# Linebreeding



## Kat LaPlante (May 17, 2009)

Looking for knowledgeable opinions on linebreeding. How much is too much? When does aiming to coninue strong and desireable traits become breeding faulty dogs? In the working GSD lines specifically DDR does anyone really know how small this gene pool really is? The more I research, it seems as though I can find almost every dog to have a common "in-cestor"????????????????????????????????


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I think that Line breeding is good till you get Consistently the desired traits that the common ancetors have into the progeny...after that it's too much. That's the whole point of line breeding. To fix traits into the lines. The problem is you can keep line breeding for quite a while till the dogs start to show problems. So, cannot give you an exact number. But I think the problem with some breeders and line breeding. They do it, thinking that they are going to get good dogs. And this can be reiforced by them having success. But I do not think they start with a plan on what they want specifically. So, they continue, simply because it worked before or someone else had success. Or they line breed because one of the current top dogs has similar ancestors. Not looking back to see that the dogs before them are line breedings on the same dogs already. and that the traits desired are already fixed into the lines and are easily passed. 

I do not think the amount is problem. It's the application. Some people simply do not know why they are line breeding...except that it wll give them more of a chance of getting a good dog. Knowing this, they do it with no long term goal on what they want in the lines, or even creating lines themselves.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

line or inbreeding isn't bad, but you have to be very,very selective in which individual you choose to breed with. Only the 100% healthy (mentally & physically) dogs. If you're not, you can create a problem in you line.


----------



## Martine Loots (Dec 28, 2009)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> line or inbreeding isn't bad, but you have to be very,very selective in which individual you choose to breed with. Only the 100% healthy (mentally & physically) dogs. If you're not, you can create a problem in you line.


 
So true! 
I like line breeding a lot as long as it is done the way Selena decribes it.


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

Taht wuld be a problem becaus thet arnt any dogs like that. Its always somthing lurking in the backround. Any dog any time will atleas cary 5 genetic faults. But you can do you best to try to gett the line as clean as posible and KNOW what you have inte the line.

The are no way in saing what is to tight, it al depends on the lines themself and the breed.
Some dogs will colaps just after a cuppel of gens, other you can se taht started of with 4-5 dogs and they still breed thos breedes closed after 50 years.

Don is pretty deep in his lines so he wuld be tha man to askt thos kind of questions

I wuld not start to breed a line of dogs and then when im satefyed leve it and do scatrebreding, That is kind of stupid. You linebreed you dogs and then when needed you outcross. You do not stopp linebreeding.


----------



## Maria Janota (Sep 24, 2009)

Kat LaPlante said:


> Looking for knowledgeable opinions on linebreeding. How much is too much? When does aiming to coninue strong and desireable traits become breeding faulty dogs? In the working GSD lines specifically DDR does anyone really know how small this gene pool really is? The more I research, it seems as though I can find almost every dog to have a common "in-cestor"????????????????????????????????


You may read this article: http://www.netpets.com/dogs/healthspa/bragg.html 
specially that part:

*



...An Example from One Breed

Click to expand...

