Question: How does homozygosity make better dogs? In other words if I have dogs of a certain speed index, how is it I can make faster dogs whose genetics fixate on a certain speed? How do you make them faster or colder nosed or better footed or more acurate locate or tougher or grittier or rig better or smarter or, etc., ect.?
Question; What is considered outcross and what is considered within the perameters of non-outcross? What is a stable genetic family base? How close is too close time after time and how far away is too far?
Question: What if at 6 years old a top reproducing dog in my tightly linebred program is found to have a defective genetic issue like; starts false treeing or starts to get fussy at trees and elsewhere or starts to run tracks backwards or starts track straddling or gets cancer or several of the above, and I"ve already bred offspring and grand offspring of the dog. What is the protocol?
Question; What do you heavy linebreeders think about the issue or inbreeding depression (small litters, poor mothering traits, non breedable dogs, etc.)? Are these acceptable traits that are controllable? What if these traits are left unchecked in any degree, is it for the betterment of the hunting side to allow a bit of it, or not?
Question; Being basically at the beginning of the genetic age, is it possible that Mother Nature has a few genetic wrenches to throw into our rudimentary examination of the genetic process? Or is it all too easy to manipulate the DNA of organisms that have taken ages to create? Is it possible that when one linebreeds for certain possible positive traits, other negative traits that become homozygous slip through the gaps?
Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Cobalt. I have been doing my best to explain why having a knowledge of Genetics will greatly improve any breeding program but without knowing the basics It’s difficult. That’s why I recommend others doing their own research. Go back and read what McDuffie said in the post above. That was many years ago but look what he produced and how long it lasted and he just knew the basics of genetics, without computer programs we have now and the advancements of genetics
What is hard for me to explain is the way people have been breeding for years is going nowhere and does not work. The advice being giving on these websites, old breeders, most vets is just hearsay and how we been doing for years and it's simply a waste of time with no measureable results.
Before I answer some of your questions let me ask you a few. How many dogs that are not inbred or line bred have the problems you ask me? Your Quote: Small litters, poor mothering traits, non breeding traits etc.
How did man create the laying hen knowing how much she will weigh, how long will she produce and how many eggs will she have, how much will she eat, how long will she live?
Genetic science: Inbreeding problems do not show up for 8-10 generations if they show up at all. If a problem shows up inbreeding brought it out, it did not create it.
You have to make genes homozygous within a family before you can fix a trait. Every mating changes the genetic code. Related dogs with desirable qualities will maintain diversity and improve the breed. Outcrossing will lead to crossing depression after the first generation. Outcrossing can be used to introduce something new to a line. The challenge is what else is introduced.
All the traits that you mention good and bad are genetic traits, controlled by a genetic code.
JTG
What is hard for me to explain is the way people have been breeding for years is going nowhere and does not work. The advice being giving on these websites, old breeders, most vets is just hearsay and how we been doing for years and it's simply a waste of time with no measureable results.
Before I answer some of your questions let me ask you a few. How many dogs that are not inbred or line bred have the problems you ask me? Your Quote: Small litters, poor mothering traits, non breeding traits etc.
How did man create the laying hen knowing how much she will weigh, how long will she produce and how many eggs will she have, how much will she eat, how long will she live?
Genetic science: Inbreeding problems do not show up for 8-10 generations if they show up at all. If a problem shows up inbreeding brought it out, it did not create it.
You have to make genes homozygous within a family before you can fix a trait. Every mating changes the genetic code. Related dogs with desirable qualities will maintain diversity and improve the breed. Outcrossing will lead to crossing depression after the first generation. Outcrossing can be used to introduce something new to a line. The challenge is what else is introduced.
All the traits that you mention good and bad are genetic traits, controlled by a genetic code.
JTG
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
I'm not questioning the practice of linebreeding. I'm questioning some basic theoretical issues that I have and maybe others might.
I think the matching of like traits is an important part of breeding.
