advanced genetics

[bolero]

jack is a very smart men who loves inbreeding and says it is the only way to breed but i can show multiple scientific journal articles that somewhat disagree i recommend everyone go to the site for the institute of canine biology and learn about estimated breeding values and inbreeding coefficients and genetic diversity. no these are not the scientific journal articles i speak of but those can be found on google scholar and some are even about the APBT. now inbreeding coefficients are pretty much useless unless you go back a good number of generations like this site allows.

I will let everyone in on a little secret on why we do not see many inbreeding defects in our working dogs and it has to do with genetic diversity. Now jack is right when he says inbreeding causes nothing but brings out what is already there but he conveniently leaves out that the more you inbreed the less genetic diversity you have when it comes to the genes. now inbreeding/linebreeding is a great tool when used correctly but one cannot inbreed for ever like he says without seeing serious problems.

genetic disorders or traits that are caused by simple recessives can be set or gotten rid of by inbreeding and selecting against or for certain traits but when you have traits good or bad that are polygenic it is not as easy to rid them from the gene pool or set them if they are good

most animal behaviours are caused by polygenic traits for example hunting traits in hunting dogs such as german shorthaired pointers or as i suspect gameness in our dogs.

inbreeding alone does not cause a loss of genetic diversity but inbreeding combined with what is called popular sire syndrome and using only one or two offspring each generation of that popular sire.

take a producer like jeep for example. let's say for example jeep was a carrier of a genetic trait that was not wanted by breeders. now as a carrier he would not express this trait himself. in fact in order for it to be expressed he would have to be bred to another carrier or another dog that expressed it. say this trait was fairly uncommon. then let's say you breed jeep 40 or 50 times like he was and a fairly uncommon trait becomes widely spread throughout the whole line and is almost near impossible to rid the line of this trait add on top of that that say only a couple sons of his were used to breed it would make it even worse thankfully as breeders of the APBT we all have our favorite lines sires dams offspring and the like and our genetic diversity is actually pretty good.

Another thing to study is heredity. now heredity is not that percentage of a trait being passed down it is the percentage of the varying degrees of a trait in a population. for instance gameness i believe has varying degrees from complete cur to dead game and everywhere inbetween. heredity takes into consideration genetics plus environment or nature vs nurture if you will. the problem with a lot of people is they believe that it has to be one or the other when in reality it is a combination of the two added together. an example is say a trait is moderately heritable which most behavioural traits are then selection for said trait will be successful as long as you breed for it and take into account environment. i say all this to say that if the inbreeding coefficient is skewed in one way or the other it can make a breeding look like an outcross when in reality it is line bred .

Heredity values are expressed from 0 to 1. 0 meaning no genes involved and only environment and 1 meaning 100 percent genetic involvement most behavioural traits fall in the moderately heritable range which is somewhere like 0.3 or 0.4. a trait being moderately heritable suggests that selecting for that trait will have an effect on the future stock.

Another interesting subject is estimated breeding values (ebv). there is an actual equation for both heredity and ebv but i doubt any scientist is willing to measure the traits of the APBT for us to find out. so the bet we can do with ebv is look at part of how they figure the equation out. basically when selecting a stud for let's just make this simple and choose on trait. i will choose gameness. ebv also explain the age old question of why curs produce gamedogs and why gamedogs produce curs. so here it goes when selecting the best stud to pass on gameness you want to look for a stud that first himself expresses the trait. this is the first step but not the only one. say for instance the stud possesses the trait you want and he has 4 other siblings and none of them carry this trait the mother and father don't carry the trait and the aunts and uncles don't either but the great great grandfather does. the dog in this scenario is not a good stud choice because clearly the genes for the trit you are looking for are not strong in this particular strain of let's say the eli line another scenario you could have is you happen to own a stud who does not carry the trait you want but you know that 3 out of his 4 siblings do his father does 4 of the mothers siblings do and both grandparents do. this dog is a much better candidate for breeding than the first dog. is he the ideal stud? no but still a better choice than the first dog. the best choice would be the same as the second dog accept this dog also carries the trait you are looking for.

