Pedigree dogs exposed sequel: 3 years later

[spottyspaniel]

Interesting documentary. I just watched it in it's entirety.

I really like the idea of the introduction LUA Dalmatians, but failed to realize what the real problems was with introducing them in the first place. All dogs have to come from somewhere, this case a Pointer. They look exactly the same and are in fact healthier. I see the importance of bloodlines, but if nothing new is ever introduced, the gene pool will get so small and the dogs so deformed they will just die out.

I will always place the overall health and quality of a dog's life above, function, and looks. The Cavalier issue that was raised was disturbing with the same dog reproducing well after the fact is know he carries a disease. I don't know if the breeder is just down right stupid and selfish, but that dog shouldn't be show, and should be neutered, end of story. The 34 breeding after the testing was done and known was simply unacceptable.

I also agree that if we look back a lot of the dogs today we see competing in the show ring do not really resemble their "originals" who served an actual purpose when they were supposedly created. I think getting away from health and function in the long run, is going to run many breeds into the ground. That is not to say the breed itself should go extinct, but something else in terms of genetics has to be restricted (the undesirable) or introduced to gradually phase out the unhealthy traits.

Will all the available science of today and tomorrow there is no reason why breeders should not be away of genetic conditions of their dogs, and there should be a clause that states any dogs with said ailment/disease cannot show, and their offspring cannot be registered.

But this may come down to breed clubs, and they are probably going to be hard to waver, especially having people with some of the top dogs weighing in for their own usage and successes. Which just back to politics again I suppose. There should be a separate organization looking out for the welfare of dogs, but who's to say we don't get someone in that organization trying to call more shots in their favor? Seems like this is a vicious cycle, and we are starting to very slowly, spiral the drain in some instances.

Also inbreeding is unacceptable. I don't even want to tough that subject really, but there really is no reason for it, especially in "top" kennels. (Where one breeder is a vet? really??!? They say they they genetics into consideration but I call some bull right there)

The tight social circles of the show world make it so it is very hard to change anything, but I do believe there are responsible breeders out there really trying to better their breeds. We just have to find, utilize, and some how make these people the norm.

I am interested in learning more about the genetic protocol and such in the Swedish Kennel Club that was hinted at in the documentary.

 

[BostonBanker]

The Cavalier issue that was raised was disturbing with the same dog reproducing well after the fact is know he carries a disease.

I haven't had time to sit through the show, but maybe someone else can answer - does the dog just have the defect, or is he affected?

 

[Dekka]

Also inbreeding is unacceptable. I don't even want to tough that subject really, but there really is no reason for it, especially in "top" kennels. (Where one breeder is a vet? really??!? They say they they genetics into consideration but I call some bull right there)

How are you using the term inbreeding? Does that include line breeding? Because if it includes line breeding there would be no breeds with out it. Its not a tough subject IMO. I can give examples of wild animals who are stupidly inbred and the healthiest population on the planet. I am not saying its a good plan. Its not, but its not cut and dry. ANd there are times when line breeding is ok.

As a geneticist I am more concerned with the over use of popular sires. That will diminish diversity faster than kennels line breeding.

 

[Kat09Tails]

I haven't had time to sit through the show, but maybe someone else can answer - does the dog just have the defect, or is he affected?

It's my understanding that the dog Beauella Radzinski had been scanned. Identified as having the brain construction indicating that the dog was affected. Just like HD though the dog may not be symptomatic at the time he was campaigning but symptoms can develop later - or not at all. The condition being genetic will possibly manifest itself in the spectrum of the disorder down the line... what a line it is. This dog has produced 140 pups in 40 litters.

From Dog World

“The scan showed a syrinx, a fluid-filled pocket, in the neck, and as he was only 16 months old I told her I would never have used him at stud,†Mrs Carter said. “I advised her that she should tell breeders who asked to use him that he had SM.â€
Mrs Carter said that an American champion son of Ms Costello’s dog had SM and was put to sleep at the age of three and that the dog had sired 28 litters since the scan was done, the youngest being eight weeks old.
But on Monday Ms Costello once again denied that Mrs Carter had seen the scan.
“I don’t want to get into an argument with her but what she says isn’t true,†she said. “The only person I showed it to was a rheumatologist.
“Anyway, I have made it clear I am packing it in; I’m not going to breed or show any more. Dogs are a hobby to me and all this has been horrendous. I feel like I’m abandoning a sinking ship.â€
Ms Costello said that her dog, who is now five, is not showing any symptoms of having SM; she confirmed what Mrs Carter had said about the American champion son.

