Bullmastiff Hip Scores

[Swanbrook]

I am after the Australian national average hip and elbow score levels for 2011. For Bullmastiffs please.The level they say is for the use of breeders to guide their breeding practises.

[Bullbreedlover]

Well, it will all depend on how many dogs and bitches get scored for 2011. We are only just in April so they wont have an average available.

Breeding practices vary from breeder to breeder.

NZ publishes average scores

For 2010 the reults were

Bullmastiff 190 scored

Average 20.8

Elbows

Bullmastiff 110 scored

24 accredited

51 were grade 1

27 were grade 2

8 were grade 3

Edited April 10, 2011 by stonebridge

[shortstep]

AVA current report

2000-2010 230 dogs scored,

average score 18.4

lowest score 2

highest score 77

OFA Hips

5243 total dogs scored

3.9% excellent hips

24.5% affected hips

OFA Elbows

2054 total dogs scored

85.6% normal

14.1% affected

[Bullbreedlover]

AVA current report

2000-2010 230 dogs scored,

average score 18.4

lowest score 2

highest score 77

In ten/eleven years there were only 230 Bullmastiffs hip scored in Aus?????

Edited April 11, 2011 by stonebridge

[shortstep]

In ten/eleven years there were only 230 Bullmastiffs hip scored in Aus?????

That is what it said. I just copied it.

I am sure lots more dogs were xrayed, but the films were not sent in to be scored.

This is why averages or any of these rating systems are not really accurte for assessing the breed.

Most experts think you can double the number of affected dogs and still might be less than the real number.

[Bullbreedlover]

In ten/eleven years there were only 230 Bullmastiffs hip scored in Aus?????

That is what it said. I just copied it.

I am sure lots more dogs were xrayed, but the films were not sent in to be scored.

This is why averages or any of these rating systems are not really accurte for assessing the breed.

Most experts think you can double the number of affected dogs and still might be less than the real number.

I know there would of been lots more xrayed.

Its not that they wouldnt of been scored. It is that they would not of had the results published to the vet assoc

[Staranais]

Here, scores from all x-rays that are scored (as opposed to a vet just having a look at them) are automatically included in the NZVA database. I'd be surprised if aussie is different?

[Bullbreedlover]

Here, scores from all x-rays that are scored (as opposed to a vet just having a look at them) are automatically included in the NZVA database. I'd be surprised if aussie is different?

© I give permission for the results of the examination to be used at a future date for the purposes of statistical research which will be published and for use by the ANKC on the internet. Yes q No q

It is optional here in Aus

[Staranais]

Here, scores from all x-rays that are scored (as opposed to a vet just having a look at them) are automatically included in the NZVA database. I'd be surprised if aussie is different?

© I give permission for the results of the examination to be used at a future date for the purposes of statistical research which will be published and for use by the ANKC on the internet. Yes q No q

It is optional here in Aus

Oh, strange. I wonder why someone would tick "no", if it's anonymous (it is, right?)

[Bullbreedlover]

Here, scores from all x-rays that are scored (as opposed to a vet just having a look at them) are automatically included in the NZVA database. I'd be surprised if aussie is different?

© I give permission for the results of the examination to be used at a future date for the purposes of statistical research which will be published and for use by the ANKC on the internet. Yes q No q

It is optional here in Aus

Oh, strange. I wonder why someone would tick "no", if it's anonymous (it is, right?)

Well

the statistical information is anonymous(or it is suppose to be) but all the details of the dog are on the form submitted.

I guess it comes down to individual choice and whether or not you WANT your dogs score to be part of the national database.

Some do. some dont.

[shortstep]

Here, scores from all x-rays that are scored (as opposed to a vet just having a look at them) are automatically included in the NZVA database. I'd be surprised if aussie is different?

© I give permission for the results of the examination to be used at a future date for the purposes of statistical research which will be published and for use by the ANKC on the internet. Yes q No q

It is optional here in Aus

Oh, strange. I wonder why someone would tick "no", if it's anonymous (it is, right?)

Well

the statistical information is anonymous(or it is suppose to be) but all the details of the dog are on the form submitted.

I guess it comes down to individual choice and whether or not you WANT your dogs score to be part of the national database.

Some do. some dont.

I like the way OFA does it. (hope this is still current)

All results are anonymose and are used for stats but there is never any indication of who the dogs are on this, I do not think the dog information is stored in any way for this part. Just the score and breed.

However there is a section which offers you three choices for an online databank.

Your dog and scores are kept confidential and never listed on the site.

Your dogs score will be listed if it is in the normal range and not lilsted if it is abnormal.

Your dogs scores will be listed no matter what the score.

You pick what suits. On this data bank and you can serch by dogs name, prefixes, breeder, by scores, and so on. Really very helpful for reserching pedigrees. You can also pull up a lateral pedigree on any dog. This will show all siblings and half siblings scores for 3-5 generations. Really a great tool.

