Lottie and Everdale latest test wins, God help us rewarding this disgrace.

[SEL]

This! BUT, if there is a sense that a genetic defect which can actually have quite devastating effects, is 'useful' in creating or enhancing the extraordinary movement of some sport horses; without really understanding the clinical impact of the 1copy of the gene, that seems massively irresponsible and very, very distasteful imo. There is a wider problem of soundness and longevity in sport horses generally so using the potential of a genetic blip, or even just believing that it's useful, is pretty revolting to me.

One of the papers I saw yesterday did seem to suggest that one copy of the gene could indicate hypermobility and that would make sense as to why there is such a high % of the gene in warmbloods and it hasn't already started to be bred out.

It would be a good research project for the warmblood societies because if it does then the implications for training, longevity etc should be considered.

They seem to be all over the PSSM 2 variants and they haven't had anywhere near as much research as WFFS.

 

[shortstuff99]

Performance of Swedish Warmblood fragile foal syndrome carriers and breeding prospects

Warmblood fragile foal syndrome (WFFS) is a monogenetic defect caused by a recessive lethal missense point mutation in the procollagen‐lysine, 2‐oxoglutarate 5‐dioxygenase 1 gene (PLOD1, c.2032G>A). The majority of homozygous ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[ihatework]

It’s a hypothesis (and a good valid one) but on very limited data and the conclusions essentially say it needs researching!

What I’m trying to point out, perhaps not very well, is that in the grand scheme of breeding this is all fairly new. Genotype does not necessarily equal phenotype. I’m not even sure (vast majority) of breeders are prospectively selecting for genotype as some of these posts seem to be indicating. They are selecting, rightly or wrongly, on phenotype. So if there is a link they are then selecting by default - but that’s just conjecture at this point in time.

Make your arguments valid and strong people, ie factually correct.

This doesn’t distract from the fact that dressage horse breeding in particular is heading well down the path of very very wrong. But the WFFS link is hypothesis only at this stage.

 

[shortstuff99]

It’s a hypothesis (and a good valid one) but on very limited data and the conclusions essentially say it needs researching!

What I’m trying to point out, perhaps not very well, is that in the grand scheme of breeding this is all fairly new. Genotype does not necessarily equal phenotype. I’m not even sure (vast majority) of breeders are prospectively selecting for genotype as some of these posts seem to be indicating. They are selecting, rightly or wrongly, on phenotype. So if there is a link they are then selecting by default - but that’s just conjecture at this point in time.

Make your arguments valid and strong people, ie factually correct.

This doesn’t distract from the fact that dressage horse breeding in particular is heading well down the path of very very wrong. But the WFFS link is hypothesis only at this stage.

I get what you are saying, but as a geneticist it is very strange to me that once the issue has been noted (and with now a hypothesis for carriers) breeders are happy to sort of ignore it.

It would be preferable to not breed from carriers until there is more research. By all means compete them but it doesn't seem to make sense to keep breeding from what could be potentially a time bomb. They know that homozygous is lethal so it does seem strange to keep it in the gene pool full stop. They all have to be tested now and display their WFFS status for breeding so they will all know whether their horses have it. Total US I believe, stopped standing once he was confirmed positive.

 

[ester]

It makes sense to keep breeding them if that’s the phenotype making the most money…

 

[meleeka]

I think it comes down to the judges. Who’s benefiting from this breeding of flinging toed horses? Somebody decided that this was what wins, or nobody would do it and there’d be less value in them.

 

[ihatework]

I get what you are saying, but as a geneticist it is very strange to me that once the issue has been noted (and with now a hypothesis for carriers) breeders are happy to sort of ignore it.

It would be preferable to not breed from carriers until there is more research. By all means compete them but it doesn't seem to make sense to keep breeding from what could be potentially a time bomb. They know that homozygous is lethal so it does seem strange to keep it in the gene pool full stop. They all have to be tested now and display their WFFD status for breeding so they will all know whether their horses have it. Total US I believe, stopped standing once he was confirmed positive.