 

[Aleron]

I really like the idea of the introduction LUA Dalmatians, but failed to realize what the real problems was with introducing them in the first place. All dogs have to come from somewhere, this case a Pointer. They look exactly the same and are in fact healthier.

Because change is hard and change usually comes about slowly. The LUA Dals are not all "in fact healthier", some are affected by the same issue other Dals are. And while all Dals pre-LUA had the potential to be stone formers, many were perfectly healthy into old age and did not form stones. There were precautions that could be taken to reduce the risk that an individual would become a stone former.

To old time breeders the idea of introducing "mixed breeds" into the gene pool is still extremely taboo. Many people both old timers and newcomers, seriously fear that by doing so, you'll certainly be introducing unwanted traits, other diseases and that it will cause changes in temperament and type. I do think it will come down to outcrossing becoming a more acceptable way to improve a breed's health but the time for that has not come yet. And there would have to be some sort of approved method of doing so since free for all outcrossing would not really be in the best interest of maintaining a breed.

I will always place the overall health and quality of a dog's life above, function, and looks. The Cavalier issue that was raised was disturbing with the same dog reproducing well after the fact is know he carries a disease. I don't know if the breeder is just down right stupid and selfish, but that dog shouldn't be show, and should be neutered, end of story. The 34 breeding after the testing was done and known was simply unacceptable.

The issue with Cavaliers is they all have a heart defect:

http://cavalierhealth.org/mitral_valve_disease.htm

"Heart mitral valve disease (MVD) is the leading cause of death of cavalier King Charles spaniels throughout the world. MVD is a polygenetic disease which afflicts over half of all cavaliers by age 5 years and nearly all cavaliers by age 10 years, should they survive that long. "


And most have the skull malformation involved in syringomyelia:

http://www.cavalierhealth.org/syringomyelia.htm#IN_DEPTH:

"SM is rare in most breeds but has become very widespread in cavalier King Charles spaniels. Some researchers estimate that as many as 95% of CKCSs have Chiari-like malformation (CM or CLM), the skull bone malformation believed to be a part of the cause of syringomyelia, and that more than 50% of cavaliers have SM.* It is worldwide in scope and not limited to any country, breeding line, or kennel, and experts report that it is believed to be inherited in the cavalier King Charles spaniel. CM is so widespread in the cavalier that it may be an inherent part of the CKCS's breed standard.

* A 2011 study of 555 UK cavaliers, reported by their owners to be symptom-less, found 25% of one year olds and 70% of 6+ year olds had SM."

So while PDE decided to portray that one breeder as "uncaring" about the breed, the fact is just about every Cavalier being bred has these problems. I do think the only answer with Cavaliers is outcrossing to another breed. My understanding is that there is a project under way in that direction. But it will take time to do the outcrosses, ensure they are in fact symptom free and then create a line of Cavaliers with them to be introduced into the breed's gene pool. Until then, people who want to see Cavaliers continue will need to keep breeding their dogs or the gene pool will get smaller and more major health issues may start occurring with regularity.

Will all the available science of today and tomorrow there is no reason why breeders should not be away of genetic conditions of their dogs, and there should be a clause that states any dogs with said ailment/disease cannot show, and their offspring cannot be registered.

While there's been a great deal of headway made with finding DNA markers for many genetic health issues, there are still far more that research hasn't been able to provide many answers for. The main problem in the breed I'm involved with is epilepsy. Ongoing studies to determine a genetic marker for epilepsy started in the early 90s and continue today and there is still no genetic marker. Epilepsy is a late onset problem usually between 4-6 years old. There is no way to screen for epilepsy. Affected dogs can appear unaffected for years. One can learn all they can, look at all the databases and evaluate the risk of any given pedigree. But it's not at all straight forward, it is always just guessing. Pedigrees which seem low risk sometimes produce epilepsy and pedigrees that seem high risk sometimes do not. But that is all we can go on right now, attempt to evaluate risk factors based on what we know at the time of a breeding. There's a lot of good things health wise about the breed - low risk of HD, low risk of ED, they don't bloat and they tend to live very long lives.

There are also only genetic tests for a handful of eye disorders in only some breeds. For other eye disorders breeders still have a rely on screening. So a dog might be screened and be clear this year, next year but not the year after. Hip dysplasia can be screened for at 1-2 years old but that only tells you what the dog is and nothing about what the dog will produce. Dogs with excellent hips sometimes produce dysplastic dogs.

