Pedigree Dog Segment On The 7pm Project

[shortstep]

Unless you are prepared to do a full DNA profile before every mating you won't know the exact outcome of a mating for every one of those millions of genes. I give up, you are closed minded on the issue and are armed with internet articles without the knowledge of how to understand them. To think I used to defend you.

Even if you do a full DNA, we have no idea what most of the genes do, so all you would know is you accidently threw out a 3000 genes in one breeding and that you have no idea what any of them did excpet that gene for coat colour you were working on. We kid ourselves.

[shortstep]

Now there's a statement by a person of credibility that needs to be picked up and run with.

I do not think anyone denies that, I certainly do not. I believe ANKC breeders care greatly and want to breed healthy dogs.

However being committed to health and good at applying test to diseases, is not the same as addressing the underlying issue of why so many diseases have become so common in our breeds that is necessary to develope all these tests in the first place.

Again, it is closing the barn door after the horse is long gone.

If the above breed had not been bred to fix the wrinkle gene across the population and then inbreed every generation on that defective gene, it would not have the fever disease in the first place.

But if it had been in bred to set something good? The problem its what you select for when you in breed.

Inbreeding never adds genes, it only removes genes. If you want to add a 'good ' gene that is not already in the breed, you cannot do that by inbreeding, you canonly do that by outcrossing. You can however breed out that 'good' gene accidently and without knowing it, only to find out when things go pare shaped.

There are many breeders that do not intentionally inbreed, but breed like to like traits (and not closely related dogs to find those traits) and they find this just as effective for their needs. However the ones I know of are working breeders not show breeders. But it might be worth a look see for any who are looking for other options.

I really do have to go.

[Marion 01]

Hey I don't mean to start world war 3, but, another fact of life would be if the intended breeding selection, sire, dam, progeny, were not true to their paperwork (pedigree) it does/has happened, is happening. So where does that leave things???

[Steve]

Did I hear the right when they said that RSPCA was making moves to have Inbreeding banned? If this is the case, what is being done to counteract that? They managed to steam roller tail docking, what's going to stop them from this little vendetta?

Well all dogs in the kennel club are inbred.

And every breeding of kennel club dogs is doing inbreeding.

By definition pedigree dogs are inbred animals.

However if they made a law that limited the amount of inbreeding to what is considered safe in humans, I would support that across all breeds.

I think that would be a good step in the right direction and would prefer that the ANKC made the change without the RSPCA having to make it a big pulbic welfare issue and a law.

Why would you want to advocate in breeding to be limited to what is considered safe in humans - and who will judge what is safe in humans? We dont have anywhere near the information for breeding in humans we do for breeding in dogs. I have 6 generations of one breed in my yard and I can tell you everything you could ask about them and their health and potential issues which may show up - how many humans have that sort of health info for their human relatives ? We practice selective breeding and we have at our fingertiops pedigree knowledge and genetic testing and scoring which we can use to make our decisions - we are talking about selectively breeding purebred dogs not randomly breeding humans!

The problem with purebred dogs is that some breeders have been slecting primarily for the way the dog looks - the show ring and you can skirt around it all you like but that has nothing to do with in breeding and everything to do with slection.

If you take away the ability for us to in breed all you will get is less predictibility on what diseases might show up and less chance of testing - if you still have such emphasis on how the dog looks and rates in a show ring.

I do not think so, I think you can have a breed and with some frequecy outcrossing and not loose your breed.

But look if people are happy to take it to the wire withthe governments and the animal welfare groups then go for it. I think you will loose and I think the UK kennel club making all these changes is a direct reaction to the notion that this topic is no longer a dicsussion, it is now a matter of changing or not having kennel clubs at all.

I also think that even if the kennel clubs are shut down, even if they ban many of the more extreme breeds, that there is still time then to reorganize and try some different ways to breed dogs.

I really do have to leave now for a Dr appointment.

Yes of course but that needs to be done with knowledge and science as much as any other breeding does and advocating for in breeding to be made a crimminal offence isnt the answer to finding what will and wont work with any other breeding program.

