Pedigree Dog Segment On The 7pm Project

[shortstep]

but i still say inbreeding is not the single cause of why pedigree dogs are suffering from genetic problems.

Yes thank you, this is an excellent example of the failed argument that she discuessed here;

This is a rather weak straw-man that uses the some-all fallacy to suggest that if we can name a woe in purebred dogs that isn’t caused or exacerbated by inbreeding that we can discount or ignore all the problems that are. This neither proves nor disproves anything.

Sorry as to the rest of your post, I am off now to town to shop. I also know when my point is missed and when to give up.

But can you answer this, are there any of the 3 types of genetic dwarfs that make up the toy breeds that do not have patella problems? Of is is spread across all of the dwarf breeds?

[Bullbreedlover]

While the British Bulldog standard still has this in it, they deserve to be called to account.

http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=183

The skull should be very large - the larger the better - and in circumference should measure (round in front of the ears) at least the height of the dog at the shoulders. Viewed from the front it should appear very high from the corner of the lower jaw to the apex of the skull, and also very broad and square. The cheeks should be well rounded and extended sideways beyond the eyes. Viewed at the side, the head should appear very high, and very short from its back to the point of the nose.

In the faults section - it says something about faults (ie not being as described by the standard) being weighed up against the health of the dog, but really - I think that dogs that are required to be born by C-section because of their genetic shape - should be excluded from the main (breeding) register. And ones that can't breathe easily when exercised - because of the genetic shape - too.

Mrs RB

How long have you been involved in The British Bulldog breed. What qualifications have you got which enables you to come to the conclusions that you have?

[toy dog]

but i still say inbreeding is not the single cause of why pedigree dogs are suffering from genetic problems.

Yes thank you, this is an excellent example of the failed argument that she discuessed here;

This is a rather weak straw-man that uses the some-all fallacy to suggest that if we can name a woe in purebred dogs that isn’t caused or exacerbated by inbreeding that we can discount or ignore all the problems that are. This neither proves nor disproves anything.

Sorry as to the rest of your post, I am off now to town to shop. I also know when my point is missed and when to give up.

But can you answer this, are there any of the 3 types of genetic dwarfs that make up the toy breeds that do not have patella problems? Of is is spread across all of the dwarf breeds?

sorry but i really have taken offence to calling a toy breed "dwarf breeds" they have just been bred small but this does not mean that their limbs suffer because of being small. they have been in existance for over 2000 years in the same form. it was the americans who named this dog and selectively bred it to what it is today.

what in your opinion is the 3 types of genetic dwarfs??? am i opening up another can of worms

the disease can affect all toy breeds and some that are not classed as toy breeds, like poodles etc. as well. it is wide spread and common problem.

ETA:

Sorry as to the rest of your post, I am off now to town to shop. I also know when my point is missed and when to give up.

i did read the link you put up and thats my conclusion to it all also i make my conclusion based on my experience for over 25 years with pedigree dogs.

i did notice that there was a small statement in there about the molera in chihuahuas being a disease, it is not a disease, it is a feature of the breed and has been for as long as the chihuahua has been in existance in the current form. Not that breeders breed for this it just is there or not there. Most have not got this feature when adult but some end up with it. All mine don't have it. but referring to it as a disease is incorrect.

Edited July 2, 2011 by toy dog

[shortstep]

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2011/05/dwarf-dogs.html

Dwarf Dogs

By Christopher– May 5, 2011

Posted in: dogs, health & genetics, sine qua non disease

There are three common and valued genetic conditions in dogs that result in stunted growth: pituitary (ateliotic) dwarfism which results in proportional minis, micromelic achondroplasia which results in shortened limbs, and brachycephalic achondroplasia which shortens the head.

All of these conditions are genetic disorders and all of them are definitive sine-qua-non features of some breeds, often in combination. These disorders aren’t accidental and unwanted, they are written into the breed standards. The breed wardens don’t want to breed these conditions out, they demand they breed true.

Mix and match your genetic dwarfism disorders.

Most of the toy breeds are ateliotic dwarfs: Chihuahuas, Boston Terriers, Italian Greyhounds, Maltese, Miniature Pinschers, Miniature Spaniels, Pomeranians, Toy Poodles, Yorkies, etc. This form of dwarfism is caused by a deficiency in somatropin which results in stunted growth of all somatic cells in the body. Ateliosis is a recessive allele.

