Would you use a cloned stallion?

Irishlife

Irishlife

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 August 2004
Messages
598
Location
Ireland
Visit site
I am intrigued that the Zangersheide stud book has registered Quidam de Revel's clone "Paris-Texas" and will permit them in the stud book with the provenance the same as the original horse but the passport marked "CL". Clones as I understand it are actually twins born at a later date although the conformation is likely to be the same, they can have differnt markings.

I know little about cloning and some of the arguments are an exceptional gelding could be replicated and the bloodlines maintained. I think this is somewhat dubious as often, horses come into their own as geldings e.g. Vintage Crop - a terrible racehorse until he was gelded won the Melbourne Cup. I give this as an example only as this is not relevant to TBs (yet).

I am quite spooked about it and think it unlikely I would use a stallion who was a) cloned or b) who had a clone.

I can see value for endangered species but isn't that really interfering with nature and evolution????
 
BallyshanHorses said:
I personally would not use a clone.I think it is definately one step too far.I saw a pic of ET's clone and he was a donkey/giraffe.
Did Dolly not have complications to her health later in life that stemmed from the way she originated.
Click to expand...

I agree and have also seen photos of an ET clone, it looked awful, terrible conformation and as described above it did indeed looked like a cross donkey/giraffe :eek:

I am not a cloning fan, let the bloodlines naturally evolve as they have done for centuries. Why would we want the same lines going round and round in a never ending circle, thinning the gene pool constantly as they reappear.

We could see, as a particular stallion gets nearer to the end of their lives, a young clone popping up to take over his job (but without the competition side of it, as under FEI rules they can't compete).

The Great's of the past should be allowed to fade away naturally, and their youngsters should be produced for competition and grading/inspection so that they can take over and become the Great's of the future, that is natural, that is evolution, cloning is simply stopping time in its tracks.
 
Last edited:
Irishlife said:
I can see value for endangered species but isn't that really interfering with nature and evolution????
Click to expand...

Are you seriously saying that the way horses have been/are bred is "natural" or in any way similar to evolution? Selective breeding (which is what we already do) is not natural :)

A clone is genetically identical, and therefore semen/sperm cells from that cloned animal will be derived from exactly the same genetics as sperm cells from the original. In my view, it is no different from using frozen semen from an old or deceased stallion... except the semen is fresh or chilled! :D
 
No, far from it, a lot of the horses I have seen bred have been distinctly unnatural!

I selectively breed a good few every year

The science is fascinating could be used for noble and essential purposes with regard to "preservation of the species". I suppose that is an ethics issues.

I was pondering whether for example in the case of Quidam de Revel does the fact he has a clone who could replace him as a competition stallion (actually Im not sure if its a filly or colt but lets suppose its a colt) devalue that bloodline because it is always available?

I completely accept preserved semen from deceased stallions because that is from the original source.

At the moment I would prefer to stick to the originals
 
Clones are not identical to the father as the egg cell the DNA is injected into contains mitochondria from the source of the cell, and any respiratory traits controlled by mitochondrial DNA are not derived from the horse being cloned. The process is still not fully understood.
I would not be prepared to use a cloned stallion or mare.
 
mik said:
Clones are not identical to the father as the egg cell the DNA is injected into contains mitochondria from the source of the cell, and any respiratory traits controlled by mitochondrial DNA are not derived from the horse being cloned. The process is still not fully understood.
I would not be prepared to use a cloned stallion or mare.
Click to expand...

This is true, however I think for breeding purposes and discussion it is (essentially) irrelevant.

Mitochondria (and their DNA) are inherited from the mother, as mitochondria from outside the egg are destroyed during conception.

It doesn't matter whether the sperm is from the original animal or a clone - the mitochondria in the resulting foal are not different, because the dam is the one that brings the mitochondrial DNA to the party.

So the genetics being passed on -are- in fact identical :D
 
AndyPandy said:
Are you seriously saying that the way horses have been/are bred is "natural" or in any way similar to evolution? Selective breeding (which is what we already do) is not natural :)

A clone is genetically identical, and therefore semen/sperm cells from that cloned animal will be derived from exactly the same genetics as sperm cells from the original. In my view, it is no different from using frozen semen from an old or deceased stallion... except the semen is fresh or chilled! :D
Click to expand...

No what I actually meant was that in time a stallions direct lines would run out, even frozen semen runs out in the end, but cloning means that there is a never ending supply of one particular stallions lines, that is the point I was trying to make!!!!!

So tell me when the original stallion has passed away and it's clone is getting to the end of it's life, are they then going to clone the clone???? The idea of producing a horse one to use it as a living breathing sperm bank with no other use is IMO wrong.

When a stallion has gone and it's supply of frozen has been used up, the next generation should be allowed to come through and take on the roll.
 
The mitochondria are within the egg cell arn't they? This come from the donar mother egg cell, not from the sperm (DNA) to be cloned? I was under the impression that age of these mitochondria had had a part to play in the premature ageing of Dolly?
 
That's interesting - I always tend to get myself in a pickle when trying to get my head around mtDNA. I was under the impression that the mtDNA would be different, but clearly not.

Slightly off topic - but for ET, does the same apply? Or does the ET mare's mtDNA come into play at all? (it's been a while since i've done any reading on this...)
 
It's a really interesting subject. Ill have to call my friend in Scotland as she is more up in this then I ever was!!! I think I'm going to have a look at some current literature. Any recommendations?
 
Willow1306 said:
That's interesting - I always tend to get myself in a pickle when trying to get my head around mtDNA. I was under the impression that the mtDNA would be different, but clearly not.
Click to expand...

It will be different in the clone, but not in the clone's offspring. That's the point I was trying to make.

Slightly off topic - but for ET, does the same apply? Or does the ET mare's mtDNA come into play at all? (it's been a while since i've done any reading on this...)
Click to expand...

No, the same does not apply for ET, as the embryo is established in the donor mare, from the donor mare's ovum.
 
mik said:
The mitochondria are within the egg cell arn't they?
Click to expand...

Yes precisely. So the sperm of the clone will not pass on their "different" mitochondria to offspring of the clone.

I was under the impression that age of these mitochondria had had a part to play in the premature ageing of Dolly?
Click to expand...

No. The Roslin institute carried out advanced genetic testing, and made it clear that there were no abnormalities in Dolly that could have derived from this so-called "advanced ageing".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top