We need to educate breeders to select differently with science not just to run with people who want to choose a supposed cause and bleat about it with out the research to back it up.

[Steve]

Hense why some breeds have such high rates of HD or ED, we know these are not simple recessive diseases, they are complex diseases, but they are still atleast in part inherited.

yes it is very complex!!! the testing system is not fail safe either. Some have said in the past that they believe it is polygenic as well. When you have a theory going and you think you may be starting to understand it, there is always something that pops up that discounts it.

Short step cross bred dogs get these things as much as any other. A cross Chi will have as much chance of get PL as much as any purebred Chi and at least the purebred chi breeders know what to look for and try to breed away form it in case it is a genetic issue.If YOU take the focus off the genetics and the belief that its is a genetic disorder you get to see other expert opinion who believe its caused by several other things impacting other than genetics- or at least that the genetic issue is a minor component. This is no argumant for outcrossing or making in breeding illegal.

[poodlefan]

My personal view is that much of the time we don't know what we're producing with breed hybrids. So the idea of introducing "foreign" genes into breeds can produce highly undesirable results.

For sure, but if done correctly, could also produce some great results? I think the low uric acid Dallies are a great example. I believe that one of the Neurologists also believed that Syringomyelia could be removed from Cavs with the introduction of another breed like a Jack Russel, to improve the skull structure?

So lets take a breed renowned for its low prey drive, high bite inhibition and high bite threshold and cross it with a breed that has high prey drive and lows for both of those other characteristics.

How suitable will each of the offspring be as the gentle, placid family pets that attract the CKCS's legions of fans at the moment?

The answer is no one will know. I don't call that a good outcome.

Edited July 4, 2011 by poodlefan

[Steve]

What about how closely Inbred some endangered species will end up as a result of humans trying to bring them back from the destruction we caused?

Exactly as we now know that inbreeding has a detrimental effect on threatened species.

Our results have important conservation implications. First, ignoring inbreeding depression will substantially underestimate extinction risk. http://www.ecologyan...ml#relationship

Inbreeding is a big risk for threatened animals.

Thank goodness domestic dogs as a species are not threatened!! And thank goodness dog 'breeds' are not separate species. We can open our stud books (a model only in our minds) and cross bred to another breed of dog to reduce COI, remove or control a genetic disease, to modify an extreme trait or to remove defect traits which are wide spread in a breed and many other uses, in any of our breeds. Tthere is no reason to skirt the dangerous world of inbred threatened species with our dog breeds.

If we allowed it, there is no problem keeping genetic diversity in any 'breed 'of dogs. But we do no allow it and currently there are more than few dog 'breeds' that are considered threatened. We just have to use this current science and cast aside the ideas and science of 100-150 years ago. We have moved on and now we need to bring our dog breeding practices up to date.

I don't disagree with this in principle; however, as wheaten terrier people found, crossbreeding to another breed is not a magic bullet to remove or control genetic disease.

A controlled outcross is not the answer for every disease in every breed, but it certainly could be the answer for many of the diseases in many breeds. That is the real point and not that it may not work for some disease.

What I find really frustrating is even in the case of the Dalmatian, where the work has been done and successfully, most breeder would rather breed dogs with disease than use a dog with a cross some 10-13 or more generations ago and prevent the disease in their dogs. It boggles the mind. Personally I think any breeder who refuses to bring the healthy genes into their Dals should be banned. I guess it will take the RSPCA to make it a welfare issue and get a government law made first.

It may take a new generation of dog breeders to effect some of the needed changes. I just hope that breeding for 'breeds' is not totally banned by then and that most breeds are not already lost or are too far gone before we start to see the needed changes happen.

Yes shortstep but advocating for a more diversified management plan for some breeds isnt quite the same as advocating for a ban on in breeding until its considered safe in humans across the board.

Whats more sometimes in breeding may even be the answer to eliminating a problem rather than just bloody spreading it further and wider.

