How close is to close?

codym · Post by **codym** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 3:11 pm

I recently heard about a litter that was the result of an accidental breeding between litter mates. The results were not good with almost all having to be culled immediately. I have often wondered about this as line breeding is a synonym for inbreeding. I know the reason for line breeding and know it can produce great dogs, but how close is too close? When is the gene pool to shallow? I'm just looking for what most of you consider to be ethical.

Post by **ezzy333** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 3:59 pm

I don't think line breeding has an ethical quotient involved. And I don't think there is a set answer to your question. I am not much in favor of brother to sister matings but breeding mother/son or father/daughter can be done if you make sure the pups are all good. But most breeding's should be a little further apart in most cases.

Ezzy

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:29 pm

I think half brother/sister is close but a good plan, especially with both pups from the same father. At least it sounds good to me.

codym · Post by **codym** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:36 pm

So ezzy you don't think it's unethical to breed so close that you have a good chance of producing birth defects?

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:40 pm

linebreeding is as good as the lines are clean.......very few know for sure if their dogs are genetically clean.

Birddog3412 · Post by **Birddog3412** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:44 pm

SCT wrote:I think half brother/sister is close but a good plan, especially with both pups from the same father. At least it sounds good to me.

What is your reasoning for same sire and not the same dam?

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:46 pm

codym wrote:So ezzy you don't think it's unethical to breed so close that you have a good chance of producing birth defects?

Birth defects happen in unrelated and even cross bred dogs...

codym · Post by **codym** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:57 pm

I understand that, but it is a lot more likely in close relatives. Just wanting to see people's opinion and have a conversation. I'm really not sure how I feel about it. It just seems like a big gamble if you know that the possibility of such a negative outcome exists.

Ralph Ford · Post by **Ralph Ford** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:41 pm

I am not a breeder or geneticist, but I don't think brother/sister litters necessarily means birth defects. If birth defects did take place, I would think that would be enough to disqualify both sire and dam from future breedings.

Brittguy · Post by **Brittguy** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:07 pm

Curious as to why the whole litter needed culled immediately. Seems it would be hard to make such a decision that soon unless a person just did not want the litter.

codym · Post by **codym** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:23 pm

From what I was told some were missing limbs or they weren't in the right places. One puppy was kept but he doesn't seem to have developed correctly, anatomically speaking. If i'm understanding most of the responses it seems like most people feel it is an indication of problems with the parents and not necessarily how closely related the dogs were? So are there people out there that breed this close without these types of problems?

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:28 pm

There is a much greater chance of a pup inheriting matched lethal alleles and other genetic problems from closely related parents. The goal is to weed out the bad genetics but you have to be ruthless in the culling and a lot of puppies don't make it. Most of us can't afford and don't have the desire to do that. Nor will we be in business long enough to make a real difference.
I have seen more bad sire x daughter, dam x son and brother x sister breedings than I have seen good. cj

gotpointers · Post by **gotpointers** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:45 pm

Its been quite a few years ago but i missed out on a accidental breeding between a direct Swami brother and sister. I couldint get a deposit over quick enough before it was entirely bought out by one buyer.

deseeker · Post by **deseeker** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:01 pm

I did a half brother to half sister on my '96 litter(same mother NAFC/DC Lobo's Cotton Candy) and had no problems. I'm planing on doing a half brother to half sister mateing this Spring(based on same sire this liter). I have also done a niece bred to uncle with no problems. If you go back to early brit litters, you will see half brothers mating half sisters based on Ban Dee line. You will also see halfs being bred basde on Bean's Blaze. They used to do that with Scipio Spinks alot too..
ALOT of good brits came out of those breedings. Micro Dot went back to a brother sister mating. IMO :roll:

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:03 pm

how do you think we got all these breeds cody? Inbreeding maybe?

BigShooter · Post by **BigShooter** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:33 pm

I read some research a long time ago that with humans, first cousin matings don't significantly increase the risk of defects any more than unrelated matings.

I elected to do one half-brother, half-sister breeding with a shared sire. Four pups were born, all survived and appear normal with no defects detected.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:34 pm

Birddog3412 wrote:
SCT wrote:I think half brother/sister is close but a good plan, especially with both pups from the same father. At least it sounds good to me.
What is your reasoning for same sire and not the same dam?

I was only speaking for myself as I like the sire's traits more on my pup, Should work either way.