*some* breeders are happy to ignore it.
Anecdotally I think we are seeing a lot less wffs +ve young stallions coming through.
(Mare owners need to do the same!!).

It unfortunately is in a large part financial driven too. Dedicated breeders might have 2-3 generations of breeding stock invested in that now at a later date the wffs crops up. Does that make them bad horses unworthy of breeding? I don’t have the answer.

I’m just playing devil’s advocate a bit here but we have generations of bloodlines. Are we just going to call a halt to that?

I’m not 100% sure where I sit at the moment but I think I’m leaning towards not allowing breeding registration for new foals that are positive. Breeders can then choose if they are willing to take the 50% risk of a positive foal. I’m mean, theoretically the best part of 50% of those will end up geldings anyway. And of the mares not all would be good breeding candidates irrespective.
By doing that you could virtually eliminate it in 2-3 generations. But importantly there would also be a 50% chance of preserving the bloodline with a negative genotype.

In parallel and actually of equal importance in my opinion is any breeding stock that are positive at the moment need really critical evaluation of their phenotype. We also need clear guidance about how to categorise hypermobile. Should a sound supple competitive nice mover (but not a hypermobile horse), who has had a long career and is producing you stock of similar type, yet happens to be positive, be excluded from the gene pool?

What about hypermobile that are negative?

I know what the purist answer is btw, but that isn’t how life works unfortunately- so to get things to change it has to be incremental and achievable.

 

[sbloom]

A connective tissue disorder which is fatal if a foal gets two copies of the gene. It's one of the animal genetics tests but naive me assumed people would want to breed it out.

I get what you are saying, but as a geneticist it is very strange to me that once the issue has been noted (and with now a hypothesis for carriers) breeders are happy to sort of ignore it.

Human nature - we decide something looks fantastic and move heaven and earth to get it. The fact that it's unhealthy, and if we tip over a very fine line, potentially lethal (talking in principle), we seek to tippy toe that line and stay just to the right side of it instead of finding a better direction. I think most now know that modern breeding has likely crossed that line, certainly for specialist dressage horses - we know that ligament attachments within the horse, especially in the neck, are decreasing in number for instance. We know that the modern horse has already got legs that are technically too long for the ligaments to be truly functional/strong, and yet still we breed for longer and longer legs (that video shown on FB the last day or two with the horse backed up in a corner, "working on piaffe" and for more and more spectacular movement with no regard to genotype.

The sooner someone starts breeding with long term soundness as the primary aim, and shake the market up, the better. But it still won't do well in the ring so we circle back, THIS is why breeders, and their clients, want to toe that line, rather than run in the other direction.

It does sometimes feel like the human ego knows no bounds when it comes to animals.

HYPP anyone?! https://ceh.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/health-topics/hyperkalemic-periodic-paralysis-hypp

 

[tristars]

truth is there are too many people breeding horses that do not have a clue

 

[tristars]

It’s a hypothesis (and a good valid one) but on very limited data and the conclusions essentially say it needs researching!

What I’m trying to point out, perhaps not very well, is that in the grand scheme of breeding this is all fairly new. Genotype does not necessarily equal phenotype. I’m not even sure (vast majority) of breeders are prospectively selecting for genotype as some of these posts seem to be indicating. They are selecting, rightly or wrongly, on phenotype. So if there is a link they are then selecting by default - but that’s just conjecture at this point in time.

Make your arguments valid and strong people, ie factually correct.

This doesn’t distract from the fact that dressage horse breeding in particular is heading well down the path of very very wrong. But the WFFS link is hypothesis only at this stage.

really good bloodlines breed both, the results are visible and you know what you will get

warmbloods are a special difficult case as they are so mongrel, this makes them more unpredictable when breeding

i would go for genotype on both sides, this has worked for me, the results have been predictable

however i no longer want to breed, the training, riding , the people who want blood out the horse sicken me

 

[SEL]

It makes sense to keep breeding them if that’s the phenotype making the most money…

Sadly so.

If flicky toed long legs wins medals then flicky toed long legs is what gets bred.