I never said that, I said I think 1st and 2nd degree inbreeding should be banned, same as is law for humans. I think we need to show a real intention to slow down deliberate inbreeding. That is not same as banning all inbreeding, as we know all of are inbreeding in closed stud books, but we can reduce the level of inbreeding.

I would be fine in doing a very close inbreeding project for particular reason if that was the best way, but only under direction a panel of experts. Just my opinion.

But why do we need to create a system which slows down the level of in breeding when Clare Wade did the pedigree research and has said we are not in breeding that much any way - that close in breeding is rare? Why ban it?She said that banning it wouldnt make that much difference any way because most of us dont do it. But banning it creates two problems- some will do it anyway and tell lies ontheir pedigrees and it cant ever be used as a tool if its needed.

Who is saying we need to? Why are YOU saying we need to ban it? Who will be the experts telling us what to do with what is happening in our own back yards? Under that system we have to have a problem and cant simply work to avoid a problem. How does any of this help to prevent peopel from selecting dogs to mate with each other which will cause the puppies to suffer?

[Steve]

My personal view is that much of the time we don't know what we're producing with breed hybrids. So the idea of introducing "foreign" genes into breeds can produce highly undesirable results.

For sure, but if done correctly, could also produce some great results? I think the low uric acid Dallies are a great example. I believe that one of the Neurologists also believed that Syringomyelia could be removed from Cavs with the introduction of another breed like a Jack Russel, to improve the skull structure?

But thats not even a given yet. First cross dogs and dogs with various different skull structure get SM - so do humans. I think if someone had that theory and wanted to test it they should be able to do that as long as they can articulate what they are doing and what they expect to happen etc but you cant just have a bunch of people running aorund saying thats a different head shape so we will make cross bred puppies because the cross bred puppies get it too.

There is now and always has been the ability for someone to state their reasons and give a good case and for the stud books to be opened. Im amazed that the ANKC never say that and just hold out their chins and get belted because of closed stud books. The case of the Dals is a perfect example - it was science based and has had great results but anyone has always had the same options and tools and they still do.

[toy dog]

Hey I don't mean to start world war 3, but, another fact of life would be if the intended breeding selection, sire, dam, progeny, were not true to their paperwork (pedigree) it does/has happened, is happening. So where does that leave things???

we're in the middle of something thats for sure , sure makes for interesting reading. us, ourselves try to avoid this as some people in the past haven't been quite honest and their breeding has been a bit questionable lets just say.....so a DNA test has been ordered from controlling body to find said dogs were infact cross bred (stud) so both parties dogs were de-registered. Even the ones that were mating to the stud. which i couldn't get my head around but there you are. not in my breed another breed of dog BTW.

not an ideal situation for dogs not to be true to their paperwork.

[Steve]

Now there's a statement by a person of credibility that needs to be picked up and run with.

I do not think anyone denies that, I certainly do not. I believe ANKC breeders care greatly and want to breed healthy dogs.

However being committed to health and good at applying test to diseases, is not the same as addressing the underlying issue of why so many diseases have become so common in our breeds that is necessary to develope all these tests in the first place.

Again, it is closing the barn door after the horse is long gone.

If the above breed had not been bred to fix the wrinkle gene across the population and then inbreed every generation on that defective gene, it would not have the fever disease in the first place.

But if it had been in bred to set something good? The problem its what you select for when you in breed.

Inbreeding never adds genes, it only removes genes. If you want to add a 'good ' gene that is not already in the breed, you cannot do that by inbreeding, you canonly do that by outcrossing. You can however breed out that 'good' gene accidently and without knowing it, only to find out when things go pare shaped.

There are many breeders that do not intentionally inbreed, but breed like to like traits (and not closely related dogs to find those traits) and they find this just as effective for their needs. However the ones I know of are working breeders not show breeders. But it might be worth a look see for any who are looking for other options.

I really do have to go.

Yes I know in breeding never adds genes and sometimes removing bad genes is a good thing. The Shar pei were selected for wrinkles - if they had been selected for great hips would that be O.K?