Post by **Sharon** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:11 pm

I'm sure no expect on this subject. Why is outcrossing not practised more often , rather than close family members being used.?

prairiefirepointers · Post by **prairiefirepointers** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:18 pm

ACooper wrote:
codym wrote:So ezzy you don't think it's unethical to breed so close that you have a good chance of producing birth defects?
Birth defects happen in unrelated and even cross bred dogs...

+1

Cody,

I'll let you know in a few months. I'll be having a pretty tight litter. If by chance I get any six legged dogs they will probably go for a premium, since they should run faster.

BigShooter · Post by **BigShooter** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:24 pm

Sharon wrote:I'm sure no expect on this subject. Why is outcrossing not practised more often , rather than close family members being used.?

I can't believe you asked this question like a GunDog Forum rookie who's never read one of the threads in the last couple of years about line-breeding vs. outcrosses with posts about the advantages & disadvantages of each. Looks like a set-up to me.

Troy08er · Post by **Troy08er** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:28 pm

I've posted this before,thought it was a great read. It's an old study,one guy on THEFIELDTRIAL.com made a few commets that he thought it needed updated. http://www.dogstuff.info/of_peas_and_pups.html

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:42 pm

Sharon wrote:I'm sure no expect on this subject. Why is outcrossing not practised more often , rather than close family members being used.?

Consistency within the litter for one, concentrating desirable traits being another......

BigShooter · Post by **BigShooter** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:37 am

Troy08er wrote:I've posted this before,thought it was a great read. It's an old study,one guy on THEFIELDTRIAL.com made a few commets that he thought it needed updated. http://www.dogstuff.info/of_peas_and_pups.html

Yes, many of us have read that article at one time or another. The additional update needed relates to the more recent research related to "switches" (gene regulatory proteins) that turn genes off or on. So the genetic soup that becomes a new pup is based not only the available genes from parents but also the variability induced by the activity of the switches. The more we know - the more we realize how much more there is for us to discover.

Generally the intention with inbreeding is to increase the likelihood the offspring will retain characteristics of the parents and likewise reduce variability. Outcrossing increases the likelihood of greater variation of the pups from the sire & dam. As far as we know, no breeder of GSPs has inbred for as many generations and as closely as was done with Moesgaard IB. A generation or two of close breeding is generally followed by an outcross. In any event breeders in both situations are looking for the "best" pup(s) to continue their breeding program with.

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:26 am

The more I study genetics the less I know and the more I think luck plays the biggest role.
My old professor said "don't let facts confuse your theories".
In breeding doesn't create 6 legged 4 eyed freaks, But we do see more genetic problems in linebred dogs. Lack of size is the most noticable and probably less resistance to disease. linebreeders try to eliminate the bad stuff but recessive genes pop up from several generations back.
All puppies in a litter cannot inherit all the same genes so if all would have a problem it is something other than genetics.
Also dogs regress toward the mean so if you don't out cross the tendency is to get worse instead of better. Cj

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:45 am

Folks need to understand that canine genetics and human genetics are different. The additional chromosomes in the canine genome allow for much closer breedings, which are quite common and typical in pack animals.

When it works it is linebreeding. When it don't work it is inbreeding. That is a common saying, but it is wrong.

If you don't want to deal with culling...don't breed... because stuff happens and you gotta deal with it when it happens to you.

In reality when you do real tight breedings...you intensify EVERYTHING...the good, the bad and the ugly. Some amazing dogs have been produced as the result of very close breedings. Some not so much.

If you have two dogs that positively ooze the qualities that you value in a bird dog, then they should be mated if you wish to cement and solidify those qualities for the future. If they happen to be closely related, the chances of solidifying and cementing those qualities is greatly enhanced and it may well be a responsible risk.

RayG

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:04 am

Only a few dozen genes define a chihuahua from a collie. Dogs are very limited in what produces variation among breeds compared to the overall amount of genetic material in their chromosomes. Check out Cornell's village dog project that was recently featured in National Geographic.

Fester · Post by **Fester** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:30 am

Does the registry have and guidelines about line breeding or inbreeding, i mean would FDSB register a breeding of littermates or Sire/daughter?
Fester

codym · Post by **codym** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:44 am

Birddog I didn't say I was against line breeding ( in fact all my dogs are somewhat linebred), the original question was how close to breed to be fairly confident you aren't going to have problems. It seems like half brother half sister gives you enough differentiation in genes.