I'm sure you are well versed on the theories of inbreeding and their positive outcomes, but there are those who might know more than you who do not agree with your tactics. It is well understood in the horse world that inbreeding just doesn't work in the end. That is one reason why the Jockey Club (thoroughbreds) will only allow live cover. The Arabian horse has had trouble because of linebreeding. The hereford breed of beef cow has had major problems and even the holsteins who are the most studied and genetically superior animal ever have taken a hit in the genetics department.
If you will indulge me to answer 1 question pertaining to YOUR beliefs. What is too close, and what is too far in your breeding program?
I think the matching of like traits is an important part of breeding.
I'm sure you are well versed on the theories of inbreeding and their positive outcomes, but there are those who might know more than you who do not agree with your tactics. It is well understood in the horse world that inbreeding just doesn't work in the end. That is one reason why the Jockey Club (thoroughbreds) will only allow live cover. The Arabian horse has had trouble because of linebreeding. The hereford breed of beef cow has had major problems and even the holsteins who are the most studied and genetically superior animal ever have taken a hit in the genetics department.
If you will indulge me to answer 1 question pertaining to YOUR beliefs. What is too close, and what is too far in your breeding program?
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Cobalt,
I do not have any tactics anything that I post can be backed up with science and you should consider doing the same in respect to information you posted on horses and cows. Why do you think they are called Thoroughbred? Post your method of breeding or anyone elses that's better than what I posted.
The question your asking me has already been answered in the previous post. I am sure there are lots of people who know more than me in respect to breeding and genetics. What's great about them knowing more than me is I am willing to listen and learn and not keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
See below on Thoroughbreds.
JTG
The Lesh brothers, early evaluators of Thoroughbred pedigrees, determined that the 3x3 position has only a slightly higher percentage of winners than average, but a very high percentage of good producers. Later researchers have agreed with this finding saying that inbred horses are often extraordinary producers.
David Dink, who entered his research to disprove the benefits of linebreeding, ended up reporting that he found duplications of significant ancestors in the 4x4 position best for winners.
Harold Hampton, who alerted the Thoroughbred breeders "down under" to the benefits of balanced linebreeding, believed the 5x5 position was premier.
Clive Harper, who gathered the results of the previous pioneers to give us a detailed overview, said that better horses have more linebreeding in the 4th, 5th and 6th, and they also need an instance of 3/4 or full siblings within 6 generations.
Harper's research went much farther into this. He also saw that the best horses accumulated multiple lines of an important mare or sire in the far reaches of the pedigree, and had reinforcement for that presence in the engine room area. And of that target ancestor in the far reaches (7th to 14th generation) he rated them as such: good- a tap root mare; better- a pair of full sisters; best- a full brother and sister.
When he was asked what he considered the perfect pedigree, he said that would be 4x4 to a full brother and sister, with each having reinforcement to its ancestors. He particularly liked to see one side of the pedigree develop the dam ancestors of the full siblings and the other side to develop the sire side ancestors. He said the closest he ever saw of his ideal pedigree was in the Thoroughbred Fair Trial.
I do not have any tactics anything that I post can be backed up with science and you should consider doing the same in respect to information you posted on horses and cows. Why do you think they are called Thoroughbred? Post your method of breeding or anyone elses that's better than what I posted.
The question your asking me has already been answered in the previous post. I am sure there are lots of people who know more than me in respect to breeding and genetics. What's great about them knowing more than me is I am willing to listen and learn and not keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
See below on Thoroughbreds.
JTG
The Lesh brothers, early evaluators of Thoroughbred pedigrees, determined that the 3x3 position has only a slightly higher percentage of winners than average, but a very high percentage of good producers. Later researchers have agreed with this finding saying that inbred horses are often extraordinary producers.
David Dink, who entered his research to disprove the benefits of linebreeding, ended up reporting that he found duplications of significant ancestors in the 4x4 position best for winners.
Harold Hampton, who alerted the Thoroughbred breeders "down under" to the benefits of balanced linebreeding, believed the 5x5 position was premier.
