The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4121314
Results 131 to 139 of 139

Thread: Will the EIC ignorance have a major negative impact?

  1. #131
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Labsrus911 View Post
    They charge $65 per puppy and require a veterinarian to sign off, which increases my cost to about $100 per puppy.
    No signature required for doing the test only for verifying identity of the dog

  2. #132
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chewelah, WA
    Posts
    779

    Default

    My veterinarian has never charged me to verify the dog's microchip for a DNA test. I usually plan a trip when I have other reasons to be at his office, then the verification of the dog and his signature are no big deal. I go to the original sources for the tests--U of MN for EIC and Alfort, France for CNM. The cost of the CNM test has dropped to I think $55 per dog and the turnaround time is fast. They send an email result immediately, then hard copy confirmation. Not a problem to drop it in the post to France with the label and shipping instructions provided.

    Meredith

  3. #133
    Senior Member Hunt'EmUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,948

    Default

    Quick question as someone else already brought it up. Does UoM require sample be submit by a vet or can I do them myself, the paperwork says the encourage vet participation, but I could care less about getting a vet involved I can do my own cheek swab, heck even blood draw without them, so will the university accept a sample not sent in by a Vet. This is really for my own info, on status, I'm just curious could careless about breeding.
    Last edited by Hunt'EmUp; 01-04-2014 at 07:47 PM.
    "They's Just DAWGS"
    "Hunting is a skill to be learned whether you do it early or late it still needs to be learned"
    "I train dogs, Not papers"

    GMRH HRCH Quick MH (most importantly Duck/Upland Enthusiast)
    MHR HRCH Lakota MH (most importantly Upland/Duck Enthusiast)
    SHR Storm.. the Pup (Beginning Upland & Waterfowl Enthusiast)

  4. #134
    Senior Member TBell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Piney Point on Sardis Lake, MS
    Posts
    492

    Default

    I think the following statement from the University of Minn. explicitly states that taking the carriers out of our breeding pool would be detrimental to the breed.

    I found this on my EIC test result pages. The bold emphasis is theirs and not mine. It contradicts what many EIC normal/clear purists are expressing in the previous posts. They even recommend the breeding of E/E (affected) dogs which has in the past rattled the RTF bus.

    Here is their statement verbatim:

    Current data shows that 35-40% of Labrador Retrievers are d-EIC carriers: therefore, we do not recommend selecting dogs for breeding based soley on their being N/N (normal or clear) for the DNM1:gene. Such a drastic strategy, although more quickly eliminating the possibility of producing E/E and EIC affected dogs, also has the undesired result of potentially losing many of the outstanding exercise and performance traits expected of many superior lines of Labrador Retrievers. A breeding program that utilizes E/N or even E/E dogs can be logically implemented by mating to N/N dogs and retaining E/N or N/N puppies for future breeding that also retain most or all of the other highly desired characteristics. Ther is no chance of producing an E/E puppy if it is known that at least one of the parents is N/N. In general, we recommend matings that produce fewer carriers (E/N) dogs in successive generations.

  5. #135
    Senior Member suepuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    South Central Virginia
    Posts
    702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TBell View Post
    I think the following statement from the University of Minn. explicitly states that taking the carriers out of our breeding pool would be detrimental to the breed.

    I found this on my EIC test result pages. The bold emphasis is theirs and not mine. It contradicts what many EIC normal/clear purists are expressing in the previous posts. They even recommend the breeding of E/E (affected) dogs which has in the past rattled the RTF bus.

    Here is their statement verbatim:
    Tammy, I think that if you have an outstanding male that is healthy, structurally sound and outstanding in performance (or whatever) he shouldn't be thrown out. Same with a bitch. UNLESS SHE COLLAPSES. There are affecteds out there that never have collapsed that are outstanding. If you breed either dog to clears, you could have outstanding pups WITHOUT the disease and not narrow the gene pool. I would NOT breed a collapsing bitch. Too much risk to her health.

    A breeding like that would take careful consideration, but shouldn't be ruled out. The whole picture needs to be looked at. I said it earlier, we can't keep narrowing the gene pool by throwing out carriers of anything. We are going to be in a huge bottleneck if we keep doing that. There are plenty of other breeds out ther that are in this position and screwed.

    Flame suit on....

    Sue Puff
    Sue Puffenbarger
    Wirtz, VA
    www.boynelabradors.com

  6. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Pa.
    Posts
    5,317

    Default

    Here are the brass tacks of the quoted passage from the statement from the University of Minn.

    In general, we recommend matings that produce fewer carriers (E/N) dogs in successive generations
    .

    In my estimation narrowing the gene pool by favored sire bottelneck breeding, only to then profess an attempt to broaden it again with the use of carriers in ones breeding program is contrary to the advice given above, not to mention common sense.

    Simply put they advise that there should be a COMPELLING REASON for breedings potentially producing (E/N) dogs.

    john
    Last edited by john fallon; 01-06-2014 at 07:18 AM.
    "i guess the old saying 'those of us that think we know everything annoy those of you that does' " --bobbyb 9/13/06

    "A Good Dog is a Good Dog"

  7. #137
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john fallon View Post
    .

    In my estimation narrowing the gene pool by favored sire bottelneck breeding, only to then profess an attempt to broaden it again with the use of carriers in ones breeding program is contrary to the advice given above, not to mention common sense.
    john
    It is possible that someone can take a path away from favored sires, and still feel compelled to use carriers when a given subset of the gene pool has a lot of carriers.

    In Goldens, in North America, there are only about 40% clear dogs for Ichthyosis. Not as serious a disease in Goldens (though more serious symptoms in some other breeds) as EIC in Labs, but still one that is considered in breedings. So, even if avoiding the most popular sires, one is faced with using carriers.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  8. #138
    Senior Member DRAKEHAVEN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Clear Lake Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john fallon View Post
    Here are the brass tacks of the quoted passage from the statement from the University of Minn.

    .

    In my estimation narrowing the gene pool by favored sire bottelneck breeding, only to then profess an attempt to broaden it again with the use of carriers in ones breeding program is contrary to the advice given above, not to mention common sense.

    Simply put they advise that there should be a COMPELLING REASON for breedings potentially producing (E/N) dogs.

    john
    There should also be a compelling reason to NOT breed dogs with curly tails and crabby attitudes but that in itself is not compelling enough for most
    Discipline is no excuse for a lack of enthusiasm !!

  9. #139
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chewelah, WA
    Posts
    779

    Default

    Yes you can collect your sample and submit to U of Mn without a veterinarian's involvement.

    Meredith

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •