Marianne you've beaten me to it - the Groenendael average comes out at 2.5%  -when  I along with almost all Groenendael breeders struggle  to find a stud that is NOT out of either Rival or Jason !!!- this figure will of course make it almost impossible for breeders to breed litters with lower COI's and will just confuse puppy buyers - in fact my new litter of pups (  from a Terv x Groen intervariety breeding ! ) have a COI of 5.39% which oour breed data base classes as 'Low' for the breed

Far better for breeders to use their own breed specific data bases to calculate the REAL coi's of their breed and any prospective matings here's ours :

http://baza.belgi.pl/

Yvonne

I have had to look on lien as to what is considered to be an acceptable/safe level fo COI and have found articles saying under 6% and some anything under 15%.

I think the KC need to say something along those liens if confusion is nto to rain with people believing that COI's above the stated breed averages are unacceptable, which is how the average person will see it.

Because I have no database calculation tools I have always used the percentages of blood method in determining the level of influence a dog that appears more than once in a pedigree has as a method of determine advisability fo use, but in conjunction you need to know what others in the breed are producing so I monitor what has been bred by others when making my won plans as we cannot breed in isolation, and the potential mates for my won breeding are those others have bred.

We need a database like Koiranet that shows the dogs pedigree (which can be shown for whatever number of generations (with COI's) one wants (is clickable so one can look up any ancestors details etc).

On a search page for any dog it will show their details, pedigree, what litters they have been the parents of (names of mates with health results), and health test results for the offspring, also main show/trial results (like the ones that would qualify for the stud book here).

Also you can see what litters have been registered, but I suppose the Kennel club would hate to loose the income from selling the BRS and other database info.  Even if the Kennel club gave all Kennel name/Affix holders free access (something for our annual fee) and charged others an annual fee equivalent to the affix maintenance one.

Would make monitoring commercial levels of breeding much easier.  Would allow breeders to plan in a much more joined up fashion, check details without embarrassment for the stud dogs or brood bitches breeding history etc.

I find it interesting the Poles (that's where 3/4's of my roots are) are quite good at these databases, breeding tools, as there was another COI tool that was also put up by a Pole. 

They sure have come along out of the dark ages of canine affairs during the communist era.

I suppose these fledgling Kennel clubs/canine organisations that were practically non existent haven't so much baggage and can move with the times more.  Also in the East European counties dog fanciers need to be very committed lot as economically things are still very difficult for the average person just with housing and reliable employment (virtually non existent welfare system).

but what about epilepsy?  Do you think that the system could help there? I was mulling this over with GSD as well, wondering if, as there is no test for epilepsy if this could be useful or is monitoring the best method on a case by case basis?
Quote selected text

Without knowing which dogs have epilepsy surely no database is going to be of any use in breeding this out?  I would be interested in knowing what you'd like doing to 'monitor on a case by case basis' - this is essential but at the moment just isn't happening.

I have no idea, that is why I am asking, I know responsible breeders will publicise if there are issues but of course a lot depends on whether owners of affected dogs inform the breeders.

I have no idea, that is why I am asking, I know responsible breeders will publicise if there are issues but of course a lot depends on whether owners of affected dogs inform the breeders.

Interesting.. I think most people inform the breeders, responsible breeders will take this on board and where epilepsy is found to be hereditary they won't breed from those dogs, or siblings again.  Oh wait a minute that may be all their dogs so will they?

I know a breeder (of border collies) who tells their owners when they advise them their pup has epilepsy that 'all puppies do that' (ie fit!) and continue to breed and sell to people. A friend has just lost hers of this breeding at 5 after years of fits finally they couldn't be controlled.  I know at least 2 others who have epileptic dogs of this breeding.  When farmers stopped buying from them they merely switched to agility and pet homes!

Many owners simply deny that there's an issue.... partic if their stud dog is well used.

On the other hand some people just want to 'make trouble'. A friend has just used a stud dog and one of the puppy purchasers was told by someone that there is epilepsy in his progeny.  Well, a son of his is epileptic - however this started at age 6 after being knocked unconscious in a freak accident and was feared that he would die - since his recovery he's had epilepsy.  No other offspring are epileptic.  Was this hereditary?  Doubtful I'd have thought.

Epilepsy is a minefield and it's unlikely that there'll be a DNA test shortly as with HD the genes are multi and complex, unfortunately.

HI PennyGC

Whether most people inform the breeder or not is an interesting point. Talking to other people (and from my own experience) some people keep in constant contact whilst others disappear, and that is after waiting and least 6 months for a puppy - usually longer. I suspect many people who "want it now" don't even bother although as you say there are troublemakers as well.
As for the "breeder" of Border Collies decency prevents my commenting on that other than  to say she is NO breeder in the proper sense of the word.
I think this (mate select) is a great start and can be built open.
Jeff.