If you’re a self-styled expert with a bad case of illusory superiority who has written more books than he’s read, you might say, “‘Achondroplasia’ literally means ‘an absence of good shape,’” but that’s not what the literal Greek means. “Chondro” is Greek for cartilage and “Plasia” means growth or change from the Greek word for moulding. Thus, the literal meaning of Achondroplasia is “Defective growth of cartilage” and that’s pretty much what it is. In general, it serves as the name for a cluster of similar disorders of the cartilage and bone (osteochondrodysplasias).

The most obvious effects of Achondroplasia occur in the long bones of the leg and “micromelic” means short limbs. Micromelic breeds include: Basset Hounds, Bulldogs, Corgis, Dachshunds, Lhasa Apsos, Scottish Terriers, Shetland Sheepdogs, etc. Micromelic Achondroplasia is a dominant allele with incomplete penetrance.

Another form of Achondroplasia that doesn’t lead to what we commonly consider to be dwarfism but which likewise results in insufficient growth of bone is Brachycephalic Achondroplasia which shortens bones in the skull. In dogs, shortening of the mid-face and maxilla and shortening of the lower jaw are inherited separately. Boxers have a shortened upper jaw, but their lower jaw is normal and they are normal sized in all other respects; whereas Boston Terriers have both upper and lower brachycephalism and are also ateliotic dwarfs, so they are proportional but small with smooshed faces.

Bulldogs have midface and upperjaw brachycephaly so their lower jaw juts out and they have trouble breathing, and they also have micromelic achondroplasia so their legs are short and bowed while their trunk is not significantly

Miniature Dachshunds carry both forms of body dwarfism, but their faces are unaffected.

And what do you get when you combine all three disorders? A Pug.

The most completely achondroplastic dog breeds are the toy imports of East Asia origin (bracycephalic + micromelic achondroplastic + ateliotic): the Pekingese, the Shih Tzu, and the Pug. The body-forms of these triply achondroplastic breeds represent the simultaneous superposition of all three varities of achondroplasia–micromelic, maxillary, and mandibular–on a midget frame. Thus, the Pug’s disproportionately stumpy legs, tending to bow (genu varum), result from micromelic achondroplasia. The Pug’s bulging forehead (frontal bossing); large, staring eyes (exophthalmos); pronounced stop (recessed nasion); and short midface (midface hypoplasia) all reflect maxillary achondroplasia. The Pug’s short lower jaw expresses mandibular achondroplasia. The Pug’s extraordinarily flat face and crowded dentition are accidence of the simultaneous operation of maxillary and mandibular achondroplasia.

- For the Love of Dachshunds, Robert Hutchinson

None of these disorders exist without other health complications like luxating patellas, arthritis, cataracts, and shortened lifespans. But, none of these disorders can be removed from breeds without fundamentally altering the breed itself. The Miniature Dachshund would simply be a Dachshund if you removed the pituitary dwarfism, but most of the other dogs no longer have a perfect corresponding wildtype breed.

For that reason, if the disease is to go, the breed is to go. I won’t count on that happening any time soon, if ever.

Diseased Dwarf Dog images provided courtesy of Cartoonize My Pet.

Edited July 2, 2011 by shortstep

[toy dog]

okay, just one persons opinion of the whole thing, so my dogs not having the disease present and appearing healthy (after being tested and screened thoroughly that is!) means that i am helping to decrease my breed.

whatever.

in my long story above in my own way i was answering the statement that pedigree dogs should be tested.

i'll give a direct answer to that statement. I was putting up an example of how hard it is to implement any health testing scheme relevant to a breed.

we could not do it. there were several people that tried. what do we do across the board implement a national testing of all known diseases to all dog breeds? trying to get all the breeders to agree to this was like getting blood out of a stone, we could not do it even conducting information lectures with state controlling body and the breed club, at the end of the day it was decided to "leave it to individual breeders discretion". so how would you implement wide spread testing of the pedigree dog all of the breeds?

So what are you saying, in one instance you are saying that we should be health testing to breed out diseases and avoid inbreeding on the other hand you are giving me an article that suggests that we should put up with genetic problems and because dogs are small they are prone to them so to test and get rid of problems will get rid of a breed.

so which is it? really not following all your articles obviously you agree with the guy that is writing all this stuff.

we are talking about inbreeding and how what they have portrayed on the media is not the whole story. i think we should keep it simple for the general public to understand not long thesis and essays on for inbreeding against inbreeding.

if we don't keep it simple and positive we will have lost the public completely and they'll continue to think that the bitsa is the only dog that can be completely healthy.

