Line breeding!!!!!!!

[Patchworkpony]

I was about to go and choose a working cocker spaniel pup when I decided out of interest to look up its breeding. I was totally shocked to see both sides of the parents were closely line bred i.e. brother on sister. I then looked up the breeding on all the other studs dogs - same thing. Then I went to other 'proper' cocker websites and checked the various bloodlines - exactly the same thing. Well I'm sad and shocked as I truly thought working dogs were free from this act against nature. How wrong I was. It appears that every dog breed has been 'engineered' to satisfy human greed and fashion; just think of the poor little KCCs for example. I got out of Welsh cobs because 'line breeding' has ruined the breed. OK it is just about but barely acceptable in rare breeds such as Exmoors, Fells and Dales but why ruin our lovely family pets?

My vet told me there isn't a single dog breed now that isn't riddled with disease and genetic problems. What happened to lovely straightforward mongrels or cross breeds we knew as children years ago? Oh I know - they are classed as designer dogs now and cost a small fortune. Call me old fashioned and I'm sure that professional dog breeders will come up with all sorts of justifiable reasons as to why incest in dogs is perfectly acceptable, but in human beings it can incur a prison sentence. Quite obviously there is a good reason for that. Village idiots are thankfully rare these days!

 

[MurphysMinder]

That is actually inbreeding! Line breeding is when dogs further back in the pedigree are doubled up on to try and strengthen a characteristic. The offspring of a mating between a brother and sister cannot be registered by the Kennel Club unless for exceptional or scientifically proven health reasons .

 

[Dry Rot]

Inbreeding/line breeding does not cause genetic defects. Poor selection of breeding stock does. Nature is continually experimenting and it is the successful experiments that survive to breed. A responsible breeder follows Nature and will only breed from stock that is as near 100% perfect as possible.

Google Chillingham Wild Cattle for just one example of successful inbreeding. There are plenty more.

Against Nature? I've never yet seen a rabbit on a bicycle. It is two hops and a jump!

I am not advocating inbreeding/line breeding but rather warning against those who don't breed responsibly. I'd say look at what the breeder produces, don't be misled by pedigrees (they are easy enough to falsify!), and look at show/field trial records with a degree of cynicism.

 

[Patchworkpony]

That is actually inbreeding! Line breeding is when dogs further back in the pedigree are doubled up on to try and strengthen a characteristic. The offspring of a mating between a brother and sister cannot be registered by the Kennel Club unless for exceptional or scientifically proven health reasons .

So is 4th generation back where brother mated with sister inbreeding or line breeding? Either way the offspring were registered.

 

[Patchworkpony]

Inbreeding/line breeding does not cause genetic defects. Poor selection of breeding stock does. Nature is continually experimenting and it is the successful experiments that survive to breed. A responsible breeder follows Nature and will only breed from stock that is as near 100% perfect as possible.

In nature - herds and pack leaders drive away the young males to find their own females so there is very little chance of inbreeding.

 

[Patchworkpony]

A responsible breeder follows Nature and will only breed from stock that is as near 100% perfect as possible.

So if Prince George mated with Princess Charlotte that's OK then. Sorry I didn't realise.

 

[Alec Swan]

The main principle of Line Breeding, and which I've applied, is that if we see a dog which we fancy then we have him as a Grandsire on the sire's side and a Great-Grandsire on the dam's side. It also works, so I'm advised with horses.

The breeding of Cockers though, and for reasons which I don't understand, has the seemingly unhealthy aspect of in-breeding, having little effect. The only influence that I can see is that by generation, they most certainly lose size. I attended a Trial about 3 years ago, and there was a man of serious repute both as a Trainer and Breeder. He had the most exquisite Cocker bitch and I took her to be about 6 months of age. She was as perfect, conformationally as one could wish for, and when I enquired as to her age, I was told that she was 2 years. Though perfectly proportioned, she was minuscule and probably weighed no more than 15lbs. The shrinking of breeds (in stature) is the only downside, that I can see.

Just about any Cocker of worth has the 4 main Wernffrwd bitches, Kathleen, her dam Silk and her dam Ci Twt, at their base, and with derivatives on both sides of any pedigree, though generally as the Dam Line.