For further research:

This website has a lot of extremely good articles on dog breeding: http://breedingbetterdogs.com/articles.php

And this is a good article too:
http://www.ashgi.org/articles/breeding_bad_genes.htm

 

[spottyspaniel]

How are you using the term inbreeding? Does that include line breeding? Because if it includes line breeding there would be no breeds with out it. Its not a tough subject IMO. I can give examples of wild animals who are stupidly inbred and the healthiest population on the planet. I am not saying its a good plan. Its not, but its not cut and dry. ANd there are times when line breeding is ok.

As a geneticist I am more concerned with the over use of popular sires. That will diminish diversity faster than kennels line breeding.

I was referring both to the overuse of the same sire, especially those with genetic health problems, as well as the breeding of mothers to their sons, daughters to grandfathers etc. I suppose there should be a measure of how inbred a dog truly is, but I'm not sure. It's quite complicated, and hypocritical of me to say inbreeding in wrong (many dogs come from only a few foundation dogs) but I also think the fact that there are many dogs to chose to breed within the breed itself, they should be as genetically different as possible.

Because change is hard and change usually comes about slowly. The LUA Dals are not all "in fact healthier", some are affected by the same issue other Dals are. And while all Dals pre-LUA had the potential to be stone formers, many were perfectly healthy into old age and did not form stones. There were precautions that could be taken to reduce the risk that an individual would become a stone former.

To old time breeders the idea of introducing "mixed breeds" into the gene pool is still extremely taboo. Many people both old timers and newcomers, seriously fear that by doing so, you'll certainly be introducing unwanted traits, other diseases and that it will cause changes in temperament and type. I do think it will come down to outcrossing becoming a more acceptable way to improve a breed's health but the time for that has not come yet. And there would have to be some sort of approved method of doing so since free for all outcrossing would not really be in the best interest of maintaining a breed.




The issue with Cavaliers is they all have a heart defect:

http://cavalierhealth.org/mitral_valve_disease.htm

"Heart mitral valve disease (MVD) is the leading cause of death of cavalier King Charles spaniels throughout the world. MVD is a polygenetic disease which afflicts over half of all cavaliers by age 5 years and nearly all cavaliers by age 10 years, should they survive that long. "


And most have the skull malformation involved in syringomyelia:

http://www.cavalierhealth.org/syringomyelia.htm#IN_DEPTH:

"SM is rare in most breeds but has become very widespread in cavalier King Charles spaniels. Some researchers estimate that as many as 95% of CKCSs have Chiari-like malformation (CM or CLM), the skull bone malformation believed to be a part of the cause of syringomyelia, and that more than 50% of cavaliers have SM.* It is worldwide in scope and not limited to any country, breeding line, or kennel, and experts report that it is believed to be inherited in the cavalier King Charles spaniel. CM is so widespread in the cavalier that it may be an inherent part of the CKCS's breed standard.

* A 2011 study of 555 UK cavaliers, reported by their owners to be symptom-less, found 25% of one year olds and 70% of 6+ year olds had SM."

So while PDE decided to portray that one breeder as "uncaring" about the breed, the fact is just about every Cavalier being bred has these problems. I do think the only answer with Cavaliers is outcrossing to another breed. My understanding is that there is a project under way in that direction. But it will take time to do the outcrosses, ensure they are in fact symptom free and then create a line of Cavaliers with them to be introduced into the breed's gene pool. Until then, people who want to see Cavaliers continue will need to keep breeding their dogs or the gene pool will get smaller and more major health issues may start occurring with regularity.



While there's been a great deal of headway made with finding DNA markers for many genetic health issues, there are still far more that research hasn't been able to provide many answers for. The main problem in the breed I'm involved with is epilepsy. Ongoing studies to determine a genetic marker for epilepsy started in the early 90s and continue today and there is still no genetic marker. Epilepsy is a late onset problem usually between 4-6 years old. There is no way to screen for epilepsy. Affected dogs can appear unaffected for years. One can learn all they can, look at all the databases and evaluate the risk of any given pedigree. But it's not at all straight forward, it is always just guessing. Pedigrees which seem low risk sometimes produce epilepsy and pedigrees that seem high risk sometimes do not. But that is all we can go on right now, attempt to evaluate risk factors based on what we know at the time of a breeding. There's a lot of good things health wise about the breed - low risk of HD, low risk of ED, they don't bloat and they tend to live very long lives.

There are also only genetic tests for a handful of eye disorders in only some breeds. For other eye disorders breeders still have a rely on screening. So a dog might be screened and be clear this year, next year but not the year after. Hip dysplasia can be screened for at 1-2 years old but that only tells you what the dog is and nothing about what the dog will produce. Dogs with excellent hips sometimes produce dysplastic dogs.