Back to the AVA and use of dogs information for ANKC or research, it does not say it is anonymose. The first thing that came to my mind was EBV databanks at the Uni. I would (and did not) want to give that right of my dogs private information over to ANKC and the Uni with no input or control over what they do with it, so I would always mark that box no. I am going to guess that the numbers quoated on the breed average is made from all the dogs scored and no information about the dog is part of this stat, and this is not what they are talking about in that permission question.

But a very good question to call and ask them.

Edited April 11, 2011 by shortstep

[espinay2]

In ten/eleven years there were only 230 Bullmastiffs hip scored in Aus?????

By AVA. There may be others scored that are not showing in the stats. For example the same AVA stats show 3 Pyreneans as being scored in that whole period. There are definitely more than that that have been done in that period that I know even just personally (10 at least without sitting to add them up). They were done directly by Wyburn though and not through AVA.

[Bullbreedlover]

In ten/eleven years there were only 230 Bullmastiffs hip scored in Aus?????

By AVA. There may be others scored that are not showing in the stats. For example the same AVA stats show 3 Pyreneans as being scored in that whole period. There are definitely more than that that have been done in that period that I know even just personally (10 at least without sitting to add them up). They were done directly by Wyburn though and not through AVA.

oh

of course.

not everyone goes through AVA.

so therefore the results do not reflect a true and accurate score nation wide(looking at it in the bigger picture)

[Aidan3]

Average scores shouldn't really be used to guide breeding practices. Nor, as can be seen from this thread, would they be a good representative of the population.

[shortstep]

Average scores shouldn't really be used to guide breeding practices. Nor, as can be seen from this thread, would they be a good representative of the population.

Agree, besides I do not think there is any proof that using 2 dogs that add up and divide by 2 to be less than the breeds average as a breeding plan does anything to improve scores in that litter or over time in the breed either.

The only xray screening method to have dramatic results of improvment on scores across the breed is to remove all affected dogs, (dogs with hips in the OFA range of Poor onwards) you will then see a dramatic improvement in the rate of unaffected pups in litters and across the breed (of screened parent litters). In some breeds this is just not possible as such a high rate of the population is affected. In other populations there is continuted breeding of unscored dogs, which is allowing affected dogs to remain in the gene pool.

The next proven method to imporve hips is diet and controlled exercise. This does not change the genetics, but it can reduce the severity of symptoms enough to mask the milder cases of HD. Even though these dogs will xray as normal they will still carry the genetic risk of affected dogs forward to their offspring. I personally recommend that breeders encourage their buyers to practice tight control of diet and exercise the first year to give their pups the best chance of normal hips, however with their own potential breeding stock I do not recomened deliberat efforts to mask HD.

Cornell about 2 years ago found some genes for HD risk traits, this was a breakthrough and opened a very important new door. I posted yesterday about the study on Labs to isolate some of this breed's risk traits and develope a test for breeders. This is very important and I suggest reading up on it, as it is going to soon be available for some breeds. This test for labs will reveal the dogs personal risk levels for developing HD. These will not be the same as a DNA test for a disease, rather they will help to expose certain traits that have been shown to increase risk. These test will be able to used on pups as a screening method, both to help protect buyers and to help select potential future breeding dogs (and in some breed prevent the accidental removal of the few dogs that have less risk, another words you can do some primary selection to retain the best hip genetics in your line).

http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=218456

Then there is a more straight forward method of selction to reduced risk fators. Large bone and size, rapid growth, early maturity, dwarf traits, short deformed legs, and so on should be avoided in breeding programs. Dogs with the above traits have higher risk of HD and breeders should either not select these traits or if they are breed wide traits should select towards the less extreme examples of thee traits, examples would be; choose dwarf dogs with a little bit longer legs, select dogs with less bone, size and weight and so on.

With the 4 methods above put into place with in a breed, I believe that HD can be controlled and continued improvement could be made in most breeds.

Edited April 11, 2011 by shortstep

[ravensmyst00]

The average bullmastiff hipscore from what I have been told by several well known and recognised breeders here in Australia is 23.

This is only an average based on dogs that have been scored and does not reflect the entire bullmastiff population. This average and and should be used as a guide for your breeding program. To say the average scores for a breed should not be used as a guideline is asking for trouble. If you have a high scoring bitch you will want to use a low scoring dog and visa versa. Personally I wouldnt be putting 2 high scoring dogs together.

[Aidan3]

To say the average scores for a breed should not be used as a guideline is asking for trouble. If you have a high scoring bitch you will want to use a low scoring dog and visa versa. Personally I wouldnt be putting 2 high scoring dogs together.

How do you relate that information to the average? And why is the average a good descriptive statistic for these purposes?

[shortstep]

The average bullmastiff hipscore from what I have been told by several well known and recognised breeders here in Australia is 23.