Clive Harper, who gathered the results of the previous pioneers to give us a detailed overview, said that better horses have more linebreeding in the 4th, 5th and 6th, and they also need an instance of 3/4 or full siblings within 6 generations.
Harper's research went much farther into this. He also saw that the best horses accumulated multiple lines of an important mare or sire in the far reaches of the pedigree, and had reinforcement for that presence in the engine room area. And of that target ancestor in the far reaches (7th to 14th generation) he rated them as such: good- a tap root mare; better- a pair of full sisters; best- a full brother and sister.
When he was asked what he considered the perfect pedigree, he said that would be 4x4 to a full brother and sister, with each having reinforcement to its ancestors. He particularly liked to see one side of the pedigree develop the dam ancestors of the full siblings and the other side to develop the sire side ancestors. He said the closest he ever saw of his ideal pedigree was in the Thoroughbred Fair Trial.
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Good information. Thank you.
I did look up a couple thoroughbred horses with the name "Fair Trial", one from 1932 and the other from 1944. The former was more linebred but only had 4 or 5 common ancestors top and bottom in 5 generations. Is that the horse in which you are referring?
I did look up a couple thoroughbred horses with the name "Fair Trial", one from 1932 and the other from 1944. The former was more linebred but only had 4 or 5 common ancestors top and bottom in 5 generations. Is that the horse in which you are referring?
-
Dads dogboy
- Babble Mouth
- Posts: 1353
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 2:53 am
- Location: Arkansas
- Location: Central Arkansas
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Folks,
Here is a link to some of the information that JTG is referencing.
http://www.sport-horse-breeder.com/pedi ... ition.html
http://www.ask.com/web?q=3x3+position+i ... 71&gct=bar
I find that what these Horse People are calling Inbreeding is in most cases what I would call “Faint Line Breeding”. The 3 x 3 refers to commonality of one individual in the 3rd generation back.
There is a Link to a Sport Horse Breeding where the Sire is also the Grand Sire on the damns side. I find this very interesting as “Brackett” and Dr. White both thought this was one of the most effective crosses to make to “TIGHTEN” or increase the chances to create more HOMOYGOUS Genes in a Line.
Anyway more FOOD for thought in Breeding.
I will Post some very good info on Breeding and Genetic work done in the Dairy Industry.
Here is a link to some of the information that JTG is referencing.
http://www.sport-horse-breeder.com/pedi ... ition.html
http://www.ask.com/web?q=3x3+position+i ... 71&gct=bar
I find that what these Horse People are calling Inbreeding is in most cases what I would call “Faint Line Breeding”. The 3 x 3 refers to commonality of one individual in the 3rd generation back.
There is a Link to a Sport Horse Breeding where the Sire is also the Grand Sire on the damns side. I find this very interesting as “Brackett” and Dr. White both thought this was one of the most effective crosses to make to “TIGHTEN” or increase the chances to create more HOMOYGOUS Genes in a Line.
Anyway more FOOD for thought in Breeding.
I will Post some very good info on Breeding and Genetic work done in the Dairy Industry.
-
Dads dogboy
- Babble Mouth
- Posts: 1353
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 2:53 am
- Location: Arkansas
- Location: Central Arkansas
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Folks here is a well thought out, easy to understand Article from Members.Tripod.com
In-Breeding and other Breeding Methods
One of the most hotly talked about topics with regard to pure-bred dogs is the use of in-breeding. This is a term that is often misused and is extremely misunderstood.
Part of the misunderstandings come from differences in the way the terms are used within the scientific/medical field, and how it is commonly used by breeders. These are the most commonly accepted definitions used by serious dog breeders and will be the definitions used within this article.
In-breeding - This is the breeding of closely related animals. Brother-Sister, Parent-Offspring, ½ brother - ½ Sister.
Line-breeding - This is the breeding of animals that share common ancestors but are not closely related. For example the dogs may share a common great-grandparent.
Out-cross - This is generally considered the breeding of animals with no common ancestors within the first 4 or 5 generations.
Common Misconceptions
In-breeding causes genetic diseases - Breeding closely related animals increases the possibility that any bad genes in a line will show up. It does not 'cause' genetic disease.
