Hi All,

I'm wondering how common it is for Dachshund breeders to xray their dogs for IVDD before breeding?

I would imagine it is expensive, and therefore not completed if it's not mandatory, but would be interested to see how many are actually doing it of their own accord?

I've become a little obsessed with the various hereditary health issues, as my own (poorly bred) JRT is so riddled with illnesses. I find it so interesting that these conditions can be identified and therefore reduced, if only the dogs were bred with some consideration. And the ongoing pain and suffering of the dogs is awful, not to mention the cost.

Anyway, just wondering as I read through the forum. This topic is a wormhole if you get into it!

Sho

Not a direct answer but this may give u some info.
Personnaly I would think amy condition that can be checked before breeding is something to consider doing . Ivdd is nasty and if u can prevent any genetic component by testing then it should be done
https://www.dachshund-ivdd.uk/screening-for-ivdd/

All breeding animals should be fully health tested before even being considered for breeding regardless of breed.

Cost of health testing should be irrelevant, my friend's Cavalier who died recently, came from MRI scanned parents, who had also had all other health tests such as hips, elbows, eyes & DNA testing. He was no more expensive than those whose parents had no testing done.

No health testing is mandatory bit personnaly I wouldnot want a pup from a breeder who hasn't health tested .
Many duck the tests or do only some and I feel its unethical . Surely we are breeding to improve the breed so health testing is imperative

I know my thoughts are not going to be popular, BUT reputable breeders, who have an indepth knowledge of their breed and of the various bloodlines, know when to test, and when it may not be the be-all and end-all.   Was a time a long while back now, when a really lovely male was eye tested and failed the gonyoscopy test.  Which means all his future breeding plans were cancelled, and he was lost to the breed.  Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, big time.  And fact is not many of those he'd already sired, developed eye problems.

On another occasion, a visiting American Champion was used by a few breeders here, us included.  There was a problem, again with eyes, in one litter he'd sired.  I had Prof.Bedford on the phone suggesting I get my puppies tested.  I declined and he backed off.  Turns out, eventually, that the problem was traced back not to the stud dog, but through the dam's side.  That breeder had been stirring the pot big time - and the Stud dog, who had by then gone back to the States, was tested - inconclusive.  None of my puppies from him were affected.  This was our ill-fated litter where because of vet incompetence, we lost 5 of her 9 puppies.  We kept two of the four left, and the other two went to another breeder ..... but that's a long and very sad story which I've written about before.

Yes in those breeds with long-established problems, it's only reasonable to expect all breeding stock to be checked but again, not to the point of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  JMO.

@MamaBas I'm sorry to hear about that litter, it's so sad.

I completely agree with your opinion, actually, that we shouldn't test "mid-lineage" and then shut everything down because of one test. It's awful to hear of that situation with the American Champ; such a claim can really damage a line as well as a breeders reputation, and really needs thorough investigating before it's "gone viral". If they had had the testing done on the dam (in that particular case) properly it could have averted such a bad outcome, but hindsight is 20/20 and all that.

I suppose that kind of gets to the root of my wonderings really; in long-line pedigrees, can we be confident that the appropriate testing was done "back then". If I am looking to source a good breeding bitch, can I be confident that because of her pedigree history, that her genetics are good to go, in so far as we can know. It's such a minefield; I find particularly in R. of Ireland (where I am) I can't find *many* Dachshund breeders, and I've noticed a lot of dogs coming available, but being imported from Hungary with various health claims.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts everyone! It's such an interesting topic (or maybe that's just me )

If I were getting a daxi I would want it done on both parents. Those I know who breed mini's smooth and wire do not xray for it. Shameful really

There’s a piece in this months Kennel Club journal on the launch of a dachshund screening scheme

https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/media/4513/july-2021-kcj-final-online.pdf

when a really lovely male was eye tested and failed the gonyoscopy test.  Which means all his future breeding plans were cancelled, and he was lost to the breed.  Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, big time.  And fact is not many of those he'd already sired, developed eye problems.

On another occasion, a visiting American Champion was used by a few breeders here, us included.  There was a problem, again with eyes, in one litter he'd sired.  I had Prof.Bedford on the phone suggesting I get my puppies tested.  I declined and he backed off.  Turns out, eventually, that the problem was traced back not to the stud dog, but through the dam's side

From a genetics point of view I find it very odd that an eye defect could be carried by one parent, but masked & not the other, but puppies were produced with the defect, that is not logical. Not sure which eye defect you are writing of, but Glaucoma is now considered genetic & Cherry eye a polygenetic from the latest research.

To use a dog with an eye defect for which there is currently no DNA test is extremely foolish, as you have no way of knowing the genetic status of the parents, as you could be mating affected to carrier, which means the likelyhood of producing affected puppies is 50/50 & only 25 % of carriers only, no clears could be produced thus spreading the defect in the breed.

In ISDS Border Collies it is acceptable at the moment to breed CEA(CH)(plus any DNA tested defect carrier dog) clear to carrier, but the puppies cannot be registered until their DNA status is known & officially recorded with the ISDS. For CEA(CH) before the DNA test was available, puppies had to be screened before 12 weeks as the condition can "go right" & become undetectable. By insisting that all puppies had to be screened, even without the DNA test, the ISDS reduced affected dogs from 20% to less than .01%, DNA tests have confirmed this status of affected dogs

If the bitch that produced was solely the source of the defect she would have to be affected which for both conditions would be obvious & therefore she should not have been bred from

Currently from the link I posted earlier if u go via the kc it only costs £100 to test . Normal price about £350 pretty good deal.

There are also statistics showing which variety of daxie has the highest risk from ivdd.

@ Anne - I'm really sorry that once again you feel it necessary to pick me up on a post.  Yes, of course, it's highly possible that the dogs in question were carrier for Glaucoma and happened to have been mated to a bitch who was also carrier.  Just as it's probable that our bitch, mated to the American Champion, was not carrier, but he was.  We never had a case of glaucoma in our line.  But again, perhaps we did have carriers but were lucky not to mate to a carrier male (before the American boy assuming he was a carrier).  Glaucoma is around in the breed for sure.  I just find it of concern that a dog can find itself removed from the gene pool when it has many other good points - not belittling that condition of course.  And if enough carriers are out there, for any one condition, it can quickly become endemic in any breed - especially if any stud dog is widely used.  Our better breeders are using the goneoscopy test these days.

It's not"highly possible"it will be a fact, unless the bitch actually had the defect which I would hope wasn't the case, the pain from glaucoma is intense & it would be obvious to a lay person. A friend's BC lost an eye to this, which has lead to intensive search for a marker gene.

It is so dangerous to use affected animals in breeding programs when there is no DNA test for the defect, no matter how outstanding the animal is, all that you achieve is to spread the condition in the breed. It is possible to store semem from males to preserve the quality of the dog for use when there is a DNA test.

DNA research has removed CLAD & PRA in both varieties of Irish Setter meaning that only only offspring from clears are registrable.

The research on canine Glaucoma will not only benefit dogs, but will lead to a human test & affected humans being forwarded.

I give up!!  OF COURSE the bitch in question was not glaucoma affected .............

Time for me to take a time out from this place!