*


> Thus the recognition of a breed creates a founder event when the registry is opened; a limited number of breed foundation animals are selected, often from a population which has already undergone considerable inbreeding and selection. Let us take for an example the Siberian Husky breed. Registered in 1939, the initial CKC population consisted of 47 animals, all belonging to or bred by one kennel! Of those 47, nine were foundation stock of the kennel whose dogs were registered. Two of those were males imported from Siberia - littermate brothers! The other seven were mostly related to one another. (Two were seven-eighths Siberian and one-eighth Malamute.) The other thirty-eight were all progeny and grand-progeny of the founders. Of the nine foundation animals, two were not bred from at all. Two were mated - once only - to each other: one only of their progeny contributed to further breeding. Of the two Siberia import males, one brother was always bred to the same bitch, producing a large number of progeny of identical pedigree; the other brother was usually bred to daughters of the first brother. Today Siberian Husky lines that trace directly back to the Canadian foundation stock owe 25% of their pedigree lines to the first brother, 15% to the second brother, and 27% to the first brother's invariable mate! Two-thirds of the genetic heritage of these modern Siberian Huskies derives from only three foundation animals! This is not an exceptional situation, it is a fair example of the early breeding history of CKC breeds. In the case of the Siberian Husky, then, (which happens to be my breed, with whose early history I am reasonably well familiar), The Canadian Kennel Club opened a registry in 1939, inspected one kennel's dogs and admitted four dozen closely-related individuals to the registry, which was then closed permanently. No effort was made to ensure a broad foundation, nor a numerous one, nor a genetically diverse one.
> (.....)
> 
> Thirty generations of breeding all going back to ten dogs or fewer represents an impressive feat of sustained inbreeding! Predictably enough Siberian Huskies, which eighty-five years ago were probably the toughest, hardiest variety of dogs on earth, now suffer from the same gamut of genetic defects that afflicts other breeds. Few if any registered Siberians are now able to perform as sleddogs on anything approaching the level of the 1910 dogs imported from Siberia. Probably this is mostly due to the decline in heterozygosity and loss of vitality through inbreeding. What is worse, unmistakable signs of inbreeding depression are surfacing in the breed: rising numbers of Caesarean births, smaller litters, lower birth weights, delicate nestlings prone to infection, etc. Breeders of domestic livestock - cattle, poultry, sheep - manage to run registries and maintain breed type without imposing the concept of absolute breed purity. They inbreed to fix desirable traits, as do dog breeders. Livestock breeders, however, do not try to pretend that they can inbreed forever without ill effects. Thus when inbreeding depression or genetic defects threaten, they outcross - repeatedly, if necessary. They can do so because they do not have closed studbooks. I do not suggest that we slavishly copy the procedures and registry structures of livestock associations, because I think they, too, might benefit from some restructuring in the light of modern genetic knowledge. Nonetheless I would make the point that we in the canine fancy are in a minority when we cling to absolute ideals of breed purity and insist on rigidly closed studbooks.
> ...


It is probably not such a big problem with working lines as show lines, but still worth consideration.

I`m also courious what`s with DDR lines.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Maria Janota said,


> What is worse, unmistakable signs of inbreeding depression are surfacing in the breed: rising numbers of Caesarean births, smaller litters, lower birth weights, delicate nestlings prone to infection, etc. Breeders of domestic livestock - cattle, poultry, sheep - manage to run registries and maintain breed type without imposing the concept of absolute breed purity.


I enjoyed your post immensley Maria and pretty much agree with it's contents. I pulled this one piece out to make a point. Mainly concerning the increasing # of Caesarian births and delicate nestlings. If an individual refuses to accept the weak from the beginning, many of these problems do not get worse. If they do, the line dies. It is a very hard concept to grasp with todays mindset. The fact is, if one is going to accept dogs that need Caesaerians, that's is what they will get. Much of the problems I see connected with line breeding can be traced to the breeders selection.


----------



## Kat LaPlante (May 17, 2009)

Thanks Maria, interesting article, and thoughts. I have no desire to breed, however I can remember the 2 or 3 questions on my grade 12 exams that pertained to dom. and rec. genes. I HATED that subjuct, interestingly I find myself fond of it now.  Before I was dog crazy, I always heard.....stay away from dog "a" or "b", they are too inbred. I was surprised to leard that it is true, and learn the importance behind it. However, it makes me wonder what will be the outcome of the breeds with the small gene pools. Will the GSD one day have to be bred with a Mal or a Dutchie to "clean them up", what other breeds will need the introduction of new gene pools to eliminate defaults. I agree that the working lines are better off than the showlines of any breed.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Kat LaPlante said:


> However, it makes me wonder what will be the outcome of the breeds with the small gene pools. Will the GSD one day have to be bred with a Mal or a Dutchie to "clean them up", what other breeds will need the introduction of new gene pools to eliminate defaults. I agree that the working lines are better off than the showlines of any breed.