How is selecting for only dogs with zero hip scores any different? How is selecting for dogs with no PL any different .You get what you select for whether the dogs are related closely or not and you dont have any idea how many genes are being lost to the dogs by selecting only dogs with great working ability over those that bark all night any more than anyone else does who is breeding dogs and selecting for specific characteristics or traits. There are many working dog people who have never outcrossed have successful healthy working dogs and have done for decades.

Again you get what you select for - its not about how closely they are related.

Edited July 4, 2011 by Steve

[Steve]

Hey I don't mean to start world war 3, but, another fact of life would be if the intended breeding selection, sire, dam, progeny, were not true to their paperwork (pedigree) it does/has happened, is happening. So where does that leave things???

Yep thats my argument. the best tool we have in selecting healthy dogs is in the knowledge of what is in the pedigree - not how many champs but whether uncle gerdie was itchy etc - In fact that is the only reason I breed registered dogs .

All of these new crap regs do is create an environment where people will lie in their paper work. There is a much bigger sin in breeding a bitch too young and faking the papers than breeding a bitch too young and not saying so because its against regs.

There is a much bigger sin in breeding a bitch back to back and saying she is a different bitch than breeding a bitch back to back and telling the truth. There is a much bigger sin in breeding a bitch to her brother and saying it was sired by another boy you happen to own the papers for.

There is a much bigger sin in not telling others if something turns up in your lines or telling lies to protect your reputation than there is in sharing the info so other can enter that in their pedigrees.

[Marion 01]

Yes toy dog, with that happening it just makes it all the harder to achieve the desired goal.

[The Spotted Devil]

The LUA Dalmatian project is a great example of how science and dog breeding can come together - however, it was commenced in 1973 and we still can't get registered LUA progeny or semen into Australia. If the AKC supports the very tight vote FOR registering these dogs held by the Dalmatian Club of America recently this could soon change. If not, progeny/semen from LUA Dals registered with UKC will not be available for another 4 years. I don't think that 38 years in the development (thus far) will be seen as particularly forward thinking.

[jacqui835]

There are certainly advantages to the concept of inbreeding - I look at my doberman and then I look at the other dogs in the park and I know who I want to take home... But that said, it poses a lot of risks (there's no denying that without investing a lot of money and time, inbreeding can be very detrimental to the dogs involved). If people are not running every test, if they don't know the condition of the lines they're using, well very quickly you end up with very sick dogs because they are too closely related and bad recessive genes have a high chance of being expressed. Additionally, inbreeding is associated with its own intrinsic negatives - for example, reduced fertility, reduced lifespan etc. They believe this is because your immune system does best when paired with a complimentary partner - not one the same as your own (such as would be found in a close relative). Reduced immune function means more shoddy repairs and problems in the first place - all which take their toll. "In fishes for example, inbred salmonids showed a higher rate of body deformations, a reduced fry survivorship and a reduced growth rate while inbred guppies (Poecilia reticulata) displayed an altered reproductive behaviour (Waldman & McKinnon 1993 and citations therein).Inbred eggs have a lower fertilization and hatching rate compared to outbred fishes, and fewer survive to reproductive age."

And for the person that claimed lab mice are healthy - that's completely misinformed. As a psychology and biology student, I have worked with both rats and mice under lab conditions. I also bred rats when I was younger - relevant for comparison. Lab animals do not have long lifespans relative to their wild cousins, but this is deemed to be ok as most of the experiments (certainly in the field of psychology) can only be conducted in the first 6-8 months of the animal's' life anyway. The animals are then used in dissections in biology. The animals are kept in bubble environments, protected from all parthogens and even from fresh air. So it's true, they are typically free of the bacterial infections that plague our pet rodents, but not by their immune systems, rather by barriers.

In the rodent breeding community, it is not uncommon for someone to have to introduce a wild rat into their lines to boost the vigour - especially when attempting to cement new variations (through inbreeding). People who did this had amazing success - rats living for 5 years + and exhibiting strong resistance to respiratory infections (which every pet rat has).

