The Median score is almost more useful than the Mean score, as it isn't affected by the occasional high score.

I'm surprised they didn't think to use that as a guide before rather than the mean score?  Though if your trying to reduce HD rather than control/keep things stable where it is respectable then the mean was the one they chose.  I suppose originally the Scroing schemes aims were more about solving a problem, rather than a preventative measure.

Hi,

If all plates were submitted for hipscoring the mean average hipscore would raise ,but it doesn't mean you couldn't have a policy in place that you only breed from dogs under a certain score  as recommended by your breed club.

This way you still breed from the recommended score or better still below BUT

we also get to see what the breed is doing as a whole when every plate  is submitted.

Surely best of both worlds ??

Briony :-)

> As long as a dog is hip x-rayed before they are bred, why should it matter if they are scored or not?  <

So a sire produces say 100 puppies all of which are X rayed 20 have good hips & are scored 80 have bad hips & are not. When the records of the sires are produced this dog looks good so people tootle off & use him not knowing he is not an improver hips & that he is just the opposite

That is why all dogs should be scored !

And if having your dog scored wasn't so expensive then more pet owners could be persuaded to have their dogs scored for the good of the breed, and the dog of course, as if found to be bad appropriate management could reduce the effects.

The reason that they should be scored is because I know of people who thought that their dogs hips looked bad on their x-ray and so did the vet and they've come back really good and vice versa.

I can't tell you how much it p***** me off to find out that some people are x-raying their dogs and then not sending them off for scoring, in my eyes they might as well not of even bothered having them xrayed!!

I can understand what you are saying. I did think about getting Tara hip-scored. She is a mismark and therefore is not to be bred from and has been spayed. After considering all the pros and cons, I didn't have it done. I don't consider it worth putting a dog through an anaesthetic for nor the cost involved. Now I am sure that you will disagree, but that's my opinion :)

Daisy

I agree. The anaesthetic risk is a definite deterrent for having it done routinely.

If you have a breed that's fairly small and you want to make sure that you don't bring a problem in then it's good to have all dogs scored be them eventual breeding stock or just pets.  It helps to see the breed as a whole and not the odd few.

She could easily ahve been done though while she was under to be spayed.

One of mine was hip x-rayed while under for a procedure to sew the third eyelid over an eye ulcer that wasn't healing.

True - but I didn't think of it until afterwards :) It hadn't ocurred to me that she needed to be hip-scored. Certainly, the breeders had never mentioned it. I'm also unsure whether the statistics produced are completely accurate from a breeding point-of-view, as it seems that environmental issues can skew the genetic issues. If I'd had Tara scored and the score was bad, it could be down to the way that I'd managed her when she was a pup. As a non-breeding owner, I'm not convinced that 100% screening is necessary.

Daisy

Ah but if all the dogs were svored the odd high score would be seen as a blip because of perhaps accident or environmental issues, but when few of the littermates and relatives are scored the wrong conclusions can be drawn for good or ill with a multifactoroal condition like HD.

"Not sending in high scoring plates is actually beneficial on two counts, the BMS will continue to move downward, and the owners bank balance will not be hit so hard!"

Paul, I hope you do not seriously mean that!

A dog's high scoring plates reveal nothing else but its individual fenotype. The genotype of a dog is a combination of its immediate relatives - scored or not!

No I don't sound like your Cavalier friends at all. SHM is known in Cavs and there is a test for it. Therefore do the test. Clinical HD is unknown in deerhounds. As I said when a very few PSS cases turned up deerhound breeders were quick to test almost universally which is the way it should be.

"When they find the marker genes for HD I wonder if you will bother to DNA test ? probably not IMHO"

Please don't take that tone. IF a genetic marker is found for HD in the forseeable future I imagine deerhound breeders will have a DNA test because by then there will be genetic markers for inherited diseases that do affect them.

"I'm surprised so many deerhounds die so young if they are such a disease free/genetically healthy breed. I've read of lots dying before they reach double figures Why is that ?"

They are a giant breed for starters. If you are interested in the breakdown on mortality for the US look here - http://www.deerhound.org/health.htm The big killers are cardiomyopathy, bloat, osteosarcoma and accidents. Show any deerhound breeder a satisfactory test for any of those and (s)he will break your arm to get it :)

FWIW my impression is that a similar UK study might show better longevity. I've only lost two that didn't get into their teens and our pups seem to motor on into their teens as well. Don't ask me to prove it because I can't but I suspect, partly from Dr Angela Bodey's work and partly from observation that DCM probably accounts for a higher percentage of premature deaths here than in the US. Again don't ask me to prove it, but I suspect that some breeding lines may have better longevity because they are relatively free of DCM and possibly are less liable to OS and GDV.

But there is no satisfactory test for any of the big deerhound killers. Even when most deerhound breeders were heart testing annually before Angela's reserach ended there was no guarantee that a dog tested clear this month would not develop signs of DCM next and unfortunately most that did develop DCM did so after the age at which they would have been bred. So we are left with plain old pedigree research.

Edited to add: Hypothyroidism also seems to be a less common problem in the UK

It will be when the HD marker genes are found not If.BTW eventually all breeds will have the Genome fully mapped Cavaliers being one of the first & just because there are no clinicial signs does not mean there is no HD, if you do not X ray & score you will never know. Like I said my BC with severe HD had no clinicial signs only the X ray can reveal the true status

The Greyhound evidence is that tangible X ray proof of over 1000 greyhounds randomly selected with no evidence of HD

BTW my friends in cavaliers are screening & are helping with the research

There is allegedly no clinicial SHM in King Charles Spaniels(althiough my vet has had two within the last year with classic symptoms)but then none have been screened & they are even more close mouthed than the Cavalier breeders !