Edited July 2, 2011 by toy dog

[quoll]

Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

Really there are many people in the ANKC and kennel clubs around the world that hold views that they would like to see some modernization and change.

Here are some good links about inbreeding. They attempt to explain inbreeding in a factual way and to answer some the agruments made which attempt promote inbreeding. You will have read many of these arguments before and here they are investigated in more detail.

This one might be good if you are not sure you really want to spend much time reading but want to get a general idea, as it covers some of the most frequent topics you will read about.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2010/11/inbred-mistakes-ii.html

The whole series of 6 Inbreeding Mistakes is found here

Inbreeding Mitakes

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/?s=Inbred+mistakes

hmmm okay.....what the media is saying is that we see many genetic problems/faults because of inbreeding with the pedigree dog. This statement is incorrect.

my point still is, a dog can suffer from a disease, genetic problem by being outcrossed to a bloodline and recessive genes, the dog doesn't have to be pedigree.

to get features in breeds that may not be desirable can be due to selection rather than straight inbreeding.

We have all heard the term kennel blind and it is not a term which has come about lightly, many breeders are so focussed on their next winners that the breed's health and strangely enough even confirmation will suffer. A well carrying eyecatching "showy" dog will do well in the ring, even if it is as far removed from the breed standard as possible.

it doesn't necessarily have to be breeders who are only breeding for the showring. I've seen it in breeders who are only concerned with their hip pockets. It can affect any breeder not only show breeders.

The other side of the coin is that many of the litters produced for that elusive winner end up in pet homes. The question here is : Is it fair to inflict a dog with many health or even one health problem unto a family, who will bond with that gorgeous puppy, and than see it over come with health issues. Where is the fairness there, for the dog or the family.

an ethical breeder strives to breed a healthy litter, by doing tests and using healthy examples, researching a bloodline viewing as many of that bloodline as possible to ascertain if there are any genetic problems that will be passed onto the produced pups. however, some genes being recessive doesn't rule out that we get that odd one that might be slightly affected with a genetic problem. All you can do as a breeder is inform the buyer of these problems, get the dog desexed so it does not get used in the gene pool. what else can you do? all dogs no matter what their breeding is has potential to be affected with a genetic problem whether we know the bloodline or it is not known (cross breed bitsas).

just my thoughts.

it just continually gets up my nose how these people are reporting on genetic problems when they are not reporting on the full story of what is actually going on here.

I totally agree with you, a responsible breeder tries will try to reduce the risk factor, and informing the buyers be it pet or other breeders is a very good place to start. If everyone followed this path there would be less problems.

[shortstep]

okay, just one persons opinion of the whole thing, so my dogs not having the disease present and appearing healthy (after being tested and screened thoroughly that is!) means that i am helping to decrease my breed.

whatever.

in my long story above in my own way i was answering the statement that pedigree dogs should be tested.

i'll give a direct answer to that statement. I was putting up an example of how hard it is to implement any health testing scheme relevant to a breed.

we could not do it. there were several people that tried. what do we do across the board implement a national testing of all known diseases to all dog breeds? trying to get all the breeders to agree to this was like getting blood out of a stone, we could not do it even conducting information lectures with state controlling body and the breed club, at the end of the day it was decided to "leave it to individual breeders discretion". so how would you implement wide spread testing of the pedigree dog all of the breeds?

So what are you saying, in one instance you are saying that we should be health testing to breed out diseases and avoid inbreeding on the other hand you are giving me an article that suggests that we should put up with genetic problems and because dogs are small they are prone to them so to test and get rid of problems will get rid of a breed.

so which is it? really not following all your articles obviously you agree with the guy that is writing all this stuff.

we are talking about inbreeding and how what they have portrayed on the media is not the whole story. i think we should keep it simple for the general public to understand not long thesis and essays on for inbreeding against inbreeding.

if we don't keep it simple and positive we will have lost the public completely and they'll continue to think that the bitsa is the only dog that can be completely healthy.

This is as simple as I can say it.

Health testing is great and I never said, nor implied, not to do it.

But health testing is like trying to close the barn door after the horse is out. The goal should be to breed dogs in such a way that inherited diseases do not become common in our breeds.