Take for instance the dog Maesydderwen Scimitar. Both his parents were sired by Maesydderwen Kestrel and he has a breeding coefficient of some 30%. Scimitar is held aloft as a remarkable sire of brood bitches, and the bulk of those dogs which are succeeding today will more often than not be out of a Scimitar bitch.

I phoned a lady from the KC a couple of years ago, who was their authority, and asked her if she could explain to me the principles of the BC thinking. In short, she couldn't. It seems to have very little to do with Cockers, though just why, I'm not sure! VERY few if any breeders of Working Cockers bother to health test their dogs, and from the many hundreds that I've viewed over the years, not one dog seemed to be anything other than rude with health!

As Dry Rot seems to suggest, the principles of breeding are better addressed by using sound stock, than by paying too much attention 'theory'. (If I've misquoted you DR, I apologise!).

Alec.

 

[MurphysMinder]

So is 4th generation back where brother mated with sister inbreeding or line breeding? Either way the offspring were registered.

Brother to sister would always be inbreeding Line breeding would be if say the dogs had thesame grandfather on the sire and dam side. I think the KC have only clamped down on close in breeding in recent years so possibly 4 generations back would be okay to register. You would certainly struggle to register offspring of a brother to sister mating nowadays.

 

[Patchworkpony]

Brother to sister would always be inbreeding Line breeding would be if say the dogs had thesame grandfather on the sire and dam side. I think the KC have only got clamped down on close in breeding in recent years so possibly 4 generations back would be okay to register. You would certainly struggle to register offspring of a brother to sister mating nowadays.

Thank you that explains that.

 

[MurphysMinder]

Alec, I don't know much about cockers, though do like the working cockers I see at agility competitions. Do you have any thought on AMS (Acral Mutilation Syndrome), which seems to be causing some concern among working cocker folk? I believe a dna test has recently been approved , which hopefully will control the problem if breeders use the test.

 

[Patchworkpony]

The main principle of Line Breeding, and which I've applied, is that if we see a dog which we fancy then we have him as a Grandsire on the sire's side and a Great-Grandsire on the dam's side. It also works, so I'm advised with horses.

The breeding of Cockers though, and for reasons which I don't understand, has the seemingly unhealthy aspect of in-breeding, having little effect. The only influence that I can see is that by generation, they most certainly lose size. I attended a Trial about 3 years ago, and there was a man of serious repute both as a Trainer and Breeder. He had the most exquisite Cocker bitch and I took her to be about 6 months of age. She was as perfect, conformationally as one could wish for, and when I enquired as to her age, I was told that she was 2 years. Though perfectly proportioned, she was minuscule and probably weighed no more than 15lbs. The shrinking of breeds (in stature) is the only downside, that I can see.

Just about any Cocker of worth has the 4 main Wernffrwd bitches, Kathleen, her dam Silk and her dam Ci Twt, at their base, and with derivatives on both sides of any pedigree, though generally as the Dam Line.

Take for instance the dog Maesydderwen Scimitar. Both his parents were sired by Maesydderwen Kestrel and he has a breeding coefficient of some 30%. Scimitar is held aloft as a remarkable sire of brood bitches, and the bulk of those dogs which are succeeding today will more often than not be out of a Scimitar bitch.

I phoned a lady from the KC a couple of years ago, who was their authority, and asked her if she could explain to me the principles of the BC thinking. In short, she couldn't. It seems to have very little to do with Cockers, though just why, I'm not sure! VERY few if any breeders of Working Cockers bother to health test their dogs, and from the many hundreds that I've viewed over the years, not one dog seemed to be anything other than rude with health!

As Dry Rot seems to suggest, the principles of breeding are better addressed by using sound stock, than by paying too much attention 'theory'. (If I've misquoted you DR, I apologise!).

Alec.

Thank you Alec - Maesydderwen Scimitar is one of the main sires I am picking up on. You say The WCs aren't affected but some are really nervy and hyperactive. Surely that is a result of interbreeding - just like the modern Welsh cobs which used to be a genuine working animals and are now highly unpredictable and often downright dangerous.

 

[blackcob]

We've had a similar discussion recently, I'll see if I can find the thread - I was surprised and disappointed to learn that a high level of inbreeding, overuse of popular sires and an almost complete lack of health testing seemed to be acceptable for so many breeders of working cockers.

