Search

Showdog.com Forum · Real Show Dogs

Replies in this thread : 7

Author Topic : Father/Daughter breedings
 Whovian Kennels
Premium Member
Posts : 19

System.__ComObject
8/27/2013 1:59:25 PM reply with quote send message to Whovian Kennels Object to Post   

Hello all!!

Question.....

Assuming healthy lines with no major genetic problems, if you had a trait that a sire possessed, that you had trouble finding in your breed, and wanted to lock into your lines, would you consider breeding him back to his daughter, who also possessed that trait?

additional info:
The breeding that produced the bitch in question was an outcross
The sire in question was from a half brother/half sister breeding
Tight line breedings have been done around the Sire's sire, and have produced very healthy dogs.

Anyone have experience with this?

The SOI would be 28%, which is not abnormally high for this small gene pool breed (who had Popular Sire syndrome 7-10 years ago)

Thanks!
 Lumen
Premium Member
Posts : 30

Premium Member
8/27/2013 3:34:38 PM reply with quote send message to Lumen Object to Post

That's too tight for my liking. You mentioned that the tight breedings with the sire resulted in healthy dogs, but what about the dogs that those healthy dogs produce? The problems may rear their head later on.

To lock in the trait, I prefer cousin/cousin, uncle/niece, etc. type of breedings. Good luck!
 Dreisaiah Hundehutte
Premium Member
Posts : 4,000+

Premium Member
8/27/2013 5:34:01 PM reply with quote send message to Dreisaiah Hundehutte Object to Post

With help from other breeders, carefully weighed the options and the risks and benefits, yes, I would do this. I'd prefer it over cousin to cousin because cousin to cousin would be attempting to lock in to the sire's line, with the maternal line of that cousin. Too many variables to keep a clean tight line there.

The fact that the breeding that produced the bitch was an outcross is the main thing that helped me say "yes" to this. If the breeding that produced the bitch was also an inbreed, I would probably attempt to find that trait in a different male than the sire, then maybe breed that offspring with the desired trait to her grandsire with the same desired trait. I would go that route more readily in both situations.

I think all things need to be weighed and a decision made on the research you have done and the constructive opinions of others who have been in the breed longer than you who are concerned about the breed's welfare as well.

My 2 cents.
 PelicanPups
Basic User
Posts : 44

Basic User
8/27/2013 9:45:44 PM reply with quote send message to PelicanPups Object to Post

Lord no, that's too close for my comfort. You never know with that close of a breeding may also perpetuate bad traits. Or scary health traits. Breeding is like playing Russian roulette, you never know the possible outcome. I would feel more comfortable taking her out, then bringing said offspring back to him.
 griffin
Premium Member
Posts : 3,000+

Premium Member
8/28/2013 3:05:53 AM reply with quote send message to griffin Object to Post

this post has been edited 4 time(s)

quote
posted by Whovian Kennels

The sire in question was from a half brother/half sister breeding
Tight line breedings have been done around the Sire's sire, and have produced very healthy dogs.

Both of those suggest around half of the recessives he carries will have been made homozygous and are either lethal (die between fertilization and weaning) or have minimal effects. There is still another half of them you will be gambling on.

Plus the Sire is expected to have 60-120 new mutations that his sire didn't have which again you are gambling on.

Only if it was impractical/impossible to find any readonable breeding with significantly lower COI (<20%) would I consider it.

grif,

ETA: It also depends what the trait is, given how inbred the breed/line is already most of the difference between individuals are unlikely to be genetic so further inbreeding may not lock in the trait.

-----
Last edited by griffin on 8/28/2013 8:16:39 AM
 Dreisaiah Hundehutte
Premium Member
Posts : 4,000+

Premium Member
8/28/2013 7:25:26 PM reply with quote send message to Dreisaiah Hundehutte Object to Post

this post has been edited 1 time(s)

I would rather do it quickly, risk a litter of mutations and pet out that litter and know my path from then on, than do it slowly, producing numerous litters with the genetic pre-disposal towards producing these issues without ever really knowing. I feel like to do it slowly proposes a greater risk to the entire breed, as more dogs are added to the gene pool with "issues" through a slow process.

I'm sure with more popular breeds, doing this usually isn't necessary; however, in the breed(s) that I like, the gene pool isn't near the size of something like the GSD or Border Collie.



-----
Last edited by Dreisaiah Hundehutte on 8/28/2013 7:26:29 PM
 
Basic User
Posts : 1,000+

Basic User
8/29/2013 2:57:43 AM reply with quote send message to Object to Post edit post

quote
posted by Dreisaiah Hundehutte
I would rather do it quickly, risk a litter of mutations and pet out that litter and know my path from then on, than do it slowly, producing numerous litters with the genetic pre-disposal towards producing these issues without ever really knowing. I feel like to do it slowly proposes a greater risk to the entire breed, as more dogs are added to the gene pool with "issues" through a slow process.

It is the myth that it is possible to get rid of all the "issues" quickly.
Tere are >500 known hereditary disorders, and ~20,000 genes which could cause unknown genetic disorders if there are as few as 10 'bad' recessives/mutation hidden in the sire. Then the chance of producing a puppy which doesn't carry any of the recessives is: 0.00005 or 0.005% (aka even if you repeated the litter for the entire life of the bitch getting big litters each time you will almost certainly never produce one)

Whereas the probability of producing a puppy affected by one of these "issues" is: 0.74 or 74%

If I'm even more conservative and say the sire only carries 5 'bad' recessives
P(puppy clear) = 0.007 or 0.7%
P(puppy affected) = 0.49 or 49% (if unnoticed it will be locked in)

grif,
 Riverwalk Kennels
Basic User
Posts : 89

Basic User
8/30/2013 9:03:37 PM reply with quote send message to Riverwalk Kennels Object to Post

I personally would never do a father/daughter breeding or a mother/son breeding. My first show dog's dam was the product of a mother/son breeding her COI was 25% they had a horrible time even getting her pregnant.. she lost every litter except one.. there were 4 puppies in that litter.. 3 of which were dead before their 5th birthdays.. in the end they all had very similar symptoms when the died. My boy who was purchased as a show dog ended up being unilaterally deaf, had slipping hocks, grade 3 patellas, the worst elongated soft palate my vet ever saw and ultimately died from a very severe case of hemivertebra, 90% of his vertebra were hemi or butterfly so he was not a surgical candidate. The ugliness of those doubled up genes might not come out in the father/daughter mother/son breeding... but having been the owner of a dog that was a complete genetic mess from the constant doubling of these genes I would not want to risk that even ONE puppy down the road would suffer through the things that my boys short 3 year life were full of.

Replies in this thread : 7

Post Reply

 



Did you know?
There are about 900 breeds of sheep in the world.
Did you know?
The two largest American dog shows after Westminster are the National Dog Show (which is televised on Thanksgiving Day by NBC, usually after the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade) and the AKC/Eukanuba National Championship.
Did you know?
The first obedience title is a CD, or "Companion Dog", which is earned through competition in the Novice obedience class.