Out-crossed dogs are healthier - This is only partly true. There is a known phenomenon called Hybrid Vigor. Two animals of unrelated strains breed and the offspring is often bigger and grows faster than it's purebred cousins. This method is often used by farmers in order to get their animals to market sooner. But one of the biggest misconceptions of hybrid vigor is that it applies to all animals of mixed heritage. Hybrid Vigor only applies to the animals that are the direct offspring of the crossing of the unrelated strains. In other words if you continue to breed animals of different strains there generally will not be any additional increase in hybrid vigor. If the unrelated strains share common genes for genetic disorders, hybrid vigor will not over ride the risk of the disorder showing up. Out-crossing can also cause problems if widely divergent physical types are mixed due to differences in growth rates and bone and muscle sizes.
Benefits Of Each Type Of Breeding
By definition, purebred dogs have a smaller gene pool to draw on than mixed breed dogs. That smaller gene pool gives the breed its individual characteristics, such as physical appearance and temperament. It is what makes a poodle a Poodle and a Golden Retriever a Golden Retriever. But there is considerable controversy with regard to whether the gene pools of the modern pure-bred have become too small.
Inbreeding -
In-breeding is more likely to help "set" or "fix" a particular trait within a breed or a line by narrowing the gene pool to favor those traits. So if a breeder is looking to set a particular desirable feature of their line then in-breeding and choosing the offspring most strongly possessing that trait can be beneficial.
Here are samples of an in-bred pedigrees -
Parent/Offspring Brother/Sister
In the first pedigree Sydney is the maternal son of Annie, thus doubling on Annie's genes. Or another way to look at it is Annie is both Sydney's mother and Grand-mother. In the second example we have a full brother/sister in-breeding so we are doubling up on the genes from both Kiley and Annie.
In-breeding can also help identify those bad genes that exist within a line. Dogs possessing the bad genes can be eliminated from a breeding program and carriers also identified.
Intermittent in-breeding within a line or breed is not damaging to the long term health of the animals. However, in-breeding over successive generations can lead to reduced fitness and fertility problems among the offspring, resulting in a phenomena known as In-breeding Depression. It can take many generations to show up depending on the traits involved.
To use this method responsibly a breeder would not want to in-breed on animals with known genetic disorders, temperaments not in keeping with it's given breed, or known serious structural faults, or to in-breed frequently even on healthy-superior specimens.
Line-Breeding -
Line-breeding is another way to help "set" or "fix" desirable traits. With line-breeding you breed animals that are related, but you are also routinely introducing genes from other lines into the genetic mix. It takes longer to fix the desirable traits this way, but doing so lowers the risk of those problems associated with repeated in-breeding. With a tight line-breeding you might find the same 3, 4 or more dogs showing up numerous times in a 5 generation pedigree.
Here's an example of a tightly line-bred pedigree (I've identified those dogs whose names show up more than once by color)
Loose line-breeding over successive generations will result in more variations of physical appearance than would in-breeding or tight line-breeding, but will keep the physical look and structure within the same general size and shape, it also carries fewer long term risks.
And a sample of loose line-breeding (as with the above pedigree I'll identify dogs whose names repeat by color):
According to geneticists. Line-breeding can be carried on for many many generations without deleterious effects on the line or breed as long as the individuals involved have few hidden genetic disorders.
Out-Crossing -
Out-crossing in terms of pure-bred dogs is the breeding of unrelated dogs. On a pedigree no names will be repeated within the first 5 generations.
This type of breeding has both advantages and disadvantages. Which as it turns out are flip sides of the same argument? With out-crossing you are maintaining the greatest genetic diversity, but this also leads to the least consistency in terms of physical appearance and other traits.
Out-crossing does not guarantee that the animals won't develop genetic disorders, but it does tend to reduce the numbers of affected offspring. Your best chance of getting an animal that is less prone to developing a genetic disorder comes more from finding a conscientious breeder that screens their animals for hereditary disorders and breeds for the betterment of the breed.