I was really referring to your statement that Malinois have no health problems.......... I thought that hip scoring and eye testing were recommended for the breed?

I realise that is not what you are referring to in your post re the Mate Select test, but what about epilepsy?

Obviously I only refer to the show lines as those are the ones I know and what with it being so few of us, you tend to know what's going on -it's almost like two breeds, isn't it. I don't know of any Malinois that has failed its eye test -only the other Belgians. (Have never seen any eye test results for working dogs, not even police dogs, so not sure if anyone does it? I know it seems to be a split in whether the working breeders hip score or not, some do, some don't, and the only higher scores I've seen in recent years have been working dogs -but at the same time both types have had scores as low as 0/0.) The BMS is going down most years so I really wouldn't say there is HD in the breed. The only epilepsy has been seen in the working lines (and again the other varieties), there's never been a case of epilepsy in the show line Malinois in the UK.

Useful site. I have always thought (with the breed that I know very well) that a certain amount of line breeding is essential to maintain type, however fresh blood/new lines are necessary every few generations for health and vigour. The dogs I most admire tend to have higher COIs.

The Crufts B.I.G. winners are a mixed bag from the terrier group winner with a staggering 45.5% to the utility group winner at 1.0% :-)

My silken girl has a high coefficient of 28.9%, as expected in a relatively new breed with a small gene pool, if I breed from her whatever dog I choose will bring the pups down to between 15.5 + 19.2%. Silkens are an extremely healthy breed, no early deaths at all apart from accidents, most dogs living well into their late teens and healthy up to then - yet most will have high COIs.

I have always thought (with the breed that I know very well) that a certain amount of line breeding is essential to maintain type, however fresh blood/new lines are necessary every few generations for health and vigour. The dogs I most admire tend to have higher COIs.

And it isn't just type but everything -health as well. Just the fact a dog is 0 % inbred doesn't automatically make it healthy (which of course is why the designer crossbreeds aren't all in perfect health as some people want to believe) -just like it having a high COI doesn't automatically make it unhealthy.

Jeff - interestingly the breeder in question is a chap not a woman... certainly disreputable whatever gender :-( Unfortunately probably not an isolated case either.  Does anyone think that buyers who have problems are more likely to go to the breeder than if the pups had been healthy?  It's an interesting issue - also of course it depends who the breeders sell too - the more picky the more likely they're to hear from buyers, and indeed to encourage them.  Disreputable breeders certainly don't encourage buyers to go back to them - I found that to my cost with my first puppy purchase.
Interestingly another border collie breeder with a good reputation for working trials dogs repeated a mating even though he knew one of the first litter had died with epilepsy.  Also interestingly they offered that person a pup from the repeat mating but nothing to the people who lost a dog a year after the first also with epilepsy.. they haven't heard a word from the breeder since they informed them that the dog had died.  The sire of that litter has been used extensively in the world of agility so if he does carry epilepsy then there's likely to be more further down the line :-(
The mate select hopefully will be much improved upon - certainly the border collie database available is much better

> Just the fact a dog is 0 % inbred doesn't automatically make it healthy (which of course is why the designer crossbreeds aren't all in perfect health as some people want to believe) -

No certainly not, although they may have hybrid vigour it doesn't cancel out the hereditary problems of both parent breeds.

>just like it having a high COI doesn't automatically make it unhealthy

Again I agree, if the high COI is a result of breed specialists, people with a great knowledge of and the best interests of the breed at heart, then that high COI comes from breeding to improve the breed - not just type but health.

If (and we know its not) but if everything else was equal. Say someone who has been involved in labs and poodles for many years and has a line of each breed that has been bred ethically, with all tests done for several generations and good results. Then you could say that if they mate their lab to their poodle the resulting pups would most likely be healthier than their parents, they would be genetically clear of eye problems like their parents, have low hip scores because both parents and all close relatives have and they would have hybrid vigour..... I still wouldn't want one though :-D

labs and poodles for many years and has a line of each breed that has been bred ethically, with all tests done for several generations and good results. Then you could say that if they mate their lab to their poodle the resulting pups would most likely be healthier than their parents, they would be genetically clear of eye problems like their parents, have low hip scores because both parents and all close relatives have and they would have hybrid vigour.....

This is in no way certain due to the nature of the HD genes - in fact the two breeds may be carrying the full set of genes between them and the pups could well have HD - this is the disadvantage in outcrossing, line breeding you're less likely to have HD show up although the dogs may well carry some of the genes required for HD, outcrossing or cross breeding may well bring them together.  You never quite know what you're going to get.

