Pedigree Dog Segment On The 7pm Project

[shortstep]

New term Genetic Rescue, make note to self.

Here is a population of inbred wolves where there has been natural selection.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30042879/ns/us_news-environment/t/inbreeding-taking-toll-michigan-wolves/

Inbreeding taking a toll on wolves.

The two dozen or so gray wolves that wander an island chain in northwestern Lake Superior are suffering from backbone malformations caused by genetic inbreeding, posing yet another challenge to their prospects for long-term survival, according to wildlife biologists.

Although confirmed only recently, the problem apparently has been festering for decades in the small, isolated packs in Michigan's Isle Royale National Park. The abnormalities, also found in some domestic dogs, can cause pain and partial paralysis while limiting the range of motion so crucial for predators in the wild.

The discovery raises the ethically thorny question of whether scientists should try to dilute the gene pool by introducing wolves from elsewhere, said researchers with Michigan Tech University in Houghton, which hosts a 51-year-old study of the island park's wolves and moose.

It is among the world's longest continuing observations of symbiotic relationships between predator and prey species and their natural surroundings.

Historically, biologists have taken a hands-off posture as wolf and moose numbers have risen and fallen, preferring to let nature take its course even if it meant extinction of one or both species. But strong arguments could be made for intervening as well, project leaders now say.

"This is not a decision just for scientists to make any more," said Rolf Peterson, who has taken part in the study since 1970.

The research team reported its findings this week in the current issue of the journal Biological Conservation and is soliciting public comments on its Web site.

Although part of Michigan, Isle Royale is closer to Minnesota and Ontario. Moose found their way to the island probably by swimming the 15 miles from Canada around 1900. Two or three wolves arrived in the late 1940s, crossing a rare ice bridge from the mainland.

Weather, food availability, disease and other factors have caused the two species' populations to fluctuate over the years. The most dangerous period for the wolves came in the 1980s, when their total dropped to 12 because of a parvovirus outbreak.

Their population stood at 24 this winter, roughly the long-term average. They were divided into four packs.

Scientists had long watched for problems from inbreeding, such as poor survival rates for pups. Instead, the first solid evidence surfaced when Jannikke Raikkonen of the Swedish Museum of National History, an expert in wolf anatomy, visited Isle Royale several years ago to examine the project's bone collection.

She identified malformed vertebrae in all wolf remains found the previous dozen years. Such abnormalities show up in just 1 percent of observed populations that are not inbred.

Peterson and biologist John Vucetich found two dead wolves this winter with misshapen vertebrae. One had been killed by fellow wolves. The other had unusually severe arthritis for its age and a neck injury suggesting a moose kick. The bone malformation may have lessened its ability to dodge the lethal blow, Vucetich said.

Living on the edge

Spinal malformation from inbreeding poses no immediate threat of extinction, Peterson said. The biggest short-term problem is a drop-off in moose, the wolves' primary food supply, which scientists attribute to climate change. This winter's moose census turned up 530 only about half their long-term average and a drop-off from last year's estimated 650.

But inbreeding joins the list of reasons why the wolves will always be living on the edge, one disaster away from disappearing, Vucetich said.

"It just makes everything a heck of a lot more complicated," he said.

The study team is considering whether to propose a "genetic rescue" trapping unrelated mainland wolves and bringing them to Isle Royale, hoping they would breed and mix their genes with the existing population.

The question involves competing scientific and ethical values, Vucetich said.

Opponents of intervention believe humans should not tinker with wilderness systems. Even if Isle Royale's wolves die out, their loss would provide information that could save endangered species elsewhere.

Other would counter that attempting to save the wolves also could yield valuable data, while sparing individual animals from painful bone deformities.

"We have an incomplete understanding of genetic rescue when and how and why it works," Vucetich said. "Even so, it may be an important conservation tool as more population species become rare."

Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

Edited July 5, 2011 by shortstep

[poodlefan]

New term Genetic Rescue, make note to self.

Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

Me: How many current breeds of dogs confront the same scenario - quoted from the article you've posted.

Weather, food availability, disease and other factors have caused the two species' populations to fluctuate over the years. The most dangerous period for the wolves came in the 1980s, when their total dropped to 12 because of a parvovirus outbreak.

If you're going to use that article to suggest that the situation that confronts most modern populations of purebred dogs is analogous, then you are simply wrong.

Oh gees is right. Comparison of the genetic diversity in the two populations is ridiculous.

Sorry but your credibility in this discussion is taking a dive here. The fact that you refuse to name your own breed ain't helping you.

Edited July 5, 2011 by poodlefan

[shortstep]

New term Genetic Rescue, make note to self.

Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

Me: How many current breeds of dogs confront the same scenario - quoted from the article you've posted.

Weather, food availability, disease and other factors have caused the two species' populations to fluctuate over the years. The most dangerous period for the wolves came in the 1980s, when their total dropped to 12 because of a parvovirus outbreak.