For further research:

This website has a lot of extremely good articles on dog breeding: http://breedingbetterdogs.com/articles.php

And this is a good article too:
http://www.ashgi.org/articles/breeding_bad_genes.htm

Thank you so much, so much information in here. Much appreciated. I'm definitely going to look more in LUA Dalmatians just as an interest point. I understand diet can play a huge role in the formation of stones, but should they even form to begin with?

 

[Aleron]

Thank you so much, so much information in here. Much appreciated. I'm definitely going to look more in LUA Dalmatians just as an interest point. I understand diet can play a huge role in the formation of stones, but should they even form to begin with?

You might like this website - it's the homepage for LUA Dals:
http://www.luadalmatians.com/

All Dals had the potential to be stone formers prior to the LUA project. Not all did form stones but the potential the same in all of them. It was due to an abnormality in them which had accidentally become part of the breed, probably much earlier in the breed's history. The names of some of the LUA dogs made me smile - High Hopes, Deal Or No Deal, Where There's A Will There's A Way, Inevitable, Seeing is Believing, U Gotta B Kiddin, Seeing the Forest

 

[Dekka]

I was referring both to the overuse of the same sire, especially those with genetic health problems, as well as the breeding of mothers to their sons, daughters to grandfathers etc. I suppose there should be a measure of how inbred a dog truly is, but I'm not sure. It's quite complicated, and hypocritical of me to say inbreeding in wrong (many dogs come from only a few foundation dogs) but I also think the fact that there are many dogs to chose to breed within the breed itself, they should be as genetically different as possible.

There are ways to calculate inbreeding. Lots of breeds use various inbreeding coefficients.

If they are genetically different as possible you are going to get a lot of 'mess'. Just as you can get inbreeding depression you can get out breeding depression. Every population needs some level of inbreeding or you lose fitness (or type)

Now in breeding would be so bad if people didn't breed unhealthy dogs because they are pretty, or nice, or have a few titles. As I said inbreeding is one way to get rid of bad genes. Though at this point its mostly luck. For example the population of moose (I know bare with me) in Newfoundland is one of the healthiest and robust in the world. They are incredibly healthy and successful. They all stem from 4 moose that were released back when. The population now is about 160,000 moose.

That said I don't line breed. But I don't hesitate to out cross to line bred dogs as long as the line breeding doesn't include dogs in my pedigree. But to have diversity for no other reason than diversity is just as harmful as inbreeding to popular sires with known health issues.

 

[curiouscolor]

. . . The issue with Cavaliers is they all have a heart defect:

http://cavalierhealth.org/mitral_valve_disease.htm

"Heart mitral valve disease (MVD) is the leading cause of death of cavalier King Charles spaniels throughout the world. MVD is a polygenetic disease which afflicts over half of all cavaliers by age 5 years and nearly all cavaliers by age 10 years, should they survive that long. "


And most have the skull malformation involved in syringomyelia:

http://www.cavalierhealth.org/syringomyelia.htm#IN_DEPTH:

"SM is rare in most breeds but has become very widespread in cavalier King Charles spaniels. Some researchers estimate that as many as 95% of CKCSs have Chiari-like malformation (CM or CLM), the skull bone malformation believed to be a part of the cause of syringomyelia, and that more than 50% of cavaliers have SM.* It is worldwide in scope and not limited to any country, breeding line, or kennel, and experts report that it is believed to be inherited in the cavalier King Charles spaniel. CM is so widespread in the cavalier that it may be an inherent part of the CKCS's breed standard.

* A 2011 study of 555 UK cavaliers, reported by their owners to be symptom-less, found 25% of one year olds and 70% of 6+ year olds had SM."

So while PDE decided to portray that one breeder as "uncaring" about the breed, the fact is just about every Cavalier being bred has these problems. I do think the only answer with Cavaliers is outcrossing to another breed. My understanding is that there is a project under way in that direction. But it will take time to do the outcrosses, ensure they are in fact symptom free and then create a line of Cavaliers with them to be introduced into the breed's gene pool. Until then, people who want to see Cavaliers continue will need to keep breeding their dogs or the gene pool will get smaller and more major health issues may start occurring with regularity. . .

Not quite. In this case the Champion stud dog was diagnosed as having CM/SM - syrinxes down his spine - at 16 months of age. This is early onset even though it is asymptomatic.

He was used with many females that were too young to have had any meaningful testing as well. He produced 140 pups in 40 litters, 32 after his diagnosis.

Researchers recommendations - since 2006 when the protocol was set up - are to not breed from dogs that have been found to have syrinxes at an early age. The disease is progressive. They are trying to prevent dogs affected at a young age.

In Cavaliers the heart recommendation - since 1998 - has also been to not breed dogs under 2 1/2 years of age, and only then if their parents are still heart clear.

