Big dogs

[evolutionkennels]

I for the longest believed in petcentages, and inbreeding coeficients, but now that we have DNA, I don't see why you would use anything else. If you have the blueprint of what you want, why not try and replicate it? Here is another piece to add to the equation, most genes come in pairs. Although I don't have the DNA markers in front of me, what Jack says is possible. I have noticed in my own dogs different paired genes, for example, the dogs that I have with ultra finish in your throat high ability are super clean, they won't pee in the kennel, and they wait to deficate while I clean the kennels. The super intense crazy in the corner I'll Take what i can get, swap it out, front end, back end ,game as the night is long strain like Machobear and Machabear will shit all over the kennel, step in it, roll in it. Etc. What am trying to get Is that super smart finisher with the retard mentality, buy I think they are a completely different gene set

[Officially Retired]

I for the longest believed in petcentages, and inbreeding coeficients, but now that we have DNA, I don't see why you would use anything else. If you have the blueprint of what you want, why not try and replicate it?

I agree, except for the caveat that we don't know exactly which DNA relates to what. In other words, we can't (yet) identify a gameness gene, an ability gene, etc.

In the end, a person has to go with his eyes ... and his own personal knowledge of "what he wants" ... and which dogs in his pedigrees carry these traits ... if he is going to successfully make breedings that pass-on the torch he's trying to perpetuate.

Although I have no love for Pat Patrick, I do think his quote to me (back in 1993) was the best I have ever heard ... when I told him of the CompuPed Pedigree program Wildside Kennels started using ... Pat said, "I don't need some fuckin' computer program to tell me that Bolio out-produced every other stud dog I had; all I had to do was start rolling his pups to see that."

Jack

[R2L]

I agree, except for the caveat that we don't know exactly which DNA relates to what. In other words, we can't (yet) identify a gameness gene, an ability gene, etc.

Sometimes i have the feeling, evolution kennels thinks we do.

[evolutionkennels]

I agree, except for the caveat that we don't know exactly which DNA relates to what. In other words, we can't (yet) identify a gameness gene, an ability gene, etc.

In the end, a person has to go with his eyes ... and his own personal knowledge of "what he wants" ... and which dogs in his pedigrees carry these traits ... if he is going to successfully make breedings that pass-on the torch he's trying to perpetuate.

Although I have no love for Pat Patrick, I do think his quote to me (back in 1993) was the best I have ever heard ... when I told him of the CompuPed Pedigree program Wildside Kennels started using ... Pat said, "I don't need some fuckin' computer program to tell me that Bolio out-produced every other stud dog I had; all I had to do was start rolling his pups to see that."

Jack

I agree 100%, but I am DNA ing everything I have for the next 10 years, and after enough sampling, I'll be able to take a few stabs at it. It's just that nobody yet has gone through the expense of it. I wouldn't say using DNA blind, that's obsurd, but if I see one has the traits that've want and compared it to the one that doesn't, I'll have an idea. You mark my words, in 10 years, I'll isolate the gameness, ability and smarts, and if I am unlucky, the cur gene... Lmao, maybe I'll get a Nobel Dogman prize.

[Ez Country]

Do you believe genetics are malleable? Meaning can environment and other outside factors have an altering effect on the genes?

[Officially Retired]

Do you believe genetics are malleable? Meaning can environment and other outside factors have an altering effect on the genes?

Of course genetics are malleable.

Take strength, for example: a dog (or person) has a certain amount of strength "genetically" in its natural, healthy state.

If, however, you take that that dog (or person), and you underfeed it, and then if you subject it to disease and a poor environment, and basically keep it in a general state of malaise/ill health ... then whatever strength that individual had "genetically" will be diminished and whatever "genetic potential" it had will be unrealized.

Take that same dog (or person), and instead feed it optimally, make sure it is in a clean, disease-free environment, and then strength-train train that individual routinely ... then whatever strength that individual had "genetically" will be be enhanced and whatever "genetic potential" it had will be maximized.

Jack

[Ez Country]

I think this could be part of the reason that identifying gene pairs like gameness, ability, ect. ect. is so difficult. I also think that these traits probably involve more than just one gene pair.

Best of luck with your research evolution, I look forward to hearing about it sometime in the future.

[Officially Retired]

I think this could be part of the reason that identifying gene pairs like gameness, ability, ect. ect. is so difficult. I also think that these traits probably involve more than just one gene pair.

Great points.

Really, this is exactly why a good dogman can take a fair dog all the way ... while a lousy dogman will ruin a great dog.

With enough human stupidity, even the best dog that ever lived has no chance ...

Jack

[evolutionkennels]

Great points.

Really, this is exactly why a good dogman can take a fair dog all the way ... while a lousy dogman will ruin a great dog.

With enough human stupidity, even the best dog that ever lived has no chance ...

Jack

Agreed. All this of course with the added expense of really good Care. Well see what happens.

[TFX]

I for the longest believed in petcentages, and inbreeding coeficients, but now that we have DNA, I don't see why you would use anything else. If you have the blueprint of what you want, why not try and replicate it?

That is really all we are doing in an intense linebreeding program that is stacked with dogs of our own evaluation and selection, "trying to replicate what we want".

The inbreeding coefficient is not magic, it is only a statistic of how close we are to narrowing our genetic variables. That statistic may or may not hold true. You could have some 75% inbred dogs that still express a lot of variation, or you could have some lesser inbred dogs that are very consistent in type and genetics makeup.

You are exactly right Evolution, the only way to truly know the genetic "sameness" is through DNA profiling. I'm just not sure the cost will ever yield a positive outcome for a breeder in being able to select either brood animals or their offspring based entirely on DNA. For one, gameness is subjective and open to wide intepretation. One man's game dog is another man's cur. How can one interpret something from DNA data that has no absolute? I think coat color, nose color, eye color, scissors bite, and other very concrete traits may be able to be predicted by interpreting genetic markers. But gameness, intellegence, stamina, etc. are very complex traits that cannot be accurately measured without physical testing. I don't think any amount of DNA data will be able to identify those type of traits. At best, they will be able to show that a descendent possesses similar genetic makeup as an ancestor, but that is no guarantee that it will be expressed outwardly in the same manner. Even clones are not identical to their genetic donors.

Please feel free to elaborate and correct me where I am wrong, I'd love to get more insight as to where you are headed with your genetic data compilation.