All three methods of breeding have their place in a long term, well thought out breeding program. Talk to the breeder, ask questions as to what their goal is in doing a particular breeding. Ask about the risks and what problems are known to that line. And all lines have some because the perfect dog and the perfect lines are still goals of the future for all breeders.
In-Breeding and other Breeding Methods
One of the most hotly talked about topics with regard to pure-bred dogs is the use of in-breeding. This is a term that is often misused and is extremely misunderstood.
Part of the misunderstandings come from differences in the way the terms are used within the scientific/medical field, and how it is commonly used by breeders. These are the most commonly accepted definitions used by serious dog breeders and will be the definitions used within this article.
In-breeding - This is the breeding of closely related animals. Brother-Sister, Parent-Offspring, ½ brother - ½ Sister.
Line-breeding - This is the breeding of animals that share common ancestors but are not closely related. For example the dogs may share a common great-grandparent.
Out-cross - This is generally considered the breeding of animals with no common ancestors within the first 4 or 5 generations.
Common Misconceptions
In-breeding causes genetic diseases - Breeding closely related animals increases the possibility that any bad genes in a line will show up. It does not 'cause' genetic disease.
Out-crossed dogs are healthier - This is only partly true. There is a known phenomenon called Hybrid Vigor. Two animals of unrelated strains breed and the offspring is often bigger and grows faster than it's purebred cousins. This method is often used by farmers in order to get their animals to market sooner. But one of the biggest misconceptions of hybrid vigor is that it applies to all animals of mixed heritage. Hybrid Vigor only applies to the animals that are the direct offspring of the crossing of the unrelated strains. In other words if you continue to breed animals of different strains there generally will not be any additional increase in hybrid vigor. If the unrelated strains share common genes for genetic disorders, hybrid vigor will not over ride the risk of the disorder showing up. Out-crossing can also cause problems if widely divergent physical types are mixed due to differences in growth rates and bone and muscle sizes.
Benefits Of Each Type Of Breeding
By definition, purebred dogs have a smaller gene pool to draw on than mixed breed dogs. That smaller gene pool gives the breed its individual characteristics, such as physical appearance and temperament. It is what makes a poodle a Poodle and a Golden Retriever a Golden Retriever. But there is considerable controversy with regard to whether the gene pools of the modern pure-bred have become too small.
Inbreeding -
In-breeding is more likely to help "set" or "fix" a particular trait within a breed or a line by narrowing the gene pool to favor those traits. So if a breeder is looking to set a particular desirable feature of their line then in-breeding and choosing the offspring most strongly possessing that trait can be beneficial.
Here are samples of an in-bred pedigrees -
Parent/Offspring Brother/Sister
In the first pedigree Sydney is the maternal son of Annie, thus doubling on Annie's genes. Or another way to look at it is Annie is both Sydney's mother and Grand-mother. In the second example we have a full brother/sister in-breeding so we are doubling up on the genes from both Kiley and Annie.
In-breeding can also help identify those bad genes that exist within a line. Dogs possessing the bad genes can be eliminated from a breeding program and carriers also identified.
Intermittent in-breeding within a line or breed is not damaging to the long term health of the animals. However, in-breeding over successive generations can lead to reduced fitness and fertility problems among the offspring, resulting in a phenomena known as In-breeding Depression. It can take many generations to show up depending on the traits involved.
To use this method responsibly a breeder would not want to in-breed on animals with known genetic disorders, temperaments not in keeping with it's given breed, or known serious structural faults, or to in-breed frequently even on healthy-superior specimens.
Line-Breeding -
Line-breeding is another way to help "set" or "fix" desirable traits. With line-breeding you breed animals that are related, but you are also routinely introducing genes from other lines into the genetic mix. It takes longer to fix the desirable traits this way, but doing so lowers the risk of those problems associated with repeated in-breeding. With a tight line-breeding you might find the same 3, 4 or more dogs showing up numerous times in a 5 generation pedigree.