If you're going to use that article to suggest that the situation that confronts most modern populations of purebred dogs is analogous, then you are simply wrong.

Oh gees is right. Comparison of the genetic diversity in the two populations is ridiculous.

Sorry but your credibility in this discussion is taking a dive here. The fact that you refuse to name your own breed ain't helping you.

Gee is right, now calm down.

This was said

Why not study nature, all the animals and their way of keeping only the best and strongest of the lines etc. No one out there to tell them when to breed and with whom, they keep their lines very close. In

I then made a post about natural selection and inbreeding, do all animals in nature 'kep their line very close" I do not think so and state such in the post above. You can read it above. So I went to look to see if wolves only naturally do tight inbreeding and avoid any mating to outsiders wolves, did not find that answer yet, but found the piece above about a small group of wolves inbreeding and it was also a case of natural selection.

Please stop looking for trouble.

Enjoy.

[OSoSwift]

I believe Shortstep has ISDS Border Collies - May be wrong though

[Are You Serious Jo]

SS said he/she has ANKC dogs earlier in this thread, but maybe not then

[Steve]

Shortstep has ANKC dogs and breeds some of the best working dogs in the country.

[bryan_mannix]

PF, Jo etc ..... settle down

Enjoy the discussion and stop attacking the person!!

What does it matter who the messenger is.... Discuss..Reflect..Contribute...Learn...

I feel like I am listening to school girls ganging up on someone on the back of the bus.

Have you read this book.... "On Doubt" by Leigh Sales. Its great. I'll post you my copy if you like.

An excerpt from the blurb

When society seems to demand confidence and certainty, how much courage does it take to admit doubt, especially self-doubt? In this personal essay, one of Australia's most respected journalists argues in favour of a doubtful mind.

Shortstep. Thanks for the Wolf article... an interesting read. I will have a think about it.

Oh and I am not a breeder (other than of two delicious children) so everything can I suppose be discounted

Though I have just checked with Mrs Mannix Re: my breeding credentials and she replied "Performance or Product????....both above average but one much higher than the other" upon further discussion she is very much in favour of opening the stud books "if they contained Pat Rafter, Aidan Turner and Ewan Mcgregor"!!

[Bullbreedlover]

Shortstep has ANKC dogs and breeds some of the best working dogs in the country.

Not agreeing or disagreeing Steve but Australia is a damn big Country.

And concidering alot of SS's statements arise from internet browsing, one just never knows which agenda SS is going by.

[poodlefan]

Oh and I am not a breeder (other than of two delicious children) so everything can I suppose be discounted

Though I have just checked with Mrs Mannix Re: my breeding credentials and she replied "Performance or Product????....both above average but one much higher than the other" upon further discussion she is very much in favour of opening the stud books "if they contained Pat Rafter, Aidan Turner and Ewan Mcgregor"!!

I am not a breeder either. I am a Whippet owner who fails to see why new breeds need to be introduced to the Whippet blood line to solve problems that don't exist.

I also fail to see the relevance of a "genetic rescue" article that discusses issues in a population of wolves derived from only 12 individuals (of whom only a few would be breeding pairs) has to do with the issues in purebred dogs.

Edited July 5, 2011 by poodlefan

[Marion 01]

Poodlefan the wolf article was a result of my post re wild animals and their way of controlling their lines. It was a very interesting read.

[toy dog]

as long as we are quoting from other sources i'll do it the old fashion way. I'll type this up for anyone that wants an interesting read. (im a speed typist) one of my favourite authors was hilary harmer, of the prefix "Aztec" i have a book that i bought in 1985. It says she was on the committee for saving the Xoloitzcuintli in Mexico and in 1956 imported the first ones into england since 1911. her first dog was a greyhound but she's bred chihuahuas, jap chins, maltese, pomeranians shih tzus, and american cockers at the time she wrote the book which was first published in 1968. She had also world champions and was a judge. I have a very old photo of one of her dogs taken in the early 70's a dog that was residing in new zealand but bred by hilary harmer. i have also researched pedigrees in chihuahuas for example and Aztec has come up in some pedigrees, going back to 1960 and beyond.

For me her books have always been a bible that i refer back to when im lost on something. Not that i agree with absolutely everything that is written in these books but for me she was the voice of reason when i first started out as a child at 13-14 breeding dogs.. its just very interesting what hilary harmer writes on the subject of inbreeding all these years ago.

i notice there are a few paragraphs on inbreeding/outcrossing and line breeding:

the best matings

Provided that the stock is good, and that no two dogs are mated together which have the same fault, and that the important recessive genes are known, then I have found that the best matings have been the most successful: grandmother to grandson, grandfather to grand-daughter, uncle to neice and aunt to nephew, son or daughter to dams half sister to half brother when the common parent is outstanding. brother and sister matings can be good, particularly if one parent is outstanding, but they cannot add any new characteristic, and the offspring cannot be better genetically than either parent.