Hi Penny,

I agree far too much of it goes on but would love to be able to peruse relevant figures- I don't think they exist- yet for this sort of thing, so very difficult to compile. I think you are probably right, people are more likely to go back to the breeder if there is a problem but I suspect only just percentage wise. I am amazed at how many people can not tell you who bred their dog and that even applies in a rare breed like TMs where there are no more than 12 breeders. Of course I suspect people are less likely to contact the breeder when they get a puppy on the spur of the moment but we had a lovely couple who took one of my OH puppies after a wait of two years and at 18 months old this puppy had 3 major ops and we found out second hand - I am adamant that these were not needed ( of course I am not a vet) but at the very least we would have all gone to our much trusted vet for a second opinion.  
Jeff.

One of mine has a COI of 2.2% on the KC mate select, but it's 23% using 10 complete generations.  A big difference!!
and another one 0.9% on KC, 24% on the breed database.

I have just cross-referenced a particular dog with Mate Select and the breed database. (Marianne - it's one of your breed, though long passed).

KC Mate Select - COI 13.5%
Breed database - COI 28.7%

That's too much of a difference not to be alarmed at the potential inaccuracy of the KC's breed COI's.

KC Mate Select - COI 13.5%
Breed database - COI 28.7%

I can see we're going to look REALLY bad for breeding such terribly inbred dogs........ :(

BTW Marianne, on the Polish database it's very hard to find any UK examples of your breed on there, versus almost impossible to find any imported ones on the KC database... lol

I ought to spend some time adding dogs to that site, but gosh, things like that really does take hours.......and with the amount going on in my life at the moment, now's not the time.

Best of it is, not all the health test results you see are true
I HAD MY DOG TESTED FOR GLAUCOMA ALONG WITH OTHERS WHO COULD SEE THAT THIS WAS BECOMING A PROBLEM IN OUR BREED
this was before the k/c in there wisdom made it a requirement, but because mine and others were done before this we cant have it on the health test finder on the k/c site
So anyone checking my dogs tests will NOT see that he HAS been tested and is clear
This also must mean that a person who had their dog tested before this became mandatory and had a failure will not be on their health tests either
WHY the k/c wont put our test results on is beyond me when i feel i have done all i can to show i have a clear and healthy stud dog

How they have set up the operating parameters is here:
http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/mateselect/sop-coi.aspx

It's answered my question on how they have clauclated the mean COI for a bred:

7. The average inbreeding coefficient for a breed is calculated on an annual basis by calculating the inbreeding coefficients of all individuals of the breed born during the selected year. The mean of the inbreeding coefficients is taken as the average for that year.

As we only had 9 litters (33 puppies) registered in 2010 it does explain why we have such a low bred COI.

> The average inbreeding coefficient for a breed is calculated on an annual basis by calculating the inbreeding coefficients of all individuals of the breed born during the selected year.

That makes sense in that you have a base line against which to measure any change in the subsequent year and thus showing you the trend but does mean those presenting a very small sample, ie few litters bred, will need to be viewed over quite a few years to really plot any changes and perhaps for them it would be better to suggest breeding is kept to under the average of, say, five years.

> 7. The average inbreeding coefficient for a breed is calculated on an annual basis by calculating the inbreeding coefficients of all individuals of the breed born during the selected year. The mean of the inbreeding coefficients is taken as the average for that year.

Ah, that's interesting, thanks. I do think they should make it more clear though, a disclaimer perhaps on the pages where calculated COIs appear, as many people will be comparing those to COIs calculated elsewhere or even by themselves. It is definitely going to lead to some confusion otherwise.

7. The average inbreeding coefficient for a breed is calculated on an annual basis by calculating the inbreeding coefficients of all individuals of the breed born during the selected year. The mean of the inbreeding coefficients is taken as the average for that year

It explains mine as well - in the show dogs I don't think there was more than one litter in 2010 that wasn't sired by an import! (We only have about 5 show litters max born per year.)

Don't think this was a very clever way of doing it as it certainly doesn't give a true picture.

Would you believe I have already received a puppy enquiry through Champdogs quoting the COI for my litter:

Here is an extract (I have removed the names of the dogs):
______________________________________________________________________________________________

Dear ,

Please can you tell me if your waiting list for girl puppies is full? Do you have many down for girls? Do you think your dogs and their working line would fit into a pet environment as I have heard the working line need more mental stimulation and they look different from the show line.

What is the temperament like of both parents?

I went on to the KC website and wanted to check for any inbreeding and you are below average which I am pleased about. I noitced all the relevant health tests have bben done.

