Inbreeding

L

lq22

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 April 2010
Messages
1,333
Location
Bonnie Scotland
Visit site
Following off the back of the pedigree dogs exposed: 3 years on programme last night, has anyone looked else looked up their dog's individual inbreeding coefficient?
 
can you do that? Have you got a link?

Pretty sure H is not very inbred as his dad is show lines and his mum working, but would be interested to see.
 
Neither of mine are registered with the KC but have pulled this off the internet

Showline dog
Mother
•5 - 4,5 (in a dog most showline dogs are inbred on)
•5 - 4
•5 - 4
•4 - 3
Father
•4 - 5 (in same dog as mother, mentioned above)
•4 - 5
•4 - 5
•5 - 4

Workingline dog
Father
•5 - 5 (in a dog most workingline dogs are linebred on)
Mother
No common anscestors in five generations


I think you can guess which one has the most intelligent linebreeding :p
 
my mutt is 0.4% with a breed average of 6.4% which is down to her having a sire within her pedigree twice at the 5th generation.

Knowing what i know now I probably wouldn't have got Skye due to her having those lines (despite her parents having a excellent hip score, having clear eyes and generally being the loveable daft healthy dog she is) but hindsite is a wonderful thing.
 
Agreed - Dad (show dog came Group 2 at Crufts) 6.9 (so over breed average)

Mum (working lines) 2.5

Looking at his 5 gen, I can see the same dog 3 times of his 5th gen on his dads side and 1 dog twice at the 5th gen on his mums.... Never looked that hard at it before.
 
Holy cow, just been checking some of our old girls, there is not enough info on the two oldest ones although their names do pop up automatically, but our last one was 7.2% (showlines, German import father, mother born in quarantine).
Died aged ten, completely unexpected, she had a massive tumour on her spleen.

Sorry, having way too much fun with that site :o
 
Neither of mine are KC registered but the flimsy handwritten bit of paper that came with Dax, which may or may not actually belong to her as the dam would have been something like 9 years old when she was born which seems unlikely, lists the dam as 2.8% (breed average of 6.1%) and a hip score of 6/4.

Can't find the sire but three grandparents less than 1% with the exception of the maternal grand-sire at 21.6% :eek: Highest hip score 12, most less than 4. Most have eye tests too. There is one father/daughter mating.

I can console myself with the fact that it's probably a totally mythical pedigree. :p

Edit: The supposed dam has 11 registered puppies from four litters. Only two have health tests recorded - hips 5/3 for a dog in 2005, 5/8 for a bitch in 2004, no eye test.
 
Last edited:
CaveCanem said:
Holy cow, just been checking some of our old girls, there is not enough info on the two oldest ones although their names do pop up automatically, but our last one was 7.2% (showlines, German import father, mother born in quarantine).

Sorry, having way too much fun with that site :o
Click to expand...

I know, you get a bit obsessed! I wasn't sure whether I wanted to look it up or not but curiosity got the better of me. Was scared it was going to be a stupidly high percentage as had never really looked at her pedigree before as had no interest in showing or breeding - copies of the health certificates for her parents and grandparents were enough for me.

Currently have a list of her relatives and looking up all the health tests they've had done and their scores/results. So far eyes have all been clear and hips have been low with the highest score being 4/5 which going by lab standards is ok.
 
For us, on the continent the health scores, working qualifications and show gradings (even breed survey critiques in the first couple of generations) are actually printed on the pedigree/registration certificate/performance record, which stays with the dog for life, wish that was the norm here.
 
Interesting! Barney isn't there, but his dam was slightly more inbred than the breed average (7.3%, the average is 6.4%) while his sire was slightly less inbred than the average - 5.3%.
 