 

[ihatework]

i would go for genotype on both sides, this has worked for me, the results have been predictable

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Maybe I’m over simplifying things, but how can you go for genotype on both sides (unless you specifically mean selecting only for wffs -ve, in which case I agree, but this has only really been routinely known about and available for ?7 ish years). You don’t currently get genome sequenced horses. Just a few select genetic tests.

You can go for pedigree on both sides, but to me that is different and I’d argue primarily phenotype based.

 

[tristars]

i don`t breed warmbloods, if i was to breed again, which is highly unlikely, i would go for good proven genes of the very best of any particular race, on both sides and look for some compatibility in the phenotype, horses that look like they would complement each other but introduce a new element ,not keen on using two sides that are physically very different, when its time to outcross after a number of years, and depending in which direction i would being aiming assessment of introducing new races, even part breds, who are phenotypical of their bloodlines and potent, to get an injection of continuity of soundness for example

so WFFS would not come into it for me, such an awful thing

but really surely like most things with horses so much depends of those making the decisions

 

[ihatework]

i don`t breed warmbloods, if i was to breed again, which is highly unlikely, i would go for good proven genes of the very best of any particular race, on both sides and look for some compatibility in the phenotype, horses that look like they would complement each other but introduce a new element ,not keen on using two sides that are physically very different, when its time to outcross after a number of years, and depending in which direction i would being aiming assessment of introducing new races, even part breds, who are phenotypical of their bloodlines and potent, to get an injection of continuity of soundness for example

so WFFS would not come into it for me, such an awful thing

but really surely like most things with horses so much depends of those making the decisions

Thank you for clarifying (it doesn’t matter whether warmblood or not), you are breeding on pedigree and phenotype just like everyone else. Not genotype.

 

[tristars]

Thank you for clarifying (it doesn’t matter whether warmblood or not), you are breeding on pedigree and phenotype just like everyone else. Not genotype.

not true

 

[Cortez]

not true

What do you think genotype means?

 

[shortstuff99]

If I remember right I think Tristars used to breed PREs of which the stud book does have some genetic listing of traits for sires and mares.

 

[ihatework]

If I remember right I think Tristars used to breed PREs of which the stud book does have some genetic listing of traits for sires and mares.

Well I’m hoping Cortez will chip in then if breeding PREs has a heavy amount of genotyping. I can’t imagine it does but I hope I’m proved wrong.

Databasing bloodlines against traits I can get with (maybe a bit like linear scoring but with a focus on what they pass on?) but I wouldn’t consider that genotyping.

 

[LEC]

Yes, as all the breeders say (obviously) that one copy is fine etc but the carriers of it do show this very extravagant, over action.

I have a WFFS carrier and her movement is diabolically average. Anything with Bay Ronald is a carrier and he was a TB.

 

[Cortez]

Well I’m hoping Cortez will chip in then if breeding PREs has a heavy amount of genotyping. I can’t imagine it does but I hope I’m proved wrong.

Databasing bloodlines against traits I can get with (maybe a bit like linear scoring but with a focus on what they pass on?) but I wouldn’t consider that genotyping.

Yep, there are indices for traits, but not anything that would be recognised as actual genotype.

 

[LEC]

Also I bred from a mare who though I did not test just went on the assumption she would be a WFFS carrier as a Jaguar Mail who has produced pretty consistent, sound horses and 90% TB. Does that make me irresponsible? I have ended up with a filly and if I bred from her; if she turned out to be a nice horse like her mother was, would again go on the assumption she might be a carrier and just specifically choose non carrier stallions. I think we are going slightly over the top on this. WFFS genetic link was only discovered within the last 6/7 years and they are still not 100% sure where it has come from.

 

[druid]

I think the only genuine breeding on genotype would be the Equinome stuff in TBs

 

[shortstuff99]

Yep, there are indices for traits, but not anything that would be recognised as actual genotype.

There are programmes within ANCCE that is aiming to investigate genotypes, APSL is starting it too.