The kennel club breeding system, from it's very starting point of the meaning of purebred which means all dogs in any breed must be, all related to each other usually from a very small founder population, no new genetics brought in, constant use of inbreeding (there is no choice even if you do not want to inbreed), closed stud books and popular sire (and you can link this to showing if you like) effect. All need major review and updating how we do things.

Edited July 2, 2011 by shortstep

[Gayle.]

I get what shortstep is saying.............the pedigree dog world should never have gotten to the point where mandatory health testing should be necessary at all. But it's there now and it's time to try and undo some of it.

[mita]

My breed of interest ( as a pet owner) has an International Working Party on health. Where data is collected & freely shared that will help breeding decisions which have equal concern for health outcomes.

'Worldwide Kennels' leads to the listing of registered breeders in a number of countries that are signed on ( you'll see Australian flags well represented among them). And each country has a designated representative on the Working Party to monitor & report on any health issues.

http://www.tibbies.net/itswp/

All this trickles down even to an individual pet owner level. As the health network states, it's aimed for owners & breeders. When my girl had a mysterious series of bowel upsets, I got great advice from breeders from Canada, USA and here in Australia. Turned out to be a food intolerance....which they suggested, given all the information. And were proven right. The dietary advice has also proven to be spot on. No more bowel upsets....& an unexpected big boost to coat health (a fact, pointed out by the groomer).

No wonder I have huge respect for the good registered breeders.

By the way, this international cooperation allows for widening of gene pool, too. My girl has 'flags' of several countries (& hence various bloodlines) in her pedigree.

Edited July 2, 2011 by mita

[shortstep]

By the way, this international cooperation allows for widening of gene pool, too.

So what is the COI for 10 gen in Australia and what is the COI of your dog/s?

[toy dog]

I get what shortstep is saying.............the pedigree dog world should never have gotten to the point where mandatory health testing should be necessary at all. But it's there now and it's time to try and undo some of it.

im looking at my own breed and how its gotten there is by "some" not being honest, denying (got that alot from many breeders who felt toy breeds don't have a problem at all) then breeding with dogs affected, not really looking at the big picture how it will affect the whole breed not just their gene pool, the only way you find out about their dishonesty (PL) is breed the dog you bought.

how do we undo it?

Edited July 2, 2011 by toy dog

[puglvr]

And what do you get when you combine all three disorders? A Pug.

And does this mean that all 13 of my pugs are unhealthy, crippled and disease ridden?

Well I suppose to some people yes. But these people would be those that have never met them or who don't have a real understanding of the breed and the breed standard. For example We don't breed for "bulging eyes and bowed legs"

Eyes

Dark, relatively large, round in shape, soft and solicitous in expression, very lustrous, and when excited, full of fire. Never protruding, exaggerated or showing white when looking straight ahead. Free from obvious eye problems.

Forequarters

Legs very strong, straight, of moderate length, and well under body. Shoulders well sloped.

And considering the Pug is one of the oldest breeds known, how is it that it has survived for so long? Could it be possible that breeders may be breeding for healthier dogs? NO!!! that would never happen.

By the way - Ever heard of a person/child being mauled to death or even attacked by a Pug?

Point being I breed Pugs, and yes I was well aware that Pugs are a product of "Dwarf genes" and I am also very aware of potential health problems in the breed.

I don't appreciate the Pug being held up as an example everytime there is a debate about health in the pure bred dog world. Believe it or not there are breeds out there with bigger problems than pugs.

[Bullbreedlover]

I don't appreciate the Pug being held up as an example everytime there is a debate about health in the pure bred dog world. Believe it or not there are breeds out there with bigger problems than pugs.

Its not always the pug puglvr.

The British Bulldog has been given the bash for many years now. And there are actually healthy Bulldogs out there,and they have been out there for many many years, although everyone only wants to talk about the unhealthy ones.

[Guest Ams]

Shar Pei are now in the spotlight and sadly for good reason. The gene that causes their wrinkles has now been proved to be linked to Shar Pei fever and amyloidosis. http://www.drjwv.com/article.php?view=0018.php&name=The+Answer+Continured

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Bullbreedlover

Mrs RB

How long have you been involved in The British Bulldog breed. What qualifications have you got which enables you to come to the conclusions that you have?

Not involved currently.

But I can read what is on the ANKC site for breed standard.