Birddog3412 · Post by **Birddog3412** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:39 am

Fester wrote:Does the registry have and guidelines about line breeding or inbreeding, i mean would FDSB register a breeding of littermates or Sire/daughter?
Fester

No you can register whatever, littermates, mother to son, dad to daughter. The field just want their money.

I have a litter due in a month that the sire and dam are out of the same bitch (half syblings). Im really excited to see how it turns out.

Elkhunter · Post by **Elkhunter** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:43 am

codym wrote:I recently heard about a litter that was the result of an accidental breeding between litter mates. The results were not good with almost all having to be culled immediately. I have often wondered about this as line breeding is a synonym for inbreeding. I know the reason for line breeding and know it can produce great dogs, but how close is too close? When is the gene pool to shallow? I'm just looking for what most of you consider to be ethical.

Just stick with the wife!

codym · Post by **codym** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:48 am

Who's wife is the real question Josh!

Elkhunter · Post by **Elkhunter** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:56 am

Post by **Sharon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:09 am

BigShooter wrote:
Sharon wrote:I'm sure no expect on this subject. Why is outcrossing not practised more often , rather than close family members being used.?
I can't believe you asked this question like a GunDog Forum rookie who's never read one of the threads in the last couple of years about line-breeding vs. outcrosses with posts about the advantages & disadvantages of each. Looks like a set-up to me.

Hey, we can't know everything about everything - although some think they do -. I am a rookie when it comes to breeding info and am not ashamed to ask about what i don't know. Warning : There will be the odd "rookie" question. I can't believe you would need to put me down like that. I thought you were a nice guy.

Montana · Post by **Montana** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:10 pm

Linebreeding and inbreeding are really neither good nor bad.... You can't create something that didn't exist in the first place. In theory, a brother bred to a sister that were both perfect would produce only perfect pups, but we all know there are no perfect dogs. Inbreeding does not cause deformed pups, retarded pups, etc.....that's an old myth, but what it does is bring out both the desireable and undesireable traits so you know what you have. By linebreeding, a breeder can better predict the outcome of the breeding but the breeder needs to be aware of what problems there might be in the lines and he/she should have a goal is far as what they want to produce. When an outcross is done it's like reshuffling the deck (the genes)....you don't know what the outcome might be. Most knowledgeable breeders linebreed, but they know what they're doing...... Genetics is an extremely complex subject...

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:04 pm

I'd like to know what the "experts" would say about this scenario...Say you've got a male, a really nice, classy, birdfinder, that is bred extremely tight. With brother/sister and father/daughter breeding on both top and bottom of the same line. Would he pass his traits more prominently than his female mate into the litter considering she is not so tightly bred??? And even do it ( pass his traits on more prominently )over and over to every bitch he's bred to??

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:17 pm

SCT wrote:I'd like to know what the "experts" would say about this scenario...Say you've got a male, a really nice, classy, birdfinder, that is bred extremely tight. With brother/sister and father/daughter breeding on both top and bottom of the same line. Would he pass his traits more prominently than his female mate into the litter considering she is not so tightly bred??? And even do it ( pass his traits on more prominently )over and over to every bitch he's bred to??

Inbred does not automatically equal prepotent.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:23 pm

May not be automatic, but I'll bet it ups the odds greatly.

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:27 pm

SCT wrote:May not be automatic, but I'll bet it ups the odds greatly.

It seems to.

EZZY

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:39 pm

SCT wrote:May not be automatic, but I'll bet it ups the odds greatly.

I agree with that.

tn red · Post by **tn red** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:03 pm

Littermate x littermate are bred every day, your friend may need to test his well water

codym · Post by **codym** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:21 pm

tn red wrote:Littermate x littermate are bred every day, your friend may need to test his well water

Well there you have it! Huh all that and it was just bad well water don't I feel silly!

tn red · Post by **tn red** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:38 pm

codym wrote:
tn red wrote:Littermate x littermate are bred every day, your friend may need to test his well water

Well there you have it! Huh all that and it was just bad well water don't I feel silly!

If they all had to be culled at birth for deformaties you really think it was the breeding? Really?

northern cajun · Post by **northern cajun** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:37 pm

RayGubernat wrote:Folks need to understand that canine genetics and human genetics are different. The additional chromosomes in the canine genome allow for much closer breedings, which are quite common and typical in pack animals.

When it works it is linebreeding. When it don't work it is inbreeding. That is a common saying, but it is wrong.

If you don't want to deal with culling...don't breed... because stuff happens and you gotta deal with it when it happens to you.