Don't get me started on "what other breeds" need to be cleaned up! ](*,) It's my #1 concern with the Beauceron's future..


----------



## Kat LaPlante (May 17, 2009)

Don Turnipseed said:


> Maria Janota said,
> 
> 
> I enjoyed your post immensley Maria and pretty much agree with it's contents. I pulled this one piece out to make a point. Mainly concerning the increasing # of Caesarian births and delicate nestlings. If an individual refuses to accept the weak from the beginning, many of these problems do not get worse. If they do, the line dies. It is a very hard concept to grasp with todays mindset. The fact is, if one is going to accept dogs that need Caesaerians, that's is what they will get. Much of the problems I see connected with line breeding can be traced to the breeders selection.


 
Don, I agree. A contraversial matter at its most begnin....here I go....if breeders are manipulating the breed do they not have a responsibility to never perpetuate the weak or faulty dogs, ensure they do not stay in tact.....


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

you do not ad a nother breed to cleen it up.
you add a nother breed to get moore geenes.
but you still nead to inbreed to clean upp. if the line itself is to week downt work with it.

i se no fault in adding mali ore ds to a gsd line and linebreed on the gsd charcterisics to get a helthyer gsd.


----------



## Maria Janota (Sep 24, 2009)

andreas broqvist said:


> you add a nother breed to get moore geenes.
> but you still nead to inbreed to clean upp. if the line itself is to week downt work with it.


Really? why going back to the breed isn`t enough? Why to inbreed?

Don, you are right, this is the problem of the breeders knowledge and sense of responsibility because it is not visible for others for a long time and when it is it might just be to late.


----------



## Alison Grubb (Nov 18, 2009)

I am not a breeder but I am very interested in both line and inbreeding. I think that as long as the breeder is selecting their breeding stock well and doing the appropriate health and temp testing that both line and inbreeding can be good tools. I also think that an inbreeding can be a great way to test your lines because the good, the bad, and the ugly is going to crop up. So IMO those litters should have a close eye kept on them and culled hard.


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

why you just downt only go back and scaterbreed.
becaus ther is wher the problem is. genetic defects and ressesive shit.
you outcross to ad hetrozygota to you line, but then you will go back and make it homizygota again to know what you have


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

in most breeds its realy not the inbreeding in it self that is the problem. the problem is the bad shoises on the way.


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

Im a believer and I will go one step further and say if you have long term goals I think it is a wise idea to breed tight and very tight on your intial breeding so you can figure out what it is exactly that you are playing with, where it came from in the pedigree, and how to proceed......to stay with the dogs or start from scratch. 

The biggest pro and con with line/ in breeding is selection. 

t


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I think that everyone here with a GSD can go back in their pedigrees to just a very few dogs in the late 1800s. 
Same thing with my terriers. 100-150 yrs or more ago there would be a dominant sire in a village and through roamingthe village or choice, those dogs were bred to. The limited resources for travel no doubt led to a lot of inbreeding and type became set. 
Dogs from different areas of the country or another town became know by their town or breeder.
JRTs were originally The parson Russel's terriers. His name was jack Russell. These were nothing more then a fox hunter's dogs that he selected for a particular working ability. Jack Russell was actually a hound man. Good hound men had working terriers.
The Yorkshire terrier was from......DUH...Yorkshire. Staffordshire terriers from...Staffordshire. 
Inbreeding/linebreeding created ALL of our dogs. We've just become to sissyfied to select for just the good ones and help mother nature get rid of the ones that didn't work. If it didn't work it sure as hell wasn't going to get fed.
The Victorian era was the beginning of selecting for physical type instead of working ability. It was the beginning of formal dog shows and not just one farmer/hunter/terrierman/etc actually competing with their dogs based on ability. Those working dog winners were the dogs to brag about and breed to until the pet fancy took over in the height of the Victorian show era.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Your a wealth of knowledge Bob.....I can always tell who the old dog guys are.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Don, my initials aren't BS for nuthin! :lol::lol::lol:;-)