Are you trying to tell me that this standard is wrong? As far as I know - the show dogs which are supposed to be the best for breeding - are judged to this standard. And it's this standard that is encouraging selection to unhealthy extremes.

I also have a science degree. So I'm quite good at logical arguments and taking things to literal extremes.

since I assume you are an expert in bulldogs

How many champion bulldogs are not from c-section or breed puppies requiring c-section to be born?

How many champion bulldogs have trouble breathing when they get a bit excited or run a lap around a standard football oval (or maybe just the length of a tennis court).

Why is the breed standard still as I quoted?

I don't see how I need any qualifications beyond primary school reading to come to the conclusion that is clearly outlined by the breed standard.

Happy to learn your point of view.

[suziwong66]

ETA: Thursday also coincides with the day Dr Chris Brown is always on the show, I am sure he will provide some wonderful insights

No insights... just eye candy... *grin*

T.

Hell yeh !!! ;)

What!? No way, The Bionic Vet is superior in every way to Roger Ramvet ! If there was a poll on this you would see how little 'eye candy man' would rate. Sorry to be harsh, but somebody has to snap you both back to reality :D

"Roger Ramvet" !!!!! best quote EVER and yes the bionic vet is way superior ;)

[Bullbreedlover]

While the British Bulldog standard still has this in it, they deserve to be called to account.

http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=183

The skull should be very large - the larger the better - and in circumference should measure (round in front of the ears) at least the height of the dog at the shoulders. Viewed from the front it should appear very high from the corner of the lower jaw to the apex of the skull, and also very broad and square. The cheeks should be well rounded and extended sideways beyond the eyes. Viewed at the side, the head should appear very high, and very short from its back to the point of the nose.

In the faults section - it says something about faults (ie not being as described by the standard) being weighed up against the health of the dog, but really - I think that dogs that are required to be born by C-section because of their genetic shape - should be excluded from the main (breeding) register. And ones that can't breathe easily when exercised - because of the genetic shape - too.

Bullbreedlover

Mrs RB

How long have you been involved in The British Bulldog breed. What qualifications have you got which enables you to come to the conclusions that you have?

Not involved currently.

But I can read what is on the ANKC site for breed standard.

Are you trying to tell me that this standard is wrong? As far as I know - the show dogs which are supposed to be the best for breeding - are judged to this standard. And it's this standard that is encouraging selection to unhealthy extremes.

I also have a science degree. So I'm quite good at logical arguments and taking things to literal extremes.

since I assume you are an expert in bulldogs

How many champion bulldogs are not from c-section or breed puppies requiring c-section to be born?

How many champion bulldogs have trouble breathing when they get a bit excited or run a lap around a standard football oval (or maybe just the length of a tennis court).

Why is the breed standard still as I quoted?

I don't see how I need any qualifications beyond primary school reading to come to the conclusion that is clearly outlined by the breed standard.

Happy to learn your point of view.

Ahh so you are not involved currently. Have you ever been involved?

Oh I am certainly no expert on the breed Mrs RB. There are alot more qualified people out there than me.

What I do take exception to are people like yourself spouting off about the extremes that Bulldogs are bred to when clearly you know little about the breed even in general. Yet you quote parts of the standard, tell us that we should be held accountable, but in fact, you dont know anything about the breed.

I am not even going to answer your questions because while you have your science degree and primary school reading qualifications, I can tell that in order to educate you more about this beautiful breed, the attitude you have towards the fact that you deem them unhealthy, speaks volumes that no matter what I say, you will disagree.

In understanding why the Bulldog is the way it is, there is alot of research available out there for you to read.

The owners of many breeds are these days are electing to have their puppies born by caesar. Many bitches these days are being AI'd instead of natural matings. Is all this wrong?

You quoted a peice in the Bulldog standard without even knowing all the facts. May I suggest you find reputable Bulldog breeders in your area to ask them so you can be better informed. Why should I seemingly waste my time educating you.

[bryan_mannix]

While the British Bulldog standard still has this in it, they deserve to be called to account.

http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=183

The skull should be very large - the larger the better - and in circumference should measure (round in front of the ears) at least the height of the dog at the shoulders. Viewed from the front it should appear very high from the corner of the lower jaw to the apex of the skull, and also very broad and square. The cheeks should be well rounded and extended sideways beyond the eyes. Viewed at the side, the head should appear very high, and very short from its back to the point of the nose.