Here's an example of a tightly line-bred pedigree (I've identified those dogs whose names show up more than once by color)
Loose line-breeding over successive generations will result in more variations of physical appearance than would in-breeding or tight line-breeding, but will keep the physical look and structure within the same general size and shape, it also carries fewer long term risks.
And a sample of loose line-breeding (as with the above pedigree I'll identify dogs whose names repeat by color):
According to geneticists. Line-breeding can be carried on for many many generations without deleterious effects on the line or breed as long as the individuals involved have few hidden genetic disorders.
Out-Crossing -
Out-crossing in terms of pure-bred dogs is the breeding of unrelated dogs. On a pedigree no names will be repeated within the first 5 generations.
This type of breeding has both advantages and disadvantages. Which as it turns out are flip sides of the same argument? With out-crossing you are maintaining the greatest genetic diversity, but this also leads to the least consistency in terms of physical appearance and other traits.
Out-crossing does not guarantee that the animals won't develop genetic disorders, but it does tend to reduce the numbers of affected offspring. Your best chance of getting an animal that is less prone to developing a genetic disorder comes more from finding a conscientious breeder that screens their animals for hereditary disorders and breeds for the betterment of the breed.
All three methods of breeding have their place in a long term, well thought out breeding program. Talk to the breeder, ask questions as to what their goal is in doing a particular breeding. Ask about the risks and what problems are known to that line. And all lines have some because the perfect dog and the perfect lines are still goals of the future for all breeders.
-
slowandeasy
- Babble Mouth
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:09 pm
- Location: AZ.
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
CJ, or JTG or anyone for that matter,correct me if I am wrong. Doesn't anybody feel that all of the breeds for the most part. Are so dilute, that is the reason for the poor percentages of successful pups. I know I do, and have had the most success when I started to recognize which ones in a pedigree that I wanted to start seeing top and bottom. Based on performance and performance only. Take care, Willy
Cry to the heavens and let slip the dogs of war. For they must feed on the bones of tyranny. In order for men to have freedom and liberty
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Dads Dogboy. Thank you for posting that article. It leave me thinking that even though science is a big part of this crazy breeding issue, there are more variables that juust a simple recipe.
There's more than one way to skin that stinky old cat and still end up with a beautiful coat depending on how the seamstress sows it together.
And thank you for clarifying the 3x3 and 4x4, etc. I think I'm back in the lines of a truer hobby linebreeder. I was almost debating weather I should breed my top beagle to one of my blues because I'm so far out of whack due to my lack of substantial reading choices. lol
There's more than one way to skin that stinky old cat and still end up with a beautiful coat depending on how the seamstress sows it together.
And thank you for clarifying the 3x3 and 4x4, etc. I think I'm back in the lines of a truer hobby linebreeder. I was almost debating weather I should breed my top beagle to one of my blues because I'm so far out of whack due to my lack of substantial reading choices. lol
-
slowandeasy
- Babble Mouth
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:09 pm
- Location: AZ.
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Quote from Cobalt:Dads Dogboy. Thank you for posting that article. It leave's me thinking that even though science is a big part of this crazy breeding issue, there are more variables that just a simple recipe.
x2
I to believe, that although science has made leaps and bounds in regards to genetics. CJ like we have talked about in the past. Most of their success has come from outward appearances, color, larger breasts on chickens, larger thighs on chickens, an extra ribeye on cattle etc. etc. But when it comes to performance animals I believe that there are more that are way more qualified than all of us. That really haven't come up with the ironclad solution.
I for one will always go with line breeding over out crossing. As I feel the percentages are far better. No I won't tell anyone that whole litters turn out great. But I believe when a line breeding program is followed. There are far less culls. This simply means that a higher percentage of pups will please a lot of people that are happy treeing criters on a less consistent basis.(Pleasure hunters). And truly special hounds come on a more frequent basis. And when added to other individuals with average to above average talent. Will make even the most meticulous Hunter happy. This is just the way that I see it. And through my eyes is what makes it fun to keep striving for perfection. I sure hope that in my lifetime, and the kids and grandkids lifetime it continues to be a challenge. Because when we have all the answers I don't think it'll be near as fun anymore.