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?716688-Tell-me-about-show-cockers

 

[monte1]

really interesting thread, I have had working cockers for several years now and bred a few times from my lovely bitch
( who we sadly lost a little earlier this year :-( )

I have two cockers at the moment and Maesydderwen Scimitar is the sire of one and the grandsire of the other.

I am just really a hobby breeder, not anything serious and we work all our dogs in the shoot season. When deciding which sire to use I spoke with the breeder of my dogs and always carefully checked the breeding on both sides and did my very best to ensure no defects and not too closely interbred. but as Alec says Working Cockers by and large appear to be hardy tough and with little problems health wise.

I often wonder if this is because they are bred from good stock to be tough and strong and resilient in the field rather than just for their looks or for the show ring , as their show cocker equivalent often seems to be ?

 

[Alec Swan]

Thank you Alec - Maesydderwen Scimitar is one of the main sires I am picking up on. You say The WCs aren't affected but some are really nervy and hyperactive. Surely that is a result of interbreeding - …….. .

We have to remember, that just as with working sheepdogs, we tend to focus on the 'cream' of the best, and it's the vital few months of interactions with humans which can create the character of the dog and how it deals with the pressures of training. Breeding will, obviously, have a part to play, but if we look at trainable, bid-able and sane parents, then we have a chance to replicate what we're breeding 'from'. All so often, without the input from us and at an early age, we can end up with the nervous dog, …….. most trainers want the hyperactive, working on the basis that we can always 'stop' a dog, but dealing with those which are a bag of nerves (and there IS a world of difference), is rarely worth the effort.

Breeding working dogs is rather like breeding racehorses in that there are no certainties! The near perfect dog, had it been in the wrong hands, could just as easily be a liability, …….. BUT, who's to say that either owner should breed with it? A point of which I'm not certain.

Alec.

 

[ycbm]

Contrary to what has been said above, inbreeding does cause genetic defects and that is why incest is against the law. The same can be seen when you look at any human community where it is normal for close relatives to marry.

Genetic defects are copying mistakes.When you start with two sets of DNA that are very similar, the likelihood of getting copying mistakes that will interact and cause genetic defects in the offspring is much higher than if you start with two dissimilar sets of DNA.

 

[Patchworkpony]

Contrary to what has been said above, inbreeding does cause genetic defects and that is why incest is against the law. The same can be seen when you look at any human community where it is normal for close relatives to marry.

Genetic defects are copying mistakes.When you start with two sets of DNA that are very similar, the likelihood of getting copying mistakes that will interact and cause genetic defects in the offspring is much higher than if you start with two dissimilar sets of DNA.

At last the voice of reason! I'm so glad you are on my wavelength - we will have to get some T shirts made.

 

[Dry Rot]

Contrary to what has been said above, inbreeding does cause genetic defects and that is why incest is against the law. The same can be seen when you look at any human community where it is normal for close relatives to marry.

Genetic defects are copying mistakes.When you start with two sets of DNA that are very similar, the likelihood of getting copying mistakes that will interact and cause genetic defects in the offspring is much higher than if you start with two dissimilar sets of DNA.

I think you've contradicted yourself there! It is not the close breeding that CREATES defects, it just increases the mathematical probablility of replicating them! If the faults are not there in the first place, how can inbreeding increase their occurrence?

If anyone had bothered to look at that link for the Chillingham Cattle, I think they'd have seen that they had been kept inside a walled enclosure for over 600 years and left to their own devices. They are remarkable free from genetic defects, thus disproving the theory that inbreeding causes genetic problems.

Once again, I repeat, I am not an advocate of inbreeding. But it does seem to be misunderstood. So let's get it right.

Line breeding is when inbreeding works. Inbreeding is when line breeding doesn't work. Got it now?

 

[Dry Rot]

As for working gundogs getting smaller, I suspect the culprit here is field trialing. Field trial judges like to see action. "Style" they call it. A small dog appears to be more active and faster than a large dog, but that is not necessarily so. So they unconsciously pick the smaller dogs as winners. Breeders do like a fair smattering of FTChs in the pedigree.