For your reference:

Lab mice, for example, are notoriously inbred brother to sister, and they have been shown to suffer from reduced fertility, life expectancy and vitality and weakened immune systems. It is theorized that a lot of these inbred mice are only biologically viable in laboratories where they are given ample food and sheltered from predators and that they would not be successful in the wild.

So in short, I am not inherently against inbreeding, because it does allow for us to strengthen specific traits and better predict the results of breeding, but I do believe that, as some others have said, it needs to be subject to very strict regulations, lots of testing and emphasis placed on maintaining the broadest and deep gene pool possible.

[toy dog]

There is a much bigger sin in not telling others if something turns up in your lines or telling lies to protect your reputation than there is in sharing the info so other can enter that in their pedigrees.

had to deal with this exact thing in re: PL. after enjoying generations of sound clear dogs 0/0 (and others said that is not possible and i am talking through my hat to have achieved such a thing ) i got a young dog that developed over time grade 3 in one leg. I then back tracked through the pedigrees each and every dog to see which dog he got it from, talked to other breeders looked at photographs and i found one dog with that grading way back in the pedigree, 4 generations back. I use to enjoy viewing videos and i found a video of this dog and viewed movement, she was very bad indeed and it was clear she was either grade 3 or 4. Dog was passed around to several breeders of that time. I then announced it to the other breeders that i got him desexed. this was all hidden and the lady who bred this dog who is not around anymore titled her and bred several times with this same dog.

my mother always says and she is right really, you don't know for sure what is hidden in some backyards (sometimes it is different and this is what we aim for) until you breed the dog in question.

Edited July 4, 2011 by toy dog

[Steve]

The problem is now and always has been that some people have no clue about what profiling a pedigree really means and even if they do being able to access the information they need to make informed decisions has been almost impossible to gather.

When we look at ANKC pedigrees the only thing it tells us is how many champions and sadly that really is the only thing many people who have been breeding purebred dogs looked for.

The importance of the pedigree system for giving us the ability to select for healthy dogs has never been promoted. Most of us start out not having a clue about how important it is to the future of our breeds and the dogs we produce is to be honest and share the seemingly minor or major health issues as well as being able to prove what breed it is without a cross bred and how the ancestors did in the ring.

If there were healthier dogs not inthe ring or which had less champs in the pedigree they were over looked for the only thing we went looking for - champions. Problem is many of us still do and that makes us the laughing stock of the world.

Edited July 4, 2011 by Steve

[shortstep]

The LUA Dalmatian project is a great example of how science and dog breeding can come together - however, it was commenced in 1973 and we still can't get registered LUA progeny or semen into Australia. If the AKC supports the very tight vote FOR registering these dogs held by the Dalmatian Club of America recently this could soon change. If not, progeny/semen from LUA Dals registered with UKC will not be available for another 4 years. I don't think that 38 years in the development (thus far) will be seen as particularly forward thinking.

I agree, the breed clubs (more than the kennel clubs) do not have much to bragg about in this situation. Has it really been 38 years, that really is a long time. I do not think the AKC will stand in the way of the Dal parent club vote results, they were the ones putting pressure on the Dal parent club to get this situation fixed. It was really a bad press for the AKC. Espcially after the UK kennel club accepted them and all the crufts media attention on the LUA dog entered.

[shortstep]

The problem is now and always has been that some people have no clue about what profiling a pedigree really means and even if they do being able to access the information they need to make informed decisions has been almost impossible to gather.

When we look at ANKC pedigrees the only thing it tells us is how many champions and sadly that really is the only thing many people who have been breeding purebred dogs looked for.

The importance of the pedigree system for giving us the ability to select for healthy dogs has never been promoted and most of us start out not having a clue about how important it is to the future of our breeds and the dogs we produce is to be honest and share the seemingly minor or major health issues as well as being able to prove what breed it is without a cross bred and how the ancestors did in the ring. If there were healthier dogs not inthe ring or which had less champs in the pedigree they were over looked for the only thing we went looking for - champions. Problem is many of us still do and that makes us the laughing stock of the world.