Inbreeding father to daughter or mother to son will show up all the existing fautls, and should only be done when the good qualities out-weigh the bad faults, and when the recessive genes of the ancestors are definately known. These matings are not advisable for the novice because a mistake can be costly to the breed.

Inbreeding

Inbreeding is the mating of close relatives, that is ,father to daughter mother to son etc. this shoud NEVER be contemplated unless the stock is absolutely sound both physically and temperamentally, and if this type of breeding is resorted to, the culling of all the stock not up to standard is absolutely imperative. if the inferior pups are kept, then they should be given away without papers and they should certainly never be bred from.

Some of the best stock in the world in horses, cattle, pigs,dogs etc. have been produced by inbreeding. but inbreeding resorted to without knowledge can be the ruination of a strain in the few generations. Probably in one generation, and certainly in two, inbreeding will show up the fautls which are in the genetic background. It must be emphasised that the elimination of any sub-standard pups is essential if inbreeding is resorted to. it is not advisable that novices, without real knowledge of all the dogs in the pedigree for at least 4 generations back, should try inbreeding. It may take several generations of inbreeding before the worst effects will be seen.

Inbreeding experiments can however, show remarkable results in animals and in plants. Dr Leon F Whitney developed a very beautiful and fine strain of tropical fish. Iebistes reticulantus. which are generally called guppies. Dr Whitney bred brothers to sisters for 10 generations consecutively. the result was that each generation became a little smaller and less vigorous than the previous one until the 5th generation there was a sudden improvement and each generation thereafter improved in vigour and also in colour. When two inbred lines, which have been produced from consecutive brother to sister matings, are crossed with each other, the resultant progeny are always larger than the original stock, and they processed increased vigour.

Dr helen L King is widely known for her experimentally bred rats, in which she carried out brother to sister matings for 100 generations. The result was finer and larger than the original pair. If two completely unrelated inbred lines are mated together, the resulting stock is likely to be larger and better than the P1 generation. I have done this with two inbred strains of one of my breeds, and the result has been most encouraging as well as interesting.

Inbreeding in all animals tends to produce rather highly strung animals and they are often bad doers. A good exmaple of this is demonstrated by highly strung thoroughbred race horses as compared with good hunters. But the classical example which is quoted of the results of good inbreeding is that of the Egyptians dynasty, which produced such brilliant leaders.

Edited July 5, 2011 by toy dog

[bryan_mannix]

Oh and I am not a breeder (other than of two delicious children) so everything can I suppose be discounted

Though I have just checked with Mrs Mannix Re: my breeding credentials and she replied "Performance or Product????....both above average but one much higher than the other" upon further discussion she is very much in favour of opening the stud books "if they contained Pat Rafter, Aidan Turner and Ewan Mcgregor"!!

I am not a breeder either. I am a Whippet owner who fails to see why new breeds need to be introduced to the Whippet blood line to solve problems that don't exist.

I also fail to see the relevance of a "genetic rescue" article that discusses issues in a population of wolves derived from only 12 individuals (of whom only a few would be breeding pairs) has to do with the issues in purebred dogs.

As I whippet owner also..... and with a quick check back through the thread I can't see anywhere the suggestion of

why new breeds need to be introduced to the Whippet blood line to solve problems that don't exist

Did I miss something!?!

All I can see is a discussion about changes taking place in the UK

and whether we want them here

and the likelihood that they will be regardless

and the suggestion that perhaps being proactive (as groups like the MDBA and Steve are)

that the changes can be made to our benefit rather being forced.

The wolf article was in response to another poster and is an interesting read.

[Are You Serious Jo]

Pat Rafter, your wife needs to get with the times, he is so old school.

The thing is with SS, they have posted some insulting things about breeders and other things that are a result of a combination of ignorance and an agenda. The insulting posts were where SS has said that by their very definition purebreds are unhealthy because they are all inbred. When some people attempted to discuss the fact that there are some breeds that are not in "crisis" as asserted by SS and perfectly fine the way they are, SS ignored that and continued an uneducated diatribe. So basically, SS insulted every registered breeder on DOL.

Now if you are going to come out with views that go against what is known to be correct and factual and alienate a large group of people on their own specialist forum then you need to be wo/man enough to own it.

[poodlefan]

Did I miss something!?!

All I can see is a discussion about changes taking place in the UK

and whether we want them here

and the likelihood that they will be regardless

and the suggestion that perhaps being proactive (as groups like the MDBA and Steve are)

that the changes can be made to our benefit rather being forced.

The wolf article was in response to another poster and is an interesting read.