CC

 

[SarahHound]

Statements from Both Walkon & Glenauld Boxers.

Walker and Yvonne Miller of the Walkon Boxers:

‘A full statement was supplied to Jemima Harrison before Monday’s programme. Despite stating that it should be read out and printed in its complete form without any alteration this was not done and we feel that we were unfairly represented and consequently wish to clarify our position.
The health and wellbeing of our dogs is and always has been of paramount importance to us, and for our puppy owners whom we actively encourage to report any problems they may encounter. In addition we check with them on a periodic basis. Consequently the continual positive feedback we receive gives us no reason to believe that we have any ongoing health problems of any kind.
We have been breeding Boxers for more than 30 years and during this time have only had two suspected cases of JKD reported in our breeding and have no reason to believe they are of a hereditary nature.
It has been suggested that we know of more cases that we are not admitting to, which is completely and unequivocally untrue.
A recent check on all litters we have bred from 2006 to 2011 – a period which exceeded that on which Dr Cattanach’s research is based – has not brought to light any further cases.
In the BBC4 documentary it was stated that if Gucci carries the faulty gene for JKD it is most likely he inherited it from a champion Walkon dog who appears in all but two of Dr Cattanach’s cases. Dr Cattanach indicated to the health committee and ourselves that this dog had to be present on both sides of affected dogs’ pedigrees as the gene in question was recessive.
Dr Cattanach was offered the complete and comprehensive breeding records of this dog and was told that blood and semen samples could be made available to the breed, an offer that was dismissed by him as being of no interest.
We were unable to give blood samples from affected dogs as we have had no cases of JKD ourselves and it should be pointed out that other breeders in addition to Walkon and Glenauld were contacted by Dr Cattanach and informed that they too were involved in the spread of JKD. These breeders were not mentioned in the programme and we feel we were unfairly singled out.
We remain concerned that the majority of the JKD cases appear to be based largely on pedigree analysis with little veterinary or pathological evidence having been produced to confirm them. It was stated in the programme that there was ‘no definitive proof that Dr Cattanach was right’ in his assumptions, and indeed a statement by the health committee on the breed council website would appear to agree with this.
When breeding, we apply a range of factors including genetic diversity, temperament and breed council and KC-approved health schemes to ensure we are breeding happy, health dogs. During 2011 and with the help of the KC’s Mate Select tool we have reduced our average inbreeding coefficient of our litters by 39 per cent and are committed to reducing this further on an ongoing basis.
We stand completely behind efforts to understand the cause and prevalence of JKD and welcome the development of any tests for it. Our complete breeding records spanning over 30 years are available for inspection and we are happy to provide blood samples to the Boxer breed council health committee to further any research into JKD’.

Janice Mair of the Glenauld Boxers:

‘At the breed council meeting in May 2011 where Dr Bruce Cattanach reported his findings on juvenile kidney disease (JKD) he named several champion dogs purely on pedigree evidence who in his opinion had produced unconfirmed cases of JKD.
So I ask why my dog was singled out and named and blame by Dr Cattanach in the programme? Was it perhaps because over the years I have openly criticised his experiment of introducing Pembroke Welsh Corgi breeding into our breed for purely cosmetic reasons? Short tails (the bobtail gene) have nothing to do with the health of the breed.
The most important part of my written response to the programme was never mentioned, which was that since Dr Cattanach brought it to our attention – although he had no evidence to back this up – that it was possible JKD was a hereditary condition, we have not used our champion dog, and that is since October 2010. He is 11 years old this week.
Sharon McCurdy who appeared on the programme omitted to mention that her bitch who died from kidney failure had been in whelp and had an anaesthetic for a caesarean section just days before she died.
The health and welfare of our dogs has always been of paramount importance and we take into account a range of factors when selecting dogs to breed from which include temperament, health test results as recommended by the breed council and the Kennel Club and genetic diversity which we now make it our policy to achieve with tools such as Mate Select. We are happy to divulge any breeding records and give bloods to the Boxer breed council health committee to help with any work to find a gene marker to test for JKD.’

More statements:

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/09-PDE2-Comments

 

[Gypsydals]

I do not know what the LUAs dalmatians look like in person. But for me in the pictures, I don't think they look just like non lua dals. Maybe its because I see none as of yet that I would breed too. It isn't known if the LUAs are in fact healthier than the non-LUAs. The project focused on the LUA gene and nothing else. What else did that pointer bring to the table that by itself wouldn't cause a problem but with potential of bottle necking may come out. My biggest issue I had with the LUA project is at one time they where breeding UNIs in the program. It will be interesting to see as time goes on what happens.