[BLADE]

Very interesting read, thanks for sharing bolero.

[IWK]

Interesting. I love the Institute of Canine Biology site and their free courses!

[IWK]

Bolero, can you explain in greater detail why you think our dogs can withstand such high COIs without showing major genetic defects?

[EWO]

Because of selection and proofing the end product.

Most of the scientific information involved around breeding is based on show dogs, some hunting stuff but the closest performance related would be horses. That information is a little off because they do not have litters. There is far less subjects to be in comparison.

There are no double blind studies in regards to gameness, its definition or its preservation. The bulldog guy must take that information and apply it the best he can and usually that will fall on personal experience. And that personal experience is normally within a line or within a family.

I agree with the last part. I mentioned a dog I have in an earlier post. His sister has won. His brother, although with limited skills, he was skull drug. His mother won and his sire was a crazy ass red Boy dog that would scratch to a sign post. All of his family started up early and were 'grown' before they were mature. My dog in turn, cold as ice. Zero interest.

If I did not have access to his brother that possess the traits I am looking for, I would take a chance on the cold dog because everything in and around him could be taken up and down the road. Just like the heredity and traits part of the Canine Biology reads, I would not want to also breed one of his sons that turned out cold (if he were bred)

The hard part of the science is factoring in personal experience as science had no room for personal experience, personal preference or subjective variables. Gameness being one. Most will agree it comes in varying degrees. Those degrees are subjectively defined.

Another example from the Bolero family is Two Eyes. Many will say Bandit quit. I'm thankful he was bred and in the breeding to Bolero popped out Two Eyes. Two Eyes to Loca made an exceptional bitch in Miss Two Eyes. Miss Two Eyes when bred to Patrick's Kasai made my Cornbread and Chloe dogs. Chloe like her mom was methodical and smart and broke things down and then showed finish. Cornbread on the other hand was the happiest dog to ever be in a box. He needed two keeps. One for him to be in shape and then an extra keep because of his wagging tail. He absolutely enjoyed working.

Bandit to Bolero was not exactly inbreeding or line breeding. Two Eyes to Loca not so much either. Miss Two Eyes to Kasai was a complete outcross. The quality was high and the percentages were high.

Not to but in, as I am looking for Bolero's response as well, but I think the answer is selection and proofing.

EWO

[bolero]

Another great post EWO. And to touch on the bandit bolero breeding a bit. to me it was a family breeding around rascal and oso negro who were brothers. if you remember i believe amos is out of rascal LOL and if you look at loca who is a panther dog which panther is mainly a zebo family dog with some eli in there and look at the bottom side of boleros top and bottom you will see why it clicked,

and like EWO said all of this info does not always translate to bulldogs because there are no studies done on bulldogs although there were two studies done about there genetic diversity. one was a study on a kennel in italy and another a kennel in russia they can be found through google.

I believe the high COI in our dogs and no defects is because there were many founders of our dogs who were all bred differently. and were mixed differently. i dont beleive all the founder dogs were straight bulldog and terier crosses some were 75/25 both ways some were 50/50. then take into account like EWO said our dogs are working dogs. plus we have so many different people breeding the same families with there twist on the end product it keeps the diversity up.

[IWK]

Good stuff, thanks guys. The more I learn about bulldogs, the more I'm amazed.

[bolero]

A good book to read is animal breeding plans by jay lush and another book which you can read on kindle is genetics and the social behaviour of dogs. Now like EWO says non of the info is on bulldogs but i believe it still pertains to working dogs as a whole, but you can read all the books you want if you are not able read dogs and have your own experiences it really wont matter

[bulldoghistorian]

Because of selection and proofing the end product.