The wolf article was used by Shortstep to suggest the application of "genetic rescue" to purebred dogs thus:

Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

And yes Bryann you have missed something. Shortstep has stated that the health issues of all purebred dogs can only be resolved by outcrossing to different breeds. And that this should be forced upon us all. You have also missed Steve taking issue with Shortstep's assertions and solutions.

[bryan_mannix]

Did I miss something!?!

All I can see is a discussion about changes taking place in the UK

and whether we want them here

and the likelihood that they will be regardless

and the suggestion that perhaps being proactive (as groups like the MDBA and Steve are)

that the changes can be made to our benefit rather being forced.

The wolf article was in response to another poster and is an interesting read.

The wolf article was used by Shortstep to suggest the application of "genetic rescue" to purebred dogs thus:

Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

And yes Bryann you have missed something. Shortstep has stated that the health issues of all purebred dogs can only be resolved by outcrossing to different breeds. And that this should be forced upon us all. You have also missed Steve taking issue with Shortstep's assertions and solutions.

OK... my computer must be playing up... I am reading stuff like this

I never said that all purebred dogs were sick, I do say they are all inbred by the very nature of closed stud books.

I never said that outcrossing was magic bullet for all health problems and infact said several times I did not say or believe that, only to have you imply that I said it again. So no problem to me, here it is one more time.

Outcrossing and cross breeding is not a silver bullet for all health problems. It works very well for simple recessive diseases it would help if applied correctly, certainly closed stud books do not help with these diseases at all. It should be in a our tool box and effort should made to assure this happens.

Like it or not these topics are not going away. Currently UK KC has now made it possible for their breeders to lower their inbreeding levels for the first time in who knows how long, I applaud them for that. I have just heard that some of the KC in Europe will be following with their own programs. It's not going away.

I also noted this morning in the UK that several breeders had on their web sites that they were using the new Mate select and had written a bit about inbreeding and their desire to reduce in their breed and in their litters and had the COI posted for the parents and their litter. These were KC Accredited Breeders and were doing all the right things, health testing and showed their dogs, they look like very good caring breeder to me. It's not going away.

[poodlefan]

OK... my computer must be playing up... I am reading stuff like this

Try reading this Yet another of Shortstep's 'purebred improvement' threads

[bryan_mannix]

OK... my computer must be playing up... I am reading stuff like this

Try reading this Yet another of Shortstep's 'purebred improvement' threads

again I read that and focus on

The bad press on pedigree dogs just keeps comeing and now they are pointing it towards any dog that even looks like a breed. If anybody thinks this is only going to affect breeds and breeders with the most noticable problems, they need to wake up. This is going to take out all dog breeds.

If we do not start to address these welfare issues now, real or not in your opinion, there is not going to be any way to turn this around.

again a cautionary warning about taking action before it is forced upon us.

I also read from the article

Designer dogs’ are not classed as pedigrees. However, pet owners deliberately breeding from any species for profit, and without considering the health and wellbeing of the pet, would be stopped from using PDSA services. This practice is entirely at odds with the provision of our charitable veterinary service, which is funded completely by public support.

It is probably best to let SS speak for themself but I am not getting an agenda of bringing down the purebred dog world rather a passion to take steps to ensure its survival.

[poodlefan]

It is probably best to let SS speak for themself but I am not getting an agenda of bringing down the purebred dog world rather a passion to take steps to ensure its survival.

Which, according to Shortstep, will only be achieved by introducing other breeds into EVERY breed, regardless of whether or not the breed has health issues.

And then doing the unthinkable.. inbreeding again *gasp*

[Are You Serious Jo]

Maybe you haven't read all the same posts we have, because it is all there in black and white if you read them all.

[Are You Serious Jo]

To me the full story is that inbreeding and closed stud books are at the root of the need to do health testing.

Health testing is looking for defective genes which are now wide spread enough in the breed as to be commonly found, which now require some sort of screening or testing for.

That is ass backwards.

Good breeding, ethical breeding, should mean that we are not making breeds that end up with wide spread health problems that need to be tested for in the first place.

The whole system is geared to make health problems. Starting with the concept of purebred, which madates inbreeding forever on a small number of ansectors. The Kennel Club moto really should be 'Keep it all in the Family'.

Inbreeding is with out question removing a wide selection of genes from each dog and eventually the whole breed, most of these genes we have no idea what they do or that we are removing them. Closed stud books force contiuned inbreeding even for those breeders who want to reduce inbreeding levels in their pups.

This goes far beyond being ethical because we health test.

It is the very foundations of how we breed dogs in the kennel club system, it needs a very close and honest review.

I think the Uk Kennel club is starting to do this, I think they know they have to, it is no longer a debate or an option. Now we need to start talking about it, from the ground up, not from the top down.

Just a small selection. But SS is apparently part of this whole thing, unless they outcross their ANKC dogs, which means they aren't ANKC breeds anymore. Or SS is doing the same thing that they condemn above.