And all of the above I believe is the reason, that although all of this is always bought up amongst hunters, magazine articles, and now in the electronic age on forums. I don't believe it will ever get old, it will always generate discussion. Take care, Willy
x2
I to believe, that although science has made leaps and bounds in regards to genetics. CJ like we have talked about in the past. Most of their success has come from outward appearances, color, larger breasts on chickens, larger thighs on chickens, an extra ribeye on cattle etc. etc. But when it comes to performance animals I believe that there are more that are way more qualified than all of us. That really haven't come up with the ironclad solution.
I for one will always go with line breeding over out crossing. As I feel the percentages are far better. No I won't tell anyone that whole litters turn out great. But I believe when a line breeding program is followed. There are far less culls. This simply means that a higher percentage of pups will please a lot of people that are happy treeing criters on a less consistent basis.(Pleasure hunters). And truly special hounds come on a more frequent basis. And when added to other individuals with average to above average talent. Will make even the most meticulous Hunter happy. This is just the way that I see it. And through my eyes is what makes it fun to keep striving for perfection. I sure hope that in my lifetime, and the kids and grandkids lifetime it continues to be a challenge. Because when we have all the answers I don't think it'll be near as fun anymore.
And all of the above I believe is the reason, that although all of this is always bought up amongst hunters, magazine articles, and now in the electronic age on forums. I don't believe it will ever get old, it will always generate discussion. Take care, Willy
Cry to the heavens and let slip the dogs of war. For they must feed on the bones of tyranny. In order for men to have freedom and liberty
-
Gary Roberson
- Open Mouth
- Posts: 722
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:09 pm
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
Now that CJC has found us the definitions of In-breeding, Line-breeding and out-crossing, what are most of you doing in your breeding program?
I found that I am a fairy aggressive line-breeder as you will find the same dogs many times in my dogs 5 generation pedigrees. The most dominant will be Smokey River J Bells Cheif, Upsons Blue Boy II and Clear River Diamond Jim.
Adios,
Gary
I found that I am a fairy aggressive line-breeder as you will find the same dogs many times in my dogs 5 generation pedigrees. The most dominant will be Smokey River J Bells Cheif, Upsons Blue Boy II and Clear River Diamond Jim.
Adios,
Gary
Re: Maybe There Is Something to this Genetics Thing???
More accurate linebreeding:
Much of the factual information on linebreeding has been camouflaged by breeder's pet theories. Literally dozens of linebreeding theories, plans, charts, and schemes have been proposed. Many such plans are represented as a method of recombining the genes that were present in some famous past dog to duplicate its quality. Some plans are touted as a general cure-all for the elimination of faults, while other schemes profess to breed champions from common pet stock.
A successful linebreeding program should always be planned to fit the individual case. No plan that is supposed to fit one breed as well as another, or one dog as well as another can be of much value. In other words, a breeder should never go to the "big name" just because he is a big show winner. Sometimes the best dog for a particular bitch can be an unknown dog with specific traits that compliment the bitch. This is what is meant by fitting a breeding to an individual case. Some breeding "theories" have become quite popular. The advocates of these theories are always pointing to this or that great dog was bred according to their theory. However, all breeding methods are used to slowly cull bad genes, in the hopes of retaining the good, and as such, assists in producing healthy, good temperamented dogs. There really is no quick "answer" or stud dog that can fix all breed problems instantly. As for show champions, there is no plan that is guaranteed - there are too many genes to say for sure this dog and that bitch WILL produce a champion - however, if they both carry excellent specimens in their genetic background, it increases the odds of combining the millions of genes in such a way as to produce general overall quality.
The strongest possible linebreeding effect is obtained by breeding a sire to his own daughters for several generations, but not even this will produce youngsters of the exact genetic composition of the original sire. Linebreeding also brings out recessive genes but in a more orderly manner than general inbreeding. Less variation will appear in linebred dogs than in inbred dogs.