Mate Select
Mating Inbreeding Coefficient Prediction
Result
Retriever (Labrador)
The average inbreeding coefficient for this breed is
6.4%
Sire
Dam

Any puppies from this mating would have a coefficient value of
2.7%
More information
Health Tests
Health Tests
How to use this information
* The inbreeding coefficient calculated is a guide and a measure to protect both the progeny from a litter and also for the overall breed. Just as important are considerations to temperament, health screening, breed type and characteristics.
* To create improvements in genetic diversity, matings are encouraged if the predicted coefficient is less than the average inbreeding coefficient for the breed.
* The average inbreeding coefficient for this breed is 6.4%.
* This gives the predicted inbreeding coefficients of any puppies born if this mating were to go ahead or of existing progeny from the parents.
* Inbreeding is defined as the mating of related individuals, whether they are closely or more distantly related. The inbreeding coefficient of an individual is the probability that two copies of the same gene have been inherited by an individual from a common founder, an ancestor shared by both parents.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

I really hope the Kennel Club have got these figures right and have taken enough time to explain to puppy buyers exactly what these figures mean. If not I think there may well be problems ahead!! Certainly this puppy buyer is taking the figures as read.

Certainly this puppy buyer is taking the figures as read.

Slightly off topic but I think this is a problem -people taking KC recommendations too literally. This week I had a very rude email via CD from somebody who "helpfully" informed me I was breeding from bitches with higher than acceptable hip scores! I have bred from two bitches of the breed, one with a score of 11, the other with a score of 9. At the current time the BMS is 9 and when the older (retired) bitch was bred from, guess what, the BMS was 11. Even so, I'd have NO problem with breeding from any a few points higher in a breed where the average is so low to start with -and where we have such a tiny genepool. But of course many articles tells you to only buy from parents LOWER than the average!

Well I think basing their breed average on one year in breeds with low registrations like mine and Mariannes's can skew the breed average severely from year to year.

2009 had just 33 registrations giving 4.1% as our COI.

If based on 2008 figures (10 litters and two individuals, makign 55) the average COI would have been 8.05%, even that is too small a number to base it on.

So basing it on just a years registrations would give a false impression of the facts and of course give rise to false expectations of breeders from puppy buyers.

I agree Marianne at under 20 a score is a functionally normal score.

> Don't think this was a very clever way of doing it as it certainly doesn't give a true picture.

Or maybe that was exactly why they did it that way so the KC can now say look all our pedigree dogs with nice low COIs so are not in bred?

I think its shows not matter what the KC do the people that object to pedigrees and shows are never going to be happy :(

No-one makes anyone own a pedigree dog, so why don't those who object to their exitence just leave the rest of us to enjoy them. 

Without shows there woudln't be most pedigree dogs (or purebred fancy Rabbits, Cavies, Mice, Pigeons, poultry etc), the majority would have died out along with their original purpose, other than companionship.

No-one makes anyone own a pedigree dog, so why don't those who object to their exitence just leave the rest of us to enjoy them.

Without shows there woudln't be most pedigree dogs (or purebred fancy Rabbits, Cavies, Mice, Pigeons, poultry etc), the majority would have died out along with their original purpose, other than companionship.
Quote selected text

Here Here.

The thing with the COI's our breed is very high but apart from Patella luxation (which we are working hard to control) we have no real problem in the breed and most reach the 14-16 range and recently a members bitch reached 18. We have a weeny gene pool but thankfully has been taken great care of by some very knowledgable people over the years.

I have just been 'playing' with Mate Select - I found looking at the progeny of various stud dogs very interesting especially the Eye Test Results - although it only give a 'Progeny Number' you can tell how many have failed eye tests.

Although no names are given it does give us another good guide when choosing a particular stud dog.

I found that facility by accident yesterday and for me in my numerically small breed found it most interesting being able to see how many litters a dog had sired (obviously bitches will have only had a couple of litters).

Using the less commonly used sire maybe a better idea if you have a list of dogs with otherwise similar qualities.

Didn't see this facility before - very interesting and useful.

I've recently got interested and involved with working cockers (they compliment our flatcoats so well when working).    There are some super little dogs out there - very capable, excellent workers with only a few health problems that I have heard of to date.

But the working cockers CofI is much higher than the 'breed average', and you could count the number that have been hip scored and eye tested almost on one hand!!!   Now is this

a. The original breeders were seriously good dogmen who only bred from the very best, and these happened to be related....  ??
b.  There are (comparitively) just so few lines of really good easily trained working cockers now that people are almost frightened to outcross to anything that hasn't been totally proven?     I have heard more than a few times that serious trainers will only consider FTCh x FTCh pups to train on......???

I'm sure the Mate select has given food for thought, but really little positive direction in  such cases.

Jo