Most of the scientific information involved around breeding is based on show dogs, some hunting stuff but the closest performance related would be horses. That information is a little off because they do not have litters. There is far less subjects to be in comparison.

There are no double blind studies in regards to gameness, its definition or its preservation. The bulldog guy must take that information and apply it the best he can and usually that will fall on personal experience. And that personal experience is normally within a line or within a family.

I agree with the last part. I mentioned a dog I have in an earlier post. His sister has won. His brother, although with limited skills, he was skull drug. His mother won and his sire was a crazy ass red Boy dog that would scratch to a sign post. All of his family started up early and were 'grown' before they were mature. My dog in turn, cold as ice. Zero interest.

If I did not have access to his brother that possess the traits I am looking for, I would take a chance on the cold dog because everything in and around him could be taken up and down the road. Just like the heredity and traits part of the Canine Biology reads, I would not want to also breed one of his sons that turned out cold (if he were bred)

The hard part of the science is factoring in personal experience as science had no room for personal experience, personal preference or subjective variables. Gameness being one. Most will agree it comes in varying degrees. Those degrees are subjectively defined.

Another example from the Bolero family is Two Eyes. Many will say Bandit quit. I'm thankful he was bred and in the breeding to Bolero popped out Two Eyes. Two Eyes to Loca made an exceptional bitch in Miss Two Eyes. Miss Two Eyes when bred to Patrick's Kasai made my Cornbread and Chloe dogs. Chloe like her mom was methodical and smart and broke things down and then showed finish. Cornbread on the other hand was the happiest dog to ever be in a box. He needed two keeps. One for him to be in shape and then an extra keep because of his wagging tail. He absolutely enjoyed working.

Bandit to Bolero was not exactly inbreeding or line breeding. Two Eyes to Loca not so much either. Miss Two Eyes to Kasai was a complete outcross. The quality was high and the percentages were high.

Not to but in, as I am looking for Bolero's response as well, but I think the answer is selection and proofing.

EWO

I always noticed that down the line breeding to cold dogs produce one or two down the line
I am not a fan on it , but it depends on the size of the yard I guess , some can gamble a bit more than others
I breed every 2 or 3 years one litter i cannot afford thos kind of gambles

[bolero]

I always noticed that down the line breeding to cold dogs produce one or two down the line
I am not a fan on it , but it depends on the size of the yard I guess , some can gamble a bit more than others
I breed every 2 or 3 years one litter i cannot afford thos kind of gambles

there really is no reason to take the gamble. but it is more of a gamble to breed to a game dog who has cur siblings and who is out of curs who are also out of curs

[CrazyRed]

I thought Jack always said the point of inbreeding was to take away the genetic diversity and to single out specific dogs or litter of dogs.

[bolero]

it is but he was wrong to a point. when you take away genetic diversity to much that is what causes low fertility, low birth rate. linebreeding is great to bring out prepotency in your line and to fix traits. but while it will fix good traits it will lock in bad ones as well. like i said earlier if the defect it locks in is a simple recessive trait then it can easily be removed but if the defect is polygenic then not so much. when you are breeding you can only work with the genes that are there and line breeding limits those genes

example say you are breeding your line and out comes a dog like chinaman and you start to line breed to get another chinaman this is great and you will get some good dogs but none of them can be genetically better than chinaman because those are the genes you are working with. now when you outcross you bring in new genes to the mix and they will line up in different ways and you can make the genes you had better than chinaman. What some people do though is either line breed to much or outcross to much neither is good for the dogs you need a happy medium

[DuckDong82]

Mr. Bill Haast.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/us/18haast.html

Not trying to ruin this great thread but here is something to think about.

[CrazyRed]

seen folks linebred and inbreed with success and do the same and get shit. Seen folks never linebreed and always outcross have success and seen others fail. It was always more about selection than anything else.

[EWO]

This is true. Selection is the difference. If you breed two exceptional dogs that in turn throw exceptional dogs at a very high percentage and out of 30 great dogs your favorite one happens to be a ten minute cur, well, when you breed that cur you will get a lot of good dogs because everything in and around him are great dogs.