In the faults section - it says something about faults (ie not being as described by the standard) being weighed up against the health of the dog, but really - I think that dogs that are required to be born by C-section because of their genetic shape - should be excluded from the main (breeding) register. And ones that can't breathe easily when exercised - because of the genetic shape - too.

Bullbreedlover

Mrs RB

How long have you been involved in The British Bulldog breed. What qualifications have you got which enables you to come to the conclusions that you have?

Not involved currently.

But I can read what is on the ANKC site for breed standard.

Are you trying to tell me that this standard is wrong? As far as I know - the show dogs which are supposed to be the best for breeding - are judged to this standard. And it's this standard that is encouraging selection to unhealthy extremes.

I also have a science degree. So I'm quite good at logical arguments and taking things to literal extremes.

since I assume you are an expert in bulldogs

How many champion bulldogs are not from c-section or breed puppies requiring c-section to be born?

How many champion bulldogs have trouble breathing when they get a bit excited or run a lap around a standard football oval (or maybe just the length of a tennis court).

Why is the breed standard still as I quoted?

I don't see how I need any qualifications beyond primary school reading to come to the conclusion that is clearly outlined by the breed standard.

Happy to learn your point of view.

Ahh so you are not involved currently. Have you ever been involved?

Oh I am certainly no expert on the breed Mrs RB. There are alot more qualified people out there than me.

What I do take exception to are people like yourself spouting off about the extremes that Bulldogs are bred to when clearly you know little about the breed even in general. Yet you quote parts of the standard, tell us that we should be held accountable, but in fact, you dont know anything about the breed.

I am not even going to answer your questions because while you have your science degree and primary school reading qualifications, I can tell that in order to educate you more about this beautiful breed, the attitude you have towards the fact that you deem them unhealthy, speaks volumes that no matter what I say, you will disagree.

In understanding why the Bulldog is the way it is, there is alot of research available out there for you to read.

The owners of many breeds are these days are electing to have their puppies born by caesar. Many bitches these days are being AI'd instead of natural matings. Is all this wrong?

You quoted a peice in the Bulldog standard without even knowing all the facts. May I suggest you find reputable Bulldog breeders in your area to ask them so you can be better informed. Why should I seemingly waste my time educating you.

What a frustrating response. It just seems to be attacking the "man" rather than playing the ball. Why not explain? Can you put up some of the links to the research. I'd love to have a read. As to C sections and AI.. an article from over 20 years ago that deals with it.......... Eugenics or Dysgenics.... I suspect there must be others.

[toy dog]

[What a frustrating response. It just seems to be attacking the "man" rather than playing the ball. Why not explain? Can you put up some of the links to the research. I'd love to have a read. As to C sections and AI.. an article from over 20 years ago that deals with it.......... Eugenics or Dysgenics.... I suspect there must be others.

I can't really disagree with that article. Brings me back to a breeder who forced her two dogs to mate by putting them in a brace, all i heard was the poor bitch screaming. The litter of 3 little pups were prematurely born with no hair and one by one despite the breeder staying up all night with them they died. i took it as not meant to be, forcing nature. we've always had a rule, a bitch who has a C-S gets desexed. Not always does a bitch have a C--S though due to her confirmation not being right, there might be a complication. There are many of us that like to only keep the free-whelping bitches and any bitches that can't are desexed.

We all have healthy examples of our own breeds, but what is being portrayed on TV is only unhealthy examples to bring down the pedigree dogs and if we say we have got healthy examples we are either lying or talking out of our behind. They said they are unhealthy because of inbreeding. Then they are saying in the same sentence about selection and what pedigree breeders are selecting are unhealthy examples which is also incorrect. grossly incorrect.

i've always had a motto and i know of a heck of alot of other breeders who have the same motto too, if you cant have a free-whelping bloodline to produce sound its not worth having them at all.

[shortstep]

Shar Pei are now in the spotlight and sadly for good reason. The gene that causes their wrinkles has now been proved to be linked to Shar Pei fever and amyloidosis. http://www.drjwv.com/article.php?view=0018.php&name=The+Answer+Continured

Yes a very good example of how inbreeding gets us in trouble and also touches on breeding for extremes.

The thickened and wrinkled skin is actually caused by a mutated gene. So we decide to define a breed by this genetic defect. So we inbreed on this defective gene and spread it thoughout the breed. Then a few wrinkles are not enough so we inbreed for heaps of wrinkles. This causes all sorts of other problems like photos all over the web of puppies with their eye lids stitched up to prevent them from going blind.