I had already done the mating inbreeding prediction for Evie and the dog I used and the coefficient is 4.1%.
As I understand it (I think it was someone on AAD who said this) the calculations are done using only dogs registered with the KC so with a breed like GSDs the figures are often inaccurate. For instance Evie's sire is in Germany so cannot get figure for him, but her dam is 3.4%.
Like CC I have been playing putting some of our older dogs names in, the lowest is 0.7% the highest 5.2%. I also put in 2 of the top producing dogs and most used dogs of the 70s , one was a German import so no figure available, the other was 0.0%.
I could become quite a geek about this.:o
 
I am officially a geek now. Almost finished a table I've made with the results (if they are on the KC website) for Skye's ggparents/gggrandparents/ggggrandparents. The worst result I've come across is for one of her great great great grandmothers who had a hip score of 16/15 but had clear eyes.
 
The two pedigrees I have had scored 1.4% and 1.6% with a breed average of 9.2%. Sadly neither lived particularly long and both had a number of serious health issues!
 
Just looked at Pickle (lancashire heeler), he is 10.9%, breed average 11.6%. I actually thought it might be higher, as an endangered breed they have a very small gene pool.
 
Perhaps someone could enlighten me. I was involved in purebred dogs in the U.S. for over 25 years. I bred, exhibited, gave handling and grooming classes, was the president of a breed club, organised specialty shows and lectures on health and breeding, prepared the art and copy for dog show catalogues (both specialty and all breed). In all those years I was aware of only 2 breedings of brother/sister or father/daughter, and both were the results of unfortunate accidents. In both incidents the breeders culled the pups at birth/kept all of the 4 pups for life (they were hounds). Is inbreeding (brother/sister, father/daughter, mother/son) really that prevalent? I know linebreeding is a common practice. Half-brother to half-sister in outcrossed individuals is a breeding method used to set type. Grandparent to grandchild is also utilised (an old saying, coming from horses, is "let the sire of the sire be the grandsire of the dam on the dam's side"). I ask this question because of last night's BBC4 program on dog breeding. I, too, preferred this program to its predecessor. So often I hear people refer to purebred dogs as being inbred, or blaming heritable problems on inbreeding. I always answer those remarks with the retort that inbreeding doesn't cause those problems, it just manifests what's already there genetically. But is the practice of very close breeding that common amongst breeders (puppy mills excluded)?

In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way. I welcomed the comments of the other professionals/owners/scientists. The Dally story was a breath of fresh air. Watching the Pug struggling to breathe was heartbreaking. A force for change is in the breeders' and judges' hands. The Kennel Club and the American Kennel Club are dog registries. They are not policing agencies. They exist to give credibility to purebred dogs. They are not going to take the kind of stand needed to rectify these problems and, in the process, lose revenue. It's the breed societies that have this responsibility. It's quite interesting how some clubs have got their priorities in the right order, and others...do ostrich and sand ring any bells?

In the US, the Boxer breed is plagued with von Willibrands disease and a high incidence of cancer. Deafness in Dalmatians is a major problem (I mention these breeds in reference to last night's program). I used to be a member of a breed club, in this country, where epilepsy and breathing problems (elongated soft palate) within the dogs are rife. The attitude of denial within this group of breeders/exhibitors is monumental. I stopped breeding, neutered all the dogs, and let my membership lapse. I tried to make a difference. I really, really tried. But, for nothing. I couldn't be a part of it any longer. And the roster of devastated pet owners gets longer within that breed.
 
RutlandH2O said:
Perhaps someone could enlighten me. I was involved in purebred dogs in the U.S. for over 25 years. I bred, exhibited, gave handling and grooming classes, was the president of a breed club, organised specialty shows and lectures on health and breeding, prepared the art and copy for dog show catalogues (both specialty and all breed). In all those years I was aware of only 2 breedings of brother/sister or father/daughter, and both were the results of unfortunate accidents. In both incidents the breeders culled the pups at birth/kept all of the 4 pups for life (they were hounds). Is inbreeding (brother/sister, father/daughter, mother/son) really that prevalent? I know linebreeding is a common practice. Half-brother to half-sister in outcrossed individuals is a breeding method used to set type. Grandparent to grandchild is also utilised (an old saying, coming from horses, is "let the sire of the sire be the grandsire of the dam on the dam's side"). I ask this question because of last night's BBC4 program on dog breeding. I, too, preferred this program to its predecessor. So often I hear people refer to purebred dogs as being inbred, or blaming heritable problems on inbreeding. I always answer those remarks with the retort that inbreeding doesn't cause those problems, it just manifests what's already there genetically. But is the practice of very close breeding that common amongst breeders (puppy mills excluded)?

