The preservation of the pure bred dog..
- Thread starter borzoimom
- Start date
- Status
Once again showing you don't have a grasp on how genetics work. The Basenji people are doing just that. They are breeding lots of carriers to clears. Eventually when they have enough stellar dogs they will slowly wean out the carriers. The issue is life threatening but the dogs will live if they receive medication for the rest of their lives.
The reason this issue is so prevalent in basenji's is due to their very small genetic base. You need greater diversity in the purebred dog-not less.
here is a site to get you started in the basics http://anthro.palomar.edu/mendel/
(oh still waiting for you to answer the questions....)
BINGO! Thats the goal- if breeding is done its only the best to the best and the rest from shelters until the numbers drop. By then the good lines in health would have taken place.. It only took about 10 years to get dwarfism out of Malamutes because the breeders were committed to it. And the breed is better for it.
Ah but then you don't know what to look for. For example.. if your dog came back and tested positive for carrying one copy of a recessive disease.. should you be worried?
No. There is no way for your dog to be affected. If you breed that dog to a dog who does not have a copy for that gene.. NONE of their puppies will be affected.
If your pup tested positive for 2 copies of a recessive gene.. then yes worry. The problem is many traits are polygenetic meaning its an interplay of multiple genes. So its not always as cut and dry as mendelian models. BUT that makes it less likely to have affected pups.
No. There is no way for your dog to be affected. If you breed that dog to a dog who does not have a copy for that gene.. NONE of their puppies will be affected.
If your pup tested positive for 2 copies of a recessive gene.. then yes worry. The problem is many traits are polygenetic meaning its an interplay of multiple genes. So its not always as cut and dry as mendelian models. BUT that makes it less likely to have affected pups.
They are only breeding clear dogs. Its like what is going on with my breed. Instead of trying to get that one litter out of several failed breedings, the females are not being bred that do not reproduce to remove this sex link gene from the breed. ...
And btw- I seriously doubt popular breeds have a small gene pool..
And btw- I seriously doubt popular breeds have a small gene pool..
Nope.
What the top breeders do has no affect on rescues. Zero.. nada none.
The numbers would not drop, not at all.
Read carefully (I have said this already and you seemed to have conveniently missed it) Good breeders dogs DON'T end up in rescues. So have no bearing on the number of dogs in rescues.
AND if you only bred the best to the best the resulting mess wouldn't be fit to be owned.. so all you would have is byb and miller's dogs.
What the top breeders do has no affect on rescues. Zero.. nada none.
The numbers would not drop, not at all.
Read carefully (I have said this already and you seemed to have conveniently missed it) Good breeders dogs DON'T end up in rescues. So have no bearing on the number of dogs in rescues.
AND if you only bred the best to the best the resulting mess wouldn't be fit to be owned.. so all you would have is byb and miller's dogs.
And btw- I seriously doubt popular breeds have a small gene pool..
They are only breeding clear dogs. Its like what is going on with my breed. Instead of trying to get that one litter out of several failed breedings, the females are not being bred that do not reproduce to remove this sex link gene from the breed. ...
And btw- I seriously doubt popular breeds have a small gene pool..
And btw- I seriously doubt popular breeds have a small gene pool..
Its common sense so follow me here.
You take a dog population, you don't let any new blood in.
Then you cull out for looks, and you cull out for health and you cull out for etc etc.
You breed those.. esp the winning-est dogs. And you cull again, and breed. It doesn't take a mathematician to see that its not too long and all your dogs are related. It doesn't matter that on paper they don't look inbred. If your breed shares 80% of its genetics with dogs not on its pedigree you CAN'T outcross to new lines.
See, here we have a very different viewpoint. Since every breeding is, by definiton, a genetic experiment, some sort of understading of basic genetics is, I think, required in order to be able to call yourself a responsible breeder. Otherwise you really have no clue what you are doing and shouldn't be doing it.
I'm going to STRONGLY suggest that, although there's a great deal of very good info in this thread - which I personally will make use of, Red - I think it will be better served to discuss it in a clean thread with clean motives, by those who are knowledgeable and those who have honest questions.
Good job to those of you who've kept this civil and informative, have done an excellent bit of work posting valid info and haven't risen to any bait.
- I think it will be better served to discuss it in a clean thread with clean motives, by those who are knowledgeable and those who have honest questions.Good job to those of you who've kept this civil and informative, have done an excellent bit of work posting valid info and haven't risen to any bait.
- Status