Note sitch above eye on left, this keep the skin out of the eye preventing blindness.

Not to mention all the stories on dogs that need face lifts so they can lead a normal life.

So we carry on, keep inbreeding on the defective wrinkle gene and suddenly a new disease is seen. Soon it is known that the same defective gene that causes the wrinkles is the same defective gene that is causing the new disease.

There is no thought being given to breeding out the defective gene. That is not the answer as what would the SP be if not a dog with skin hanging off it's body in folds with big thick lips.

Instead we look for a way to control the new disease and if lucky we will have a test that ethical breeders can use to help control the disease caused by the defective wrinkle gene.

Some Australian coverage.

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/4151/how-shar-pei-dogs-got-their-wrinkle

How Shar-Pei dogs got their wrinkles

Friday, 18 March 2011

by Bridget Murphy

Cosmos Online

An international investigation has uncovered the genetics of the Shar-Pei dog's characteristic wrinkled skin, connecting this mutation to a periodic fever disorder which could have important implications for human health.

SYDNEY: A genetic mutation that causes wrinkled skin in Shar-Pei dogs may also be responsible for familial Shar-Pei fever, an inflammatory disease that plagues the breed, according to an international investigation.

Scientists are now working on designing a genetic screening test, which will help people to breed Shar-Pei dogs with a reduced risk of the disease. The research will also aid investigations of the genetic causes of periodic fever syndromes in humans, which lead to uncontrolled inflammation throughout the body.

“Our findings will assist the canine community and provide clues about the mechanisms of human inflammatory disorders,” said Jennifer Meadows, a geneticist at Uppsala University in Sweden and co-author of the journal article published in PLoS Genetics.

Familial Shar-Pei fever

Shar-Pei dogs, known for their thick wrinkly skin, exhibit a high prevalence of familial Shar-Pei fever (FSF), a congenital autoinflammatory disease causing fever and swelling of the dog’s ankle joints (hocks).

Chronic inflammation from FSF can lead to organ failure and premature death for Shar-Pei dogs.

The wrinkly skin of the Shar-Pei contains an excess of a disaccharide polymer called hyaluronan, most likely due to over-activation of a gene called hyaluronan synthase 2 (HAS2). If hyaluronan becomes fragmented, it can stimulate an immune reaction in the body and cause inflammation and fever.

Same mutation causes wrinkles and fever

The researchers compared the genomes of more than 100 Shar-Pei with genomes of other dog breeds. At the same time, genomes of healthy Shar-Pei dogs were compared with genomes of Shar-Pei suffering from FSF.

Both genome comparisons pointed to the same segment of DNA, close to the HAS2 gene, that had been duplicated in error. In some cases the segment had been duplicated multiple times, increasing the risk of FSF for these dogs while also causing the wrinkled skin.

The association of HAS2 dysregulation and autoinflammation is also of wide interest since the genetic cause of approximately 60% of human periodic fever syndrome cases remains unexplained.

"The finding that hyaluronan is a major trigger of fever opens a new research field in canine and human inflammatory disease," said senior author Kerstin Lindblad-Toh, a professor in comparative genomics at Uppsala University.

Side effects of selective breeding

This type of genetic control, where one gene can control multiple traits, is called pleiotropy. Understanding pleiotropy in domestic animals is particularly important, since selective breeding for a specific trait can inadvertently increase the frequency of other sometimes undesirable characteristics in the breed.

Meadows and her co-authors are in the process of developing a test for the mutation, although it has not been determined when the test will be available for commercial use.

“Our hope is that a genetic test may help breeders to reduce the prevalence of risk alleles in the Shar-Pei breeding population,” said Meadows.

Improving dog health and welfare

Claire Wade, a professor of animal genetics at the University of Sydney, said that genomic studies are helping to improve the health and welfare of all dogs, not just those of specific breeds.

The Australian National Kennel Council has promised to adjust breeding standards to improve animal welfare if scientific evidence suggests a link between a disorder and a characteristic that is standard for the breed. The Shar Pei breed standard was recently adjusted in 2009 to discourage breeding dogs with heavy wrinkling.

“There is a strong commitment by the pedigree dog community to breed healthier dogs. Dog breeders are very good at applying tests relevant to their breeds as they become available,” said Wade.

Edited July 3, 2011 by shortstep