This is only an average based on dogs that have been scored and does not reflect the entire bullmastiff population. This average and and should be used as a guide for your breeding program. To say the average scores for a breed should not be used as a guideline is asking for trouble. If you have a high scoring bitch you will want to use a low scoring dog and visa versa. Personally I wouldnt be putting 2 high scoring dogs together.

With a average score of 23 which is considered Borderline HD (19-25) and 25% of screened dogs affected with HD, no one would suggest that HD should not be paramount in the mind of all breeders and all buyers of this breed.

However in my opinion, to believe that averaging scores is going to improve the chance of a litter not haveing 1 in 4 affected pups or will help to improve the breeds future by decreasing HD, is an over simplification at best.

In my opinion, any breed with numbers like this, should have a panel of experts in genetics, population genetics, a specialist on HD genetics and risk factors, breed expert, and so on. All the records collected from Australia as well as around the world, including all HD records and population numbers including COI's. Then ask them to develop a plan to address HD in the breed. A sort of EBV system for HD reduction would likely be designed for this breed.

I am very sure their solutions will include several methods of screening and selection. Including selection using assessment of risk factors such as body size and weight, growth rate, early maturing and so forth. Screening programs to capture more information about dog in question, including lateral pedigrees for siblings and other close relatives. Likely mandatory hip screening on all parents of registered litters ( and I think any dog with a score over 12 should have to be final scored after 2 years of age to look for further changes). A final selection guideline (which I very much question would be to use breed average as the method of selection). Also needed would be methods for the breed club to capture all the above information and have that information in usable format for breeders and buyers. Lots of education on how to use this information. Finally a review process every few years to see if progress is being made by the reduction of the number of affected dogs in litters. Some other methods might also be advised if improvement was not seen. I am sure there is much more I have left out.

So I am not suggesting that anyone abandone breed averaging so they can breed two high scoring dogs together, far from it.

I am suggesting that depending on breed average as the selection process to improve the future of hips in this breed is not near enough.

Just my opinion based, on the numbers presented.

Edited April 12, 2011 by shortstep

[Bullbreedlover]

The average bullmastiff hipscore from what I have been told by several well known and recognised breeders here in Australia is 23.

This is only an average based on dogs that have been scored and does not reflect the entire bullmastiff population. This average and and should be used as a guide for your breeding program. To say the average scores for a breed should not be used as a guideline is asking for trouble. If you have a high scoring bitch you will want to use a low scoring dog and visa versa. Personally I wouldnt be putting 2 high scoring dogs together.

With a average score of 23 which is considered Borderline HD (19-25) and 25% of screened dogs affected with HD, no one would suggest that HD should not be paramount in the mind of all breeders and all buyers of this breed.

However in my opinion, to believe that averaging scores is going to improve the chance of a litter not haveing 1 in 4 affected pups or will help to improve the breeds future by decreasing HD, is an over simplification at best.

In my opinion, any breed with numbers like this, should have a panel of experts in genetics, population genetics, a specialist on HD genetics and risk factors, breed expert, and so on. All the records collected from Australia as well as around the world, including all HD records and population numbers including COI's. Then ask them to develop a plan to address HD in the breed. A sort of EBV system for HD reduction would likely be designed for this breed.

I am very sure their solutions will include several methods of screening and selection. Including selection using assessment of risk factors such as body size and weight, growth rate, early maturing and so forth. Screening programs to capture more information about dog in question, including lateral pedigrees for siblings and other close relatives. Likely mandatory hip screening on all parents of registered litters ( and I think any dog with a score over 12 should have to be final scored after 2 years of age to look for further changes). A final selection guideline (which I very much question would be to use breed average as the method of selection). Also needed would be methods for the breed club to capture all the above information and have that information in usable format for breeders and buyers. Lots of education on how to use this information. Finally a review process every few years to see if progress is being made by the reduction of the number of affected dogs in litters. Some other methods might also be advised if improvement was not seen. I am sure there is much more I have left out.

So I am not suggesting that anyone abandone breed averaging so they can breed two high scoring dogs together, far from it.

I am suggesting that depending on breed average as the selection process to improve the future of hips in this breed is not near enough.

Just my opinion based, on the numbers presented.

email all the Bullmastiff breeders you can in Aus and NZ, Shortstep with your views. See what kind of response you get.

[shortstep]

email all the Bullmastiff breeders you can in Aus and NZ, Shortstep with your views. See what kind of response you get.

I have no need to do that.

Seems clear, if they want to do these things they will be doing them and I am sure many are.

In todays world, we are often 'all' judged by the action of a few others, with the threat that we are all at risk of loosing our decision making ability.

So what was not my concern a few years ago is now every bodies worry and concern.

With that in mind, 24% affected and average score of 23 needs to be addressed with the most modern methods available, it is still my opinion.

Like I said above, I am sure most breeders are doing that.