Despite DNA testing for TNS (trapped neurophill syndrome) in border collies there has recently been a puppy born with this terrible (and deadly) disease. It's widely discussed - how can a 'breeder' not know about it? should it be compulsory to have at least one parent (it's recessive) DNA tested (or genetically clear) before KC (tricky cos not all are KC registered) registration.  Talking to collie 'owners' it's clear not all DO know about it - seeing some adverts saying 'parents tested for TNS but not saying that they're carriers) it's worrying....

We have been lucky so far, only a few pups in this country have died from this disease - and we've only had a few CL carriers found (the other deadly collie disease) but how do we make people aware, when many aren't even aware that two merles shouldn't be put together???

Thank you for posting this Penny. I'm sorry to say that we are 'banging against a brick wall' when it comes to persuading some 'breeders' to take up DNA tests. I would also say  that in this situation the stud dog owner is equally at fault. It really is down to education - prospective puppy owners doing their home work on the breed and, of course ,the integrity of the breeder.

I was recently at an eye testing clinic and asked a breeder whether such an such a girl had been tested for CEA. Her mother is known to be carrier. Her friend, who it was I asked, said she didn't need to because the likelihood of the girl being a carrier was decreasing through time. I was not at all sure if I had understood her correctly ! My understanding is that a carrier  mated to a genetically normal dog will produce puppies, each with a 50% chance of being DNA normal or a carrier.

TNS is a dreadful condition and we are fortunate that a DNA test is available. Trouble is, testing is not compulsory, even for KC registered dogs and unregistered dogs are never tested anyway. I've been getting as many unregistered Border Collies eye tested ( including Gonioscopy ) as possible by  'inducements' to owners ( I'm not saying what !)

I have got a bit of a reputation for  'banging on' about testing. A lot falls on deaf ears. I reckon the breed clubs could do more to ensure that testing for all known inheritable conditions in the breed is done, including DNA tests as they become available. Furthermore, the Kennel Club really needs to take the 'bull by the horns' and refuse to register puppies from untested parents. The ABS has just provided an excuse for the KC to allow a two  tier system of registration. And how about the vets ? They should be more aware of these conditions and the tests available. As well as adverts for Frontline etc, could they not have a few posters detailing the hereditary conditions in all breeds ( I'm thinking a huge wall chart ) and advise accordingly ?

Penny I know little about health testing in BC's but what I'd like to see from the KC is that they will only allow registrations of litters when both parents have had the relevant health tests done and the results are satisfactory(pointless doing them and then still ignoring them imo).
The breed clubs need to put in place confirmed requirements, as in what HAS to be done(not should) and what IS the minimum allowed on test results. For example I know with one breed that with elbows you can't breed from anything with more than a 1, there is no if or buts.

Far too many breeders are still covering things up and far too many breed clubs have health tests where the results are private and no one is none the wiser on results(They aren't published) which makes it harder to build up a picture on good health linage for the future :-(

> too many breed clubs have health tests where the results are private and no one is none the wiser on results(They aren't published)

Couldn't agree more, still can't believe the KC/BVA are considering secrecy for the CM/SM scheme. Madness!

Jan I'd just take you to task a bit about 'unregistered' border collies, do you mean border collies not registered with the KC?  Of course the other main registry for border collies is the ISDS and they take health very seriously.  There are also a LOT of working register border collies being tested - probably by people who do agility/obedience/working trials with their dogs, but still a significant number.  I agree that the breeder and owner of the stud bear responsibility as I understand his sire is a known carrier.

As for dogs only being clear being allowed to be used I would be very against this at the moment - throwing the baby out with the bathwater springs to mind.  TNS is as yet an unknown factor in many lines and whilst I think we should encourage people to test we shouldn't immediately in a blame culture way ban dogs found to be carriers from breeding!  The test results of TNS and CEA need to be used 'wisely' and in the future we can eliminate these diseases.

It's shocking to think that people are just hoping that CEA has reduced significantly (it hasn't in border collies) so that people with likely carriers or affected dogs shouldn't worry... all more reason for finding a clear dog!

I feel very sad for the little pup whose life will be short and painful and no sympathy for the breeder who should have known about TNS :-( but lets not have a blame culture.  I would be so against using the accredited breeder scheme as a 'two tier' system as it's riddled with problems - full of puppy farmers and so problematic that good breeders (myself included) are not willing to join in its present form.  There are a lot of good breeders who should be supported - lets try and sort out the bad ones :-(

Hello Penny,

Sorry about the misunderstanding regarding registration. I am referring to BCs not registered at all/on any register whatsoever.  I am aware of the ISDS scheme  and  of the Agility /Working registers and I just decided that there was an opportunity to have a 'bigger picture ' of the breed, particularly with regard to eye problems.

With reference to DNA testing, of course this should be used as a 'tool 'in good breeding practice. I was not suggesting that carriers should not be used. I have a CEA carrier girl who has been bred from .But, we need to identify carriers in order to avoid problems in successive generations. Eliminating excellent dogs on the basis of their carrier status would be bad practice. I was trying to make the point that the breeder should have her tested otherwise we are no better off than we were before the advent of DNA testing-in the dark and keeping our fingers crossed.

Hi Jan - sorry, it wasn't you it was someone else, I was trying to respond to 2 postings :-(
You're referring to back yard breeders who are almost 'beyond' any control unfortunately - this can be farm collies who are allowed to roam and mate with whoever, and people with no knowledge just breeding and not having a clue.  Very difficult to reach these people unfortunately.
Yes, of course we need to identify carriers - someone was saying identify carriers and don't breed from them, which at this moment imo would be disastrous, in border collies and in other breeds, shelties eg.  In rough collies if we did that I don't think we could use a single British bred dog!  Over a few generations we should be able to reduce the numbers of carriers - of CEA, TNS and the few CL that there are.  Of course we also now have glaucoma (eye test) to consider, plus HD and epilepsy.  Should we eg withdraw from the genepool all those carriers (and even affected CEA) we may find that the remaining dogs also include carriers for HD and epilepsy when we eventually identify genes - also other diseases may be found - and we'll regret reducing our gene pool.  Jan I know that's not what you're suggesting, but people are - even with border collie circles :-( you and I are in agreement :-)

Hi again Penny!

      Thank you for your comments. Many breeders are reluctant to take up DNA tests fearing that identification of their dogs as carriers will result in them being excluded from breeding . We know that this  should not be the case and the tests should be used as a tool to enable eventual elimination of the defect without ablating the gene pool and allowing other genetic problems to flourish.

I've just opened my copy of Dog World and on page 72 there is a really good article  titled ' Should We Breed From Carriers '.

In the last paragraph the author identifies a condition 'Inherited Disease Sundrome' -must make sure I don't catch it !!

Hi Jan
Yes that's partly true, but with TNS they are putting lives at risk if no tests are done :-( but a lot of 'pet' owners who aren't members of clubs and who perhaps don't join in internet discussions may well be unaware of this illness.  There's a huge 'discussion' on borderbility at the moment over using carriers - and this for CEA which doesn't put pups lives at risk.
However this isn't an excuse for some breeders continually churning out puppies with epilepsy which is a major problem in border collies and sadly which we don't have a DNA test for yet, although it is being worked on.  People don't want to withdraw their dogs from the breeding programme, don't want to admit to anything it's horrendous.
'Inherited Disease Sundrome' - something for the summer perhaps?