In the next few breedings you center the program around the cur the percentages will fall. In time there will be a six generation pedigree chock full of dogs that should have performed and produced and did not, that is the result of selection.

Selection cuts both ways. If dogs are selected for the wrong reasons or the ones who are selected are sub par, then that selection process will have some negative affects.

Look at college football and a lot in the NFL. The spread offenses made defenses stop playing the majority of the time between the hash marks and now they must play from side line to side line. The ultimate grade is placed on speed. Now every body is bigger, faster and stronger because that is what the coaches are selecting. Freak athletes. Along the way the kids no longer learn how to tackle.

In dogs that would be like selecting the hardest biters over and over, and in time you will have a yard full of freak mouthed dogs. They won't scratch but they sure will bite.

It is all about selection. Selection can only come from experience within a family of dogs and experience in recognizing not only like traits in a family but traits that have been repeatable.

Selection also nixes paper breeding dogs vs. trait breeding as well.

EWO

[bolero]

seen folks linebred and inbreed with success and do the same and get shit. Seen folks never linebreed and always outcross have success and seen others fail. It was always more about selection than anything else.

i believe you but i would like to see what they consider outcrosses what some consider an outcross is really a family breeding. and you have to remember a lot of these lines are related. they may not have common ancestors in the first four generations but if you go back past that they are actually quite related.

for example take the nigger toby dog on paper looks like a complete outcross but if you believe the way eli is bred ( which i dont for a second) then eli and zebo are quite related just down through different families of dibo.

also what do you consider successfull because say i continually outcross and come up with one or two quality dogs that just is not what i would consider good. now if gthere were 2 quality dogs out of 4 total i would change my mind but say 2 out of 7 is a different story

Also like EWO said selection is everything no matter which way you breed. personally i really dont care which way people breed or even what anyone other than me is doing. this is just the way i am i dont worry about what the next man is doing unless it effects me directly

[bolero]

This is true. Selection is the difference. If you breed two exceptional dogs that in turn throw exceptional dogs at a very high percentage and out of 30 great dogs your favorite one happens to be a ten minute cur, well, when you breed that cur you will get a lot of good dogs because everything in and around him are great dogs.

In the next few breedings you center the program around the cur the percentages will fall. In time there will be a six generation pedigree chock full of dogs that should have performed and produced and did not, that is the result of selection.

Selection cuts both ways. If dogs are selected for the wrong reasons or the ones who are selected are sub par, then that selection process will have some negative affects.

Look at college football and a lot in the NFL. The spread offenses made defenses stop playing the majority of the time between the hash marks and now they must play from side line to side line. The ultimate grade is placed on speed. Now every body is bigger, faster and stronger because that is what the coaches are selecting. Freak athletes. Along the way the kids no longer learn how to tackle.

In dogs that would be like selecting the hardest biters over and over, and in time you will have a yard full of freak mouthed dogs. They won't scratch but they sure will bite.

It is all about selection. Selection can only come from experience within a family of dogs and experience in recognizing not only like traits in a family but traits that have been repeatable.

Selection also nixes paper breeding dogs vs. trait breeding as well.

EWO

perfectly said EWO. that is one thing i have seen and read once you stop selecting working dogs you will lose those working traits it is just inevitable

[bolero]

I am not saying it can not happen but i will say i have never seen a successful program based on continuous outcrossing. now dont get me wrong i am not saying that you need to inbreed the shit out of these dogs i am saying the exact opposite. But i am saying that line breeding which when you get down to it is inbreeding and only animal breeders differentiate between the two is a successful tool when you are trying to lock in traits.

another form of breeding that some have tried is assortative breeding which is breeding like traits to like traits regardless of relation. this can work but again it can only take you so far say for instance you have a stifle dog and breed him to another stifle dog yes they have the same trait but it was not the same combination of genes that created it.