I saw this in Irish setters back in the '70s. Then smaller dogs started to win and the breed lost size. Same thing with English setters. Lord Kimball of Altnaharra had a strain of English setters that were the size of small donkeys, which is exactly what you want for long heather as a small dog is lost! But they never did much in trials because they weren't flashy enough. They are now extinct.

 

[Alec Swan]

Contrary to what has been said above, inbreeding does cause genetic defects and that is why incest is against the law. …….. .

With humans, near mutations will all so often be the result of direct matings between 'immediate' relatives. Just as a late born human child to a woman may face life with difficulties. It doesn't actually work quite like that with animals. Consider DR's quoted Chillingham cattle with 600 years and no introductions of fresh influence. It is generally the case that when farmed animals have, for instance, males covering their dams, immediate siblings breeding with each other and any other form of what we would consider incest, then perfectly normal young are born. I can't explain why it should be peculiar to humans either!

Birds kept in captivity will also breed with parent to young and young to each other, and again without any apparent differences in the produce. Don't ask me why, because I haven't got a clue, but it does throw up huge question marks over the value of Breeding Coefficients, I think.

I should add, that even though I live in Norfolk, I have never used a breeding programme which would have relatives as parents!

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

Alec, I don't know much about cockers, though do like the working cockers I see at agility competitions. Do you have any thought on AMS (Acral Mutilation Syndrome), which seems to be causing some concern among working cocker folk? I believe a dna test has recently been approved , which hopefully will control the problem if breeders use the test.

I'd never even heard of AMS until reading your post. I've now done a bit of swatting up and it seems that though tests are now available to separate those dogs which are infected or are carriers, I can't see any connection (unless I've missed the point), where Line-breeding would be likely to in any way make matters worse. Obviously, breeding from affected parents would be a huge risk.

Consider H/D in Springers; 40 years ago it was unheard of. Few would use direct relatives for breeding Springers, so how or why are they now so afflicted? It cannot be as a result of Line-breeding. For me it's the million-dollar question, and one which I've yet to have answered, along with the fact that despite medical and testing improvements, the situation seems to be no better, and has now spread to other breeds.

I'm more than happy to be told and to learn, but as yet, despite my modest research, all that seems available is a collection of possibilities.

Alec.

 

[druid]

Alec, do me a favour and take a good look at the movement, hips and forelimb conformation of the spaniels at the next test or trial you're at. Some of them are quite frankly shocking (and I say that as someone who works, trials and breeds ESS). Also, there is vast under diagnosis of HD and ED in spaniels - two fold, either the dogs are fobbed off as "a bit stiff" as they're so damn stoic about it or if the animal is xrayed and it's a poor result the xrays never get sent to the BVA as it's not compulsory and the result is swept under the rug. I'm guilty of the later, I've had a dog with an estimated score double the breed average from a FTCh x FTCh mating where one parent was also the British champion, I didn't send the results to the BVA (why waste sixty pounds when I knew myself looking at the films they were shockingly bad) and I just quietly removed him from the breeding population. The problems are there, a lot of us are turning a blind eye. I think the screening is creeping in - lab breeders are ahead of us in this respect and openly advertise their dogs health status.

AMS is a growing problem in cockers - there's now 9 confirmed affected dogs s tested by Anatgene and a growing list of carriers. The fact that Rytex kennels went to the bother of testing Mallowdale Gun and Mallowdale x Factor for AMS and advertising their clear status tells you it is an issue in the breed.

 

[MurphysMinder]

Alec I wasn't attributing AMS to line or in breeding, just asking your thoughts on it as it seems to be causing concern in the breed, as druid has confirmed.

 

[Alec Swan]

Alec I wasn't attributing AMS to line or in breeding, just asking your thoughts on it as it seems to be causing concern in the breed, as druid has confirmed.

And thank you Druid, I'll reply later. MM, I haven't the faintest idea. Sorry if I misread your post!

My rather basic thoughts are that we make too good a job of rearing the pups and so the problems are being fostered. It seems to me to be the only available or possible reason, for the accelerating problems.

Alec.

 

[ycbm]

I think you've contradicted yourself there! It is not the close breeding that CREATES defects, it just increases the mathematical probablility of replicating them! If the faults are not there in the first place, how can inbreeding increase their occurrence?