 

[shortstuff99]

Also I bred from a mare who though I did not test just went on the assumption she would be a WFFS carrier as a Jaguar Mail who has produced pretty consistent, sound horses and 90% TB. Does that make me irresponsible? I have ended up with a filly and if I bred from her; if she turned out to be a nice horse like her mother was, would again go on the assumption she might be a carrier and just specifically choose non carrier stallions. I think we are going slightly over the top on this. WFFS genetic link was only discovered within the last 6/7 years and they are still not 100% sure where it has come from.

Your horse is 50% likely to have a copy of the gene (if Jaguar Mail is a carrier).

I imagine it is possibly a recent mutation (or was always around but is now becoming more common as breeders over use certain stallions).

But knowing that it is a lethal gene it should be looked at and monitored. Such as HWS in Connemaras or lethal white overo.

 

[ihatework]

Yep, there are indices for traits, but not anything that would be recognised as actual genotype.

Indexing, knew there was a name for it but was having a brain fart!
Done across most studbook to varying degrees of usefulness and I think I hear rumour the wbfsh was going to try and centralise it (good luck to them )

That said I’d imagine indexing more useful/reliable in the closed stud books than the Warmbloods. But still not genotyping

 

[shortstuff99]

Indexing, knew there was a name for it but was having a brain fart!
Done across most studbook to varying degrees of usefulness and I think I hear rumour the wbfsh was going to try and centralise it (good luck to them )

That said I’d imagine indexing more useful/reliable in the closed stud books than the Warmbloods. But still not genotyping

That is not but ANCCE is doing genotyping studies. They have their own private genetics lab.

 

[ihatework]

That is not but ANCCE is doing genotyping studies. They have their own private genetics lab.

That’s cool and I’m sure it’s how things will start to evolve over the years across a variety of stud books.
But sounds like it’s current research?
Tristars presumably was not using it in their historical breeding from yonder years and therefore I appreciate im a bit of a dog with a bone, but I generally pull up blatant inaccuracies.

 

[LEC]

Just had a look it was diagnosed in 2019 and actually Dark Ronald/Bay Ronald is not the cause..

I should maybe get my 2yo tested mainly for being nosey but will see when I have some cash lying about to do it. I didn’t test her mother as no point as enough decent sjing stallions about who were WFFS free.

I am not convinced on the hyperflexion links with WFFS. I think you only need to look at the German warmbloods in 1970s to now to realise what money and motivation can do in breeding. Look at Everdale he had a 10yo son competing alongside him at London International. AI, embryo transfer and line breeding are probably far bigger reasons we have horses who move like they do now.

Dark Ronald xx, Not Origin Horse for Warmblood Fragile Foal Syndrome (WFFS)

The Thoroughbred Dark Ronald xx is not the source horse of the Warmblood Fragile Foal Syndrome (WFFS). A recent study proved that Dark Renold xx was not a carrier of the WFFS causative variant and that the origin might come from a Hanoverian stallion.

eurodressage.com

 

[shortstuff99]

That’s cool and I’m sure it’s how things will start to evolve over the years across a variety of stud books.
But sounds like it’s current research?
Tristars presumably was not using it in their historical breeding from yonder years and therefore I appreciate im a bit of a dog with a bone, but I generally pull up blatant inaccuracies.

To be fair I'm not sure when she last bred, but if it is last couple of years then she *could * have been using some types of genotyping which is why I mentioned it.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

It's "funny" when people decide to play it safe, or not. With the genetic link of WFFS being relatively new, and there being a lot of unknowns, people are still very enthusiastic about breeding from carriers rather than apprehensive. Then again, I can see people just thinking that there's no reason to be apprehensive.

I know that in general the attitude surrounding WFFS carriers and breeding them to non carriers is very relaxed.

Not sure whether or not I agree or disagree, really. If I had a WFFS carrier, it'd have to be one hell of a horse for me to breed it (to a non carrier). Then again, I feel that way in general.

I don't agree with a lot of the casual breeding decisions on HHO to be honest, but as long as people and horses are happy and healthy, then whatever I suppose!