In reality when you do real tight breedings...you intensify EVERYTHING...the good, the bad and the ugly. Some amazing dogs have been produced as the result of very close breedings. Some not so much.

If you have two dogs that positively ooze the qualities that you value in a bird dog, then they should be mated if you wish to cement and solidify those qualities for the future. If they happen to be closely related, the chances of solidifying and cementing those qualities is greatly enhanced and it may well be a responsible risk.

RayG

Listen to this man he understands and puts it in laymen's terms and is spot on.

ultracarry · Post by **ultracarry** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:48 pm

codym wrote:I recently heard about a litter that was the result of an accidental breeding between litter mates. The results were not good with almost all having to be culled immediately. I have often wondered about this as line breeding is a synonym for inbreeding. I know the reason for line breeding and know it can produce great dogs, but how close is too close? When is the gene pool to shallow? I'm just looking for what most of you consider to be ethical.

Are you talking about dogs, because I herd they have been doing this in the south to make the family tree taller....

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:07 pm

SCT wrote:I'd like to know what the "experts" would say about this scenario...Say you've got a male, a really nice, classy, birdfinder, that is bred extremely tight. With brother/sister and father/daughter breeding on both top and bottom of the same line. Would he pass his traits more prominently than his female mate into the litter considering she is not so tightly bred??? And even do it ( pass his traits on more prominently )over and over to every bitch he's bred to??

Absolutely not!!!! The sire can't contribute more than the dam. It don't make a bit of difference how tightly the sire is bred or anything else he will only contribute half of the genetics to his offspring and the dam will contribute half. Nothing changes that. There is no way the sire can contribute more. The goal would be to try to breed him with a bitch with the same genetics. Littermates can't all carry the same genetics or they would be clones. It's a great theory. To bad it don't work CJ

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:37 pm

I believe there is a difference between prominent traits and genetics. cjhills, how would you describe pre-potency and how it's passed down??

I think a good way to capture traits would be to take a female pup with the same desirable traits as her father and breed her back to him or to a half brother that shares the same traits (or vice versa). Isn't that what we're talking about here??

BigShooter · Post by **BigShooter** » Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:32 am

We are talking more from the perspective of what we have observed from certain breeding practices than from our complete knowledge of the science. Observations are subject to individual interpretation and create opinions. We know opinions vary. For example, I cannot fully agree that real tight breeding absolutely intensifies everything. There simply is too much random variation between littermates, even in real tight breedings. There have also been outcrosses that have produced several outstanding pups with "intensified" qualities and seemingly little variation between littermates. So we are not talking about absolutes & guarantees but about the increased likelihood that certain breeding practices will produce certain outcomes, based more upon observation & a bit less upon a complete knowledge of the exact biological mechanisms at work. Hence we experiment with breeding practices attempting to improve a breed, but not really knowing what negative consequences our efforts may produce as well.

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:50 am

SCT wrote:I believe there is a difference between prominent traits and genetics. cjhills, how would you describe pre-potency and how it's passed down??

I think a good way to capture traits would be to take a female pup with the same desirable traits as her father and breed her back to him or to a half brother that shares the same traits (or vice versa). Isn't that what we're talking about here??

My personal belief is that prepotency and the blue hen theory is mostly a myth and basically genetically impossible because one allele comes from each parent.
Traits or genetics what ever you would like to call it are still pass down half from each parent. the example in your post is exactly what we are talking about. We hope both pass on the same allele. wouldn't we be just as likely to get the same desirable trait from a out cross if the dog had the trait. With out the probability of getting more of the undesirable traits.
Wehle's breeding program had as many or more puppies that had to be disposed of as it did good pups. After all his inbreeding bad stuff is still popping up from recessive genes. Cj

Ralph Ford · Post by **Ralph Ford** » Sat Apr 07, 2012 6:38 am

"My personal belief is that prepotency and the blue hen theory is mostly a myth and basically genetically impossible because one allele comes from each parent."

I also follow this theory. Most 'blue hens' got their reputation because of opportunities offered to her litters.

"Wehle's breeding program had as many or more puppies that had to be disposed of as it did good pups. After all his inbreeding bad stuff is still popping up from recessive genes." Cj[/quote]

I don't think that is an accurate statement.

Retiredbirddogman · Post by **Retiredbirddogman** » Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:06 am

I had tremendous results with half brother/half sister breeding in a setter line I had. They had 3 litters and all pups were great.