----------



## Ben Thompson (May 2, 2009)

Wouldnt' you agree that the most important thing is picking a dog that has a reputation for producing some of the best working dogs in the world? Rather then saying linebreeding is better inbreeding is better outcrossing is better. Look who is producing the best and let all that other stuff fall into place on its own.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> I think that everyone here with a GSD can go back in their pedigrees to just a very few dogs in the late 1800s.
> Same thing with my terriers. 100-150 yrs or more ago there would be a dominant sire in a village and through roamingthe village or choice, those dogs were bred to. The limited resources for travel no doubt led to a lot of inbreeding and type became set.
> Dogs from different areas of the country or another town became know by their town or breeder.
> JRTs were originally The parson Russel's terriers. His name was jack Russell. These were nothing more then a fox hunter's dogs that he selected for a particular working ability. Jack Russell was actually a hound man. Good hound men had working terriers.
> ...


Hi Bob, thats the reason KNPV-line dogs are what they are. KNPV was in the early days a "poor-mans sport". (the rich were in showdogs and horses) Training and selling the dog for policework made a few more bucks for people when work wasn't availeble much. So you can indeed imagine what was done with the ones that wouldn't work...

Dick


----------



## Jason Hammel (Aug 13, 2009)

Dick did the Dutch style of breeding and training develope in Holland and did it remain 'dutch' in its Philosophy before,during, and after WWII. How much changed as far as the lines before WWI after and Between WWII. Did the german occupation add,take away,water down,or change anything from the native (working) herders of Holland. Is there a history we (americans) don't know about during the occupation of Holland in regards to your dogs and training. I hope my question makes sense.


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

Ben 
Ofcaus and it shuld be what every breeder shuld look for. But I se it more like looking for a dog/line of dogs that produces just what you want "as close as posible", and does this constantly.
It is prety hard to keep breeding what you like and have a good shans in doing it constantly if you just pic GREAT dogs randomly around the world.

It is not as easy as best To best. But If you do best to best within a line of you own dogs you will not have sutsh a high shans of being suprised. 

Ther is a fact that most breeders do not tell you about the dogs flaws, What ressesive stuff they cary and so on. They tell you the good stuff and thats that. You nead to know to produce good in the long run.

I am not saying that scaterbreeding best to best will not work out, Ofcaus it can work out, and in many cases it does. But when you breed you own dogs within a line you will probobly se the genetic defects popping upp pretty soon. If you scater breed you might not se the problem untill you have spreed thos defects around to 1000 of dogs.

On a side not.
I am wery mutsh a beliver in the abilety to be able to cross breeds and the reregistarte them when they cary and produce true to that breed. So im not a one trac mind. Is se the good in both worlds and I think peopel shuld use the whole toolbox..


Ben Thompson said:


> Wouldnt' you agree that the most important thing is picking a dog that has a reputation for producing some of the best working dogs in the world? Rather then saying linebreeding is better inbreeding is better outcrossing is better. Look who is producing the best and let all that other stuff fall into place on its own.


----------



## Maria Janota (Sep 24, 2009)

andreas broqvist said:


> Ben
> Ofcaus and it shuld be what every breeder shuld look for. But I se it more like looking for a dog/line of dogs that produces just what you want "as close as posible", and does this constantly.
> It is prety hard to keep breeding what you like and have a good shans in doing it constantly if you just pic GREAT dogs randomly around the world.
> 
> ...