In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way. I welcomed the comments of the other professionals/owners/scientists. The Dally story was a breath of fresh air. Watching the Pug struggling to breathe was heartbreaking. A force for change is in the breeders' and judges' hands. The Kennel Club and the American Kennel Club are dog registries. They are not policing agencies. They exist to give credibility to purebred dogs. They are not going to take the kind of stand needed to rectify these problems and, in the process, lose revenue. It's the breed societies that have this responsibility. It's quite interesting how some clubs have got their priorities in the right order, and others...do ostrich and sand ring any bells?

In the US, the Boxer breed is plagued with von Willibrands disease and a high incidence of cancer. Deafness in Dalmatians is a major problem (I mention these breeds in reference to last night's program). I used to be a member of a breed club, in this country, where epilepsy and breathing problems (elongated soft palate) within the dogs are rife. The attitude of denial within this group of breeders/exhibitors is monumental. I stopped breeding, neutered all the dogs, and let my membership lapse. I tried to make a difference. I really, really tried. But, for nothing. I couldn't be a part of it any longer. And the roster of devastated pet owners gets longer within that breed.
Click to expand...


The inbreeding in my dog's pedigree her great great great grandmother had a son and daughter (different sires) whose offspring were bred together and one of her great great great grandfathers was also her grandfather.

lexiedhb said:
Hurumpghs at no "mongrel" button!!
Click to expand...


Shoot them :mad::mad::D:D:D
 
Mark Evans made me laugh when he said about how shows should be about health and fitness and wotnot - soooo kind of like working trials then? But oh no, the RSPCA isn't keen on working dogs either... :rolleyes:
 
Spudlet said:
Mark Evans made me laugh when he said about how shows should be about health and fitness and wotnot - soooo kind of like working trials then? But oh no, the RSPCA isn't keen on working dogs either... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Indeed!


Rutland, my breed is genetically large and diverse but it does not stop bottlenecks from happening, especially when the show system is geared towards one dog being held up as the 'ideal' each year and he being the dog to breed to (not everything is perfect on the continent!!!!!)
I don't know many closely bred dogs, maybe one or two, and it seems to work better for those who linebreed for working characteristics.
That is just my experience, bear in mind.

There was someone in the UK who deliberately bred a father to a daughter, for a variety of reasons they said, and retained all the pups themselves.
There was uproar as you can imagine.
 
CC: I've been out of the dog loop for many years now. More recently, I have been involved in breeding Shire horses. Close breeding in horses, I have learned, is quite a no-no. Having said that, one of my mares has a great granddam who is the result of a father/daughter breeding. I was quite taken aback when I made that discovery. My mare's "husbands" have been outcrosses as far back as is possible.

I was quite horrified when I moved to the UK with all my dogs. Several of them had been imported from the UK to the US years before. One, in particular, was quite well-known in this country when I purchased him. He turned out to be severely epileptic (reasonably controlled with phenobarbitone). Before he came to me, he had been mated to 10 bitches. He had pups in several European countries. When he came out of quarantine here, I was approached by a couple of breeders who knew him and wanted to use him at stud. It was completely out of the question, as far as I was concerned. When he had 4 seizures in one day (pre-phenobarb), I made it known to these people. They were unfazed. I had him neutered. In the not too distant past, I have seen the pedigrees of several individuals of his breed whose lineage reflects my dog 4 and 5 times in 5 generations! I know several of his progeny are affected with epilepsy. How can mindsets be altered?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top