Agree and that is what EBV pedigrees will be all about. I am all for that and wish we had that now, for both ourselves and the buyers. I do nothink OZ breeders are any different to most kennel club breeders around the world, with the exception of some of the european countries, who have a lot more rules controlling what can be breed.

[shortstep]

Did I hear the right when they said that RSPCA was making moves to have Inbreeding banned? If this is the case, what is being done to counteract that? They managed to steam roller tail docking, what's going to stop them from this little vendetta?

Well all dogs in the kennel club are inbred.

And every breeding of kennel club dogs is doing inbreeding.

By definition pedigree dogs are inbred animals.

However if they made a law that limited the amount of inbreeding to what is considered safe in humans, I would support that across all breeds.

I think that would be a good step in the right direction and would prefer that the ANKC made the change without the RSPCA having to make it a big pulbic welfare issue and a law.

Why would you want to advocate in breeding to be limited to what is considered safe in humans - and who will judge what is safe in humans? We dont have anywhere near the information for breeding in humans we do for breeding in dogs. I have 6 generations of one breed in my yard and I can tell you everything you could ask about them and their health and potential issues which may show up - how many humans have that sort of health info for their human relatives ? We practice selective breeding and we have at our fingertiops pedigree knowledge and genetic testing and scoring which we can use to make our decisions - we are talking about selectively breeding purebred dogs not randomly breeding humans!

The problem with purebred dogs is that some breeders have been slecting primarily for the way the dog looks - the show ring and you can skirt around it all you like but that has nothing to do with in breeding and everything to do with slection.

If you take away the ability for us to in breed all you will get is less predictibility on what diseases might show up and less chance of testing - if you still have such emphasis on how the dog looks and rates in a show ring.

I do not think so, I think you can have a breed and with some frequecy outcrossing and not loose your breed.

But look if people are happy to take it to the wire withthe governments and the animal welfare groups then go for it. I think you will loose and I think the UK kennel club making all these changes is a direct reaction to the notion that this topic is no longer a dicsussion, it is now a matter of changing or not having kennel clubs at all.

I also think that even if the kennel clubs are shut down, even if they ban many of the more extreme breeds, that there is still time then to reorganize and try some different ways to breed dogs.

I really do have to leave now for a Dr appointment.

Yes of course but that needs to be done with knowledge and science as much as any other breeding does and advocating for in breeding to be made a crimminal offence isnt the answer to finding what will and wont work with any other breeding program.

We need to educate breeders to select differently with science not just to run with people who want to choose a supposed cause and bleat about it with out the research to back it up.

I never said I wanted to make inbreeding a crime, but I think it may come to that if the kennel clubs can not find some way to regulate the amount of inbreeding then the governments may well step in and do it.

[Steve]

The problem is now and always has been that some people have no clue about what profiling a pedigree really means and even if they do being able to access the information they need to make informed decisions has been almost impossible to gather.

When we look at ANKC pedigrees the only thing it tells us is how many champions and sadly that really is the only thing many people who have been breeding purebred dogs looked for.

The importance of the pedigree system for giving us the ability to select for healthy dogs has never been promoted and most of us start out not having a clue about how important it is to the future of our breeds and the dogs we produce is to be honest and share the seemingly minor or major health issues as well as being able to prove what breed it is without a cross bred and how the ancestors did in the ring. If there were healthier dogs not inthe ring or which had less champs in the pedigree they were over looked for the only thing we went looking for - champions. Problem is many of us still do and that makes us the laughing stock of the world.

Agree and that is what EBV pedigrees will be all about. I am all for that and wish we had that now, for both ourselves and the buyers. I do nothink OZ breeders are any different to most kennel club breeders around the world, with the exception of some of the european countries, who have a lot more rules controlling what can be breed.

All sounds good but dogs are not cattle and it will still always depend on what you are selecting for in each and every litter and how many tools are left to us to use.