I am not sure if I get you right, and I don`t know if I`m talking aboute the same thing, you lucky people from faraway country don`t have that much issues as we in Europe (you have more canine organizations, more new breeds etc).
There have been a big inquiry in England, after the BBC movie `pedigree dogs exposed` wchich prooved that the movie was very realistic . And basicly this is how the breeding goes in Europe (very happy to have Holland in Europe). 
If you want to breed f.ex working GSD in Poland under Polish Kennel Club you will be in big trouble because it won`t be aprooved for breeding - you still have to take it to the dog show and finish it with very good.
It`s better in Czech, because they don`t have such firm regulantions, but under this circumstances the gene pool is getting smaller since you can`t breed in neighbour countries. 
You also can`t join other canine organization because you`ll get kicked from FCI, and you don`t have an alternative one. Your dogs can`t even compeet on the high level competitions. 
So as long as there are no working dog associations here like this one , and the stood books are closed - linebreeding will still make the problem grow.


----------



## xxxxxxxxKarina Scuckyte (Oct 27, 2008)

Getting a conformation evaluation isn't a problem. Normal working dog will get at least very good, some even perfect. In our country GSD's need conformaiton evaluration (at least 2xvery good for bitches and at least 2x perfect for dogs) or private breed examination with an expert which writes that the dog is breed worthy, HD test (A, B and C can be bred) and that's all. If you breed through the GSD club you also need IPO-I B (only the obedience part).


----------



## Maria Janota (Sep 24, 2009)

You can get very good here easily with badly looking (I mean really shitty) show dog, but when it doesn`t have this humy back and black&red colour - it`s not so obvieuos. I checked here you need excelentx3 (in Czech good is enough) for both; males and females. Plus there is an evaluation I don`t (and don`t want to) understand - some running on the leash around the ring and things like dog is back-tied and decoy comes with no pressure. It is a joke, the fur is the most important factor. They also need to have IPOV (another joke).
So IPO1 Polish Champion (from Czech lines) I saw in autumn during training was then bread to a female on the condition of geting his confirmation later because he didn`t get those excelents on dog shows.
Very nice black&red GSDs to do obedience we have here (if one is lucky and the dog is capable of learning).


----------



## xxxxxxxxKarina Scuckyte (Oct 27, 2008)

Well, I got my 2xvery good with a black straight backed bitch at CAC shows. In one of those two shows there were 3 dogs in our class, three showlines, three dogs got very good (one of them was mine). Judge from Estonia. The second day the judge was changed to a local expert, owner of a popular show kennel, insted of a latvian expert for one single breed - GSD. Judges changed after this one breed. And what do you think, now we were the only ones with very good with the same dogs in our class. Well, at least I had a reason to laugh. First day: sufficient withers, good top line, good front movement, a bit narrow hind movement. Second: flat withers, straight back, front angulation could be better, hind legs standing wide. Well, her hind legs changed overnight.
I know a sable male that got his perfects in CAC's, of course, some very goods, and a sable bitch that got 1 very good and 1 perfect. I don't think Lithuania is much different from Poland. It can be done, you just need to visit a bit more shows.


----------



## Maria Janota (Sep 24, 2009)

You are probably right Karina, it can be done at last, but IMO it`s sick to have to go to noone know how many shows to have working dog confirmed for breeding. Really this time and money should be spent on training not so called experts who often know less about the breed then you. Not to mention those hundreds of dogs, who get titeld and get the same confirmation as your actually working dog, when they`re in fact pets and the breed is supposed to be working breed.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Dick, your doing it right! :wink:
I will also add to what I've said by stating that a lot of "old" breeds are recreations based on looks only. That just one more reason for non workers. 
The Irish wolfhound, Rhodesian Ridgeback and how many other dogs were "saved" from extinction by breeding a few to whatever could get back that "look".
The Guiness book of Records had the Chinese Sharpea (sp) as the world's rarest dog in 1971. Now they are as common as rats and all those rats have the same skin, eye, hip, temperment, etc problems because they became the popular Yuppie dog a few yr back. How may "good" breeders made the effort to extinguish their many problems?!


----------