Breeding is called an art for a reason because it is part science and part intuition. Like EWO said half the battle is having the experience to know which animals to select to create the next generation.

[bolero]

i just came across this and i think it fits in with this thread


While there exists no absolute set of rules to guarantee your breeding program is successful, there are
general rules to play by. You should always thoroughly understand the goals you are trying to attain. You
should understand as much as possible the genetic mechanisms underlying the traits you want to select for.
And you should understand that there is, and there will always be, a lot of luck. You cannot change the rules,
but you can stack the deck in your favor.

[IWK]

Good quote. Where is it from?

[bolero]

i believe the person's name is jim lanting he is just a show dog breeder but the quote still holds true

[IWK]

Certainly does.

Ok, so I'm still stuck on this COI deal. If the ICB website is accurate, the fact that our dogs had a variety of founders shouldn't matter. We should still be seeing genetic disorders with the high amounts of inbreeding that some bulldog folks are doing. For example, I've got this dog: http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_dogs_profile.php?dog_id=62598

If you open up the pedigree to 14 generations, the COI is greater than 90%! She's only 6 months old right now, but she doesn't seem to have any issues yet.

The only thing I can figure is that maybe the pedigree is incorrect somewhere and that her actual COI is lower. I don't know.

[EWO]

This is just my thoughts. No real experience.

I would say two explanations. One the dog is bred like advertised. The only thing is that there are several different breeders involved. This where nature and nurture come into play as well one guy might be looking for a slightly different trait than the next. Maybe Mr. Durant was looking for one of those all night dogs. TVK added a shot of Eli that carried heavy into those dogs that look very heavy Red Boy. The Swinson and Lanier dogs were heavy Red Boy but could really shut it down. So just looking at the pedigree one would say Cottingham/Red Boy. Break it down breeding to breeding and there are some considerable differences.

Secondly, as you say, there may be some inaccuracies in the pedigree.

Interested in the responses.

EWO

[bolero]

that ICB site is a little biased so you have to take the info and remember that. also like EWO so elegantly said three different breeders looking for different things in the dogs they bred. or like ewo said might be a little paper mishandling


The Ins and Outs of Pedigree Analysis, Genetic Diversity, and Genetic Disease Control
Tufts' Canine and Feline Breeding and Genetics Conference, 2003
Jerold S. Bell, DVM

this guy is not so biased and explains it pretty good in this article

[bolero]

also it is a brother sister breeding but gloria is a complete out cross

[EWO]

Some of those TVK dogs were colored like the Cottingham dogs but they were all Eli underneath. So in that pedigree on the left hand side it is a Cottingham/Red Boy bred dog. As the cursor moves to the right the first couple of breedings were paper/money breeding. Further to the right there were a couple three guys who knew exactly what they wanted to ride up and down the road with on Saturday night.

In turn they bred the same family of dogs but selected for different reasons.

On the Red Boy click, one of the breedings where selection and personal experience trumps the COI's and 'book knowledge' is the Mims Red Boy family. Same breeder, same original Red Boy dogs, and a lot of the COI's are similar but yet three completely different strains , all Red Boy and same breeder but different dogs.

All were and threw deep game dogs and most were early starters. Jiggs thru a much rougher dog, with mouth to spare, much more straight ahead. Punch threw all night game dogs, sometimes less talented, but it was often said if there was one hair on the tip of his tail still living, he would make his scratch. And Punch threw that. Spiffy, threw really methodical, break down dogs, not as much mouth as Jiggs, just as game as Punch, but always looking for the time and place to show finish.

When a single breeder uses selection based on traits there can be different dogs from the same family (pure) that are and throw completely different dogs.

Factor in the same family with different breeders and things change quickly, almost exponentially.