If anyone had bothered to look at that link for the Chillingham Cattle, I think they'd have seen that they had been kept inside a walled enclosure for over 600 years and left to their own devices. They are remarkable free from genetic defects, thus disproving the theory that inbreeding causes genetic problems.

Once again, I repeat, I am not an advocate of inbreeding. But it does seem to be misunderstood. So let's get it right.

Line breeding is when inbreeding works. Inbreeding is when line breeding doesn't work. Got it now?

With humans, near mutations will all so often be the result of direct matings between 'immediate' relatives. Just as a late born human child to a woman may face life with difficulties. It doesn't actually work quite like that with animals. Consider DR's quoted Chillingham cattle with 600 years and no introductions of fresh influence. It is generally the case that when farmed animals have, for instance, males covering their dams, immediate siblings breeding with each other and any other form of what we would consider incest, then perfectly normal young are born. I can't explain why it should be peculiar to humans either!

Birds kept in captivity will also breed with parent to young and young to each other, and again without any apparent differences in the produce. Don't ask me why, because I haven't got a clue, but it does throw up huge question marks over the value of Breeding Coefficients, I think.

I should add, that even though I live in Norfolk, I have never used a breeding programme which would have relatives as parents!

Alec.

I believe you are both wrong. In breeding does create mutations causing genetic problems. It may not create more mutations, but it creates more mutations that cause problems.

Take HWSS in Connemara ponies. It requires a copy from both parents. It probably arose from a mutation in only one animal. So how did it get into a very large segment of the Connemara population? Because unscrupulous breeders were in breeding.

And it's not limited to humans. Animals with two heads or no skeleton (both of which I've seen in father on daughter sheep matings) are born dead or die at birth. Puppies are knocked on the head. Children with serous defects are kept alive by whatever means are available, so we see them.

 

[ycbm]

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar...ved=0ahUKEwjnn9XO3pjMAhXIuRoKHe1wC_gQgQMIGTAA


Alec read a few of these if you think it doesn't happen in birds.

 

[Patchworkpony]

Well - this is certainly turning into an interesting thread. Thanks everyone.

 

[Alec Swan]

……..

Take HWSS in Connemara ponies. It requires a copy from both parents. It probably arose from a mutation in only one animal. So how did it get into a very large segment of the Connemara population? Because unscrupulous breeders were in breeding.

…….. .

Affected parents are the problem, and whether line bred or from opposite ends of the world, the result is the same. A GSD with rotten hips put to a Labrador which also has rotten hips will be likely to produce pups which are similarly affected. Parents with flaws will pass on those defects and to simply blame line breeding is a mistake.

There is probably no other breed of dog (which I know of) which has been line bred for the last 30-40 years to the level of Cockers. Can you explain the current level of physically well rounded dogs which we mostly have? No HD? I wonder why. Springers which now have HD fairly well established have a huge gene-pool, line breeding is 'unusual', but they're none the less inflicted with the complaint. Labradors, again rarely line bred, and just look at the previous state of them as a breed.

I'm sorry, but to lay the blame of heritable complaints at the door of line breeding, really doesn't make for any sense, at all!

Alec.

 

[druid]

I'm certainly not blaming line breeding but to try to pretend diseases or genetic conditions don't exist in the breed is ridiculous. Springers and Cockers have the same average hip score by the way so the breeds are equally as prone to dysplasia.

 

[Alec Swan]

…….. to try to pretend diseases or genetic conditions don't exist in the breed is ridiculous. …….. .

Who has disagreed with this?

Alec.

 

[ycbm]

Affected parents are the problem, and whether line bred or from opposite ends of the world, the result is the same.

This is correct, but the question is how the parents get affected in the first place.

When an animal is conceived, it takes copies of half of each parents genes. In taking a copy of such a long chain of letters, mistakes are always made. Sometimes those mistakes are good (which is how we get evolution). Sometimes those mistakes are bad.

If two animals mate who already share a good percentage of their genes then the likelihood of two copying errors being made which interact in the offspring to produce a serious defect are very much higher than a similar problem occurring in two animals whose genes are very different.

That's how the defect arises in the parent in the first place. More often in in bred animals. And in breeding will then make sure it carries on.

Careful selection of the parents will limit risk, but the more genes the pairing have in common, the higher the risk.