief. Whoever wrote these regulations, clearly has no understanding of DNA testing and how it should be used to preserve a gene pool.

We were given a proposed set of LRLs by the ANKC that were similar to the new rules to take to our breeders. These were unanimously opposed by the breed clubs so we were told to write our own set of LRLs. After much consultation between clubs, this was achieved and voted in. You have no idea how many times they were re-writtten until everyone agreed with them. With these new rules overriding everything we voted for, we have wasted huge amounts of time. Why did we bother.

Unless profiling can be done by any lab and the results accepted by all other labs, then it is not appropriate for the ANKC to demand profiling (unless there is reason to believe a breeder has lied on a registration). As you would well know, Sylvie, this is not going to happen because the commercial labs are making sure it doesn't happen. Those of us involved in the test development will never support compulsory profiling in the current situation.

[shortstep]

Ask me and the whole concept is off the rails.

The state of Victoria requires certain DNA testing, yet they are not requiring breeders to send them lab results. You are assumed to be following the law and are threaten with punishment if you do not. If this is good enough for the government, then it is more than enough for ANKC to do to their own members.

The bottom line seems to have been lost. DNA tests are aids to help the breeders breed better dogs. Not hoops to jump through, trophies on a shelf or to be used to make life difficult for breeders. ANKC is suppose to be working for the members, breed clubs are suppose to be working for members, to help them use these tools.

Personally I think a DNA Normal or normal by parentage on at least one parent in every breeding for CEA and CL is more than acceptable, both here in OZ and internationally. It prevents the pup from being affected and protects the buyer and breeder by assuring no affected pups. The rest should be up to the breeder to decide what fits best in their breeding program. TNS can be nothing more than a recommendation at this time. If breeders wants to do more DNA testing of both parents and/or all offspring then by all means they can.

A signature from the breeder that they have met the requirement is all that is needed to accompany the litter registration form. There has to be some trust of all breeders until proven otherwise, just as the state of Vic trusts their citizens to follow the law.

However there is so much more that could be done by the breed clubs and ANKC.....

The most respected modern politically correct KC in Europe (Sweden) and maybe the world is not requiring DNA testing for CEA, CL or TNS on border collies.

For CEA, clear eye exam/cert on both parents is the minimum requirement for them. I did not see anything about CL, which has a zero DNA carrier rate in the northern hemi lines at present and a low rate in the imported lines, so prevalence is not high and I assume education and breeder discretion prevails.

But they do require hips scores on both parents because HD is the most likely health problem to be encountered in the breed today (now that CEA and CL is controlled). However it is not a severe problem in the breed so their requirements allow the breeders as much room as possible, FCI A or B scores are required which is equal to Borderline, Fair, Good, Excellent OFA, and equal to (not sure) AVA 25 ?? or less.

All test results are collected directly from the labs or vets and reporting is mandatory and public.

For my breed they have a public on line system of all hip elbow and shoulder scores, eye cert results and any DNA tests the breeder decided to do. Also temperament tests, working tests and general physical inspection scores.

All the information is shown on a lateral pedigree with COI. All relatives are listed with their scores. This is far too much information to go on the average pedigree. But is far more helpful then only knowing just the scores of the parent or grandparent, but have no idea what all the siblings and grand siblings and offspring were. So clearly they are moving towards doing EBV style breeding plans.

I am very impressed as they have kept their efforts focused on helping the breeders by collecting and making available in a usable format good information to allow good choices by the breeder, with the key word being choices. They are not spending all their time trying to write rules to catch breeders breaking those rules. Nor do you hear the breeders speak about each other in such negative terms or thoughts. Decisions are made by groups of experts in the different fields of science, data collection and breeder members.

Personally I think we need to leave all the time and energy spent on policing concepts behind and get back on track, working for the breeders, giving breeders the help and information they need to make good choices.

Edited December 17, 2010 by shortstep

[Bisart Dobes]

But you are right, I have several generations of clear by parentage and have not profiled all of those dogs.

But they are still with me and it is not a problem to do so, if the lab results can be used. Frankly I can not see how you can do Clear by Parentage with out profiling.

You can do it easily then - just go back and start with the dogs that have test results, profile them and do CBP down the generations.

Sylvia

Impossible if the tested dogs are dead which is the case for many breeders.

You can profile from dna which is on record or from semen stored. So that covers deceased dogs but bitches - well . . .

All you can do is work with the system as it stands and use it to your advantage. I don't see it as something we 'have' to do for the state law or the canine bodies - it is something that we can use to further our breeding program and the health and wellbeing of all of the puppies we produce. Within the Victorian state law we have to test for vWD but there is still the ability within the law to breed two affected dogs together - so what's the point of the law ????? Really there is none.

All of our dogs are DNA vWD tested and profiled at 4 weeks of age.

Our first dam was DNA tested in the US as there were no company's here at that time. So when she had her second litter which was a possible dual sire litter and we went to parentage profile both dogs, her and the litter - her DNA wasn't on record with this company and they wouldn't / won't share records / dna with each other . So we had to have her profiled with this company - no issue but still a pain in the butt that they won't work together.

I have also spoken to company's here about the DNA DCM mutant gene test that is now available in the states - but due to the limited breeds this applies to it is not worth the $$$ the patent would cost. So again we send our dogs tests off to the states . . .