There are not a lot of competitive pure red boy dogs out there, especially ones from the same breeder. Red Boy may be the most popular 'pure' family out there because they will sell when no others will (basis for the decline in the family). But Red Boy is a family where several strains from different breeders can be stacked and you get throw back dogs to when the dogs were more competitive/more front running dogs.

I have downloaded much of the information that has been put up and borrowed a book from a friend. Enjoy the topic. I just think I should have read more, thought more and learned more a number of years ago. The Saturday night or bust thinking has left me a little short in a lot of categories.

EWO

[CrazyRed]

i believe you but i would like to see what they consider outcrosses what some consider an outcross is really a family breeding. and you have to remember a lot of these lines are related. they may not have common ancestors in the first four generations but if you go back past that they are actually quite related.

I agree, when I speak to outcross I don't mean a family bred dog. For instance taking a heavy Dirty jersey bred dog and taking it to a Bolio dog i consider that breeding within the family. When i speak outcross i mean taking a inbred Hap dog and breeding that to an Eli dog.


for example take the nigger toby dog on paper looks like a complete outcross but if you believe the way eli is bred ( which i dont for a second) then eli and zebo are quite related just down through different families of dibo. Once you get into believing how a dog is bred the argument changes. I believe either way if Eli is bred how stated by FB he is a heavy linebred Dibo dog. If you look at how DM stated, he's a grandson of Dibo with some Dibo on top.. Zebo is another linebred Dibo dog. Somehow or another they are family related, i do not believe Zebo to be off Eli at all though as some rumor to be.


also what do you consider successfull because say i continually outcross and come up with one or two quality dogs that just is not what i would consider good. now if gthere were 2 quality dogs out of 4 total i would change my mind but say 2 out of 7 is a different story. to me success is winning and being able to maintain the ability to win in your program. Not many folks get 2 out of 4. Some will say it but not many get that in every litter, most folks get 2 out of 7 but you will only hear but the 2 that won and the ones that lost lol. Folks will say 2 out of 4 bc 2 won and 2 lost, 1 game and 1 quit so # wise it looks good but it really be 9 pups in the litter. 2 out of 7 isn't great but it's better than not getting no winners.


Also like EWO said selection is everything no matter which way you breed. personally i really dont care which way people breed or even what anyone other than me is doing. this is just the way i am i dont worry about what the next man is doing unless it effects me directly I agree selection is everything, i never have concerns for any other man yard unless my opinion is asked from that individual.

[IWK]

that ICB site is a little biased so you have to take the info and remember that. also like EWO so elegantly said three different breeders looking for different things in the dogs they bred. or like ewo said might be a little paper mishandling


The Ins and Outs of Pedigree Analysis, Genetic Diversity, and Genetic Disease Control
Tufts' Canine and Feline Breeding and Genetics Conference, 2003
Jerold S. Bell, DVM

this guy is not so biased and explains it pretty good in this article


Thanks! I'll check that one out. And your point about Gloria being an outcross is valid, but still, the 90% COI suggests that 90% of this pup's alleles are exact copies of each other. Not much genetic diversity there.

[EWO]

This is a question I have always had about COI's, especially when they are really high.

What is up when two littermates have the really high COI but are completely different when it comes to traits?

EWO

[IWK]

Do you mean behavioral traits or physical traits? Physically, you would expect them to be very similar, but behavior is shaped by environment as well as genetics. And even if the pups grow up in the same environment, they have different experiences. One may get more/different attention from the dam or more/different attention from siblings. If raised with kids, one might be the favorite of one child while the other is the favorite of another child so they're both spending time with different people who handle them differently. So many factors that can have an influence on their behavior.

[bolero]

This is a question I have always had about COI's, especially when they are really high.

What is up when two littermates have the really high COI but are completely different when it comes to traits?

EWO

the COI's are the percent or chance of getting the same genes from certain individuals but each individual you can get the genes from has many genes they can give so i believe that while the chances for each pup to get genes from certain individuals may be high it does not mean that the exact same genes will be passed down to each pup