With linebreeding the breeder can choose, to some extent, which recessive gene he wishes to bring out and which ones he wishes to hold back. For example, if youngsters are sired by a dog with the genetic composition AAbb, while the dam is aaBB, (these original parents are known as the P1 generation; capital letters represent dominant genes, small letters recessive genes), all of the young will be of the genetic composition AaBb.
This generation is termed the F1 generation. If these youngsters are bred brother to sister, the resulting puppies (called the F2 generation) may vary all the way from AABB to aabb. The difference between the individual puppies may actually be greater than between the individuals of the P1 generation. If one of the female pups of the F1 generation (AaBb) is bred back to her sire (AAbb) the resulting pups will be either A-bb or A-Bb. They will never show the recessive gene (b) carried by their father. From these simple examples, it can be seen that linebreeding permits a better control of the genes than does general inbreeding. In actual practice, a cross may involve several hundred different genes. Obviously, this number of genes cannot be dealt with in the precise manner used in these examples. The geneticist must work by steps, focusing his attention on a few important genes and traits in each mating. Also, genes are not all dominant and recessive, but may combine in other more complex ways, or a specific trait is governed by a group of genes - so this too must be taken in to consideration when a breeding is planned.
Much of the factual information on linebreeding has been camouflaged by breeder's pet theories. Literally dozens of linebreeding theories, plans, charts, and schemes have been proposed. Many such plans are represented as a method of recombining the genes that were present in some famous past dog to duplicate its quality. Some plans are touted as a general cure-all for the elimination of faults, while other schemes profess to breed champions from common pet stock.
A successful linebreeding program should always be planned to fit the individual case. No plan that is supposed to fit one breed as well as another, or one dog as well as another can be of much value. In other words, a breeder should never go to the "big name" just because he is a big show winner. Sometimes the best dog for a particular bitch can be an unknown dog with specific traits that compliment the bitch. This is what is meant by fitting a breeding to an individual case. Some breeding "theories" have become quite popular. The advocates of these theories are always pointing to this or that great dog was bred according to their theory. However, all breeding methods are used to slowly cull bad genes, in the hopes of retaining the good, and as such, assists in producing healthy, good temperamented dogs. There really is no quick "answer" or stud dog that can fix all breed problems instantly. As for show champions, there is no plan that is guaranteed - there are too many genes to say for sure this dog and that bitch WILL produce a champion - however, if they both carry excellent specimens in their genetic background, it increases the odds of combining the millions of genes in such a way as to produce general overall quality.
The strongest possible linebreeding effect is obtained by breeding a sire to his own daughters for several generations, but not even this will produce youngsters of the exact genetic composition of the original sire. Linebreeding also brings out recessive genes but in a more orderly manner than general inbreeding. Less variation will appear in linebred dogs than in inbred dogs.
With linebreeding the breeder can choose, to some extent, which recessive gene he wishes to bring out and which ones he wishes to hold back. For example, if youngsters are sired by a dog with the genetic composition AAbb, while the dam is aaBB, (these original parents are known as the P1 generation; capital letters represent dominant genes, small letters recessive genes), all of the young will be of the genetic composition AaBb.
This generation is termed the F1 generation. If these youngsters are bred brother to sister, the resulting puppies (called the F2 generation) may vary all the way from AABB to aabb. The difference between the individual puppies may actually be greater than between the individuals of the P1 generation. If one of the female pups of the F1 generation (AaBb) is bred back to her sire (AAbb) the resulting pups will be either A-bb or A-Bb. They will never show the recessive gene (b) carried by their father. From these simple examples, it can be seen that linebreeding permits a better control of the genes than does general inbreeding. In actual practice, a cross may involve several hundred different genes. Obviously, this number of genes cannot be dealt with in the precise manner used in these examples. The geneticist must work by steps, focusing his attention on a few important genes and traits in each mating. Also, genes are not all dominant and recessive, but may combine in other more complex ways, or a specific trait is governed by a group of genes - so this too must be taken in to consideration when a breeding is planned.