RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Silver Labs?

84K views 318 replies 101 participants last post by  wushusmackdown 
#1 ·
Open Letter to The Kennel Club (U.K.)

Posted on January 8, 2014 by Jack Vanderwyk


The Kennel Club
Attn governance

Copy to: the Labrador Breed Council; the Labrador Clubs in the United Kingdom

Dear Board members of The Kennel club,

The Kennel Club maintains the studbook of the Labrador Retriever and has the task of ensuring that only purebred Labradors are registered in the studbook .
In that respect, it seems that the registry of the Labrador Retriever is about to go wrong, or has already gone wrong. This concerns not only me, but also the Labrador Clubs in the United Kingdom and abroad.

The cause of these concerns lies in the fact that more and more dogs are imported from the United States, with pedigree certificates from the American Kennel Club (AKC), which state that the dogs are Labrador Retrievers with the colours black, yellow or chocolate, while in reality these are dogs that are carriers of the so-called “dilute” (dd) gene. The dd gene is characterized by a “diluted” coat colour and light eyes, which are called “charcoal” or “blue” if the base colour is black, “champagne” if the base colour is yellow, and “silver” if the base colour is chocolate. In particular, the “silvers” are becoming more and more popular with the general public and substantial amounts of money are paid for puppies and adult dogs.

On first sight it seems that there is nothing to worry about these practices, because these dogs are imported with the recognized colours on their pedigree certificates, and as such they can formally be entered in the Kennel Club studbook. However, the duties of the Kennel Club as keeper of the studbook surpass that of formally administrator. One can not pretend that nothing is wrong, only because of the fact that the paperwork looks okay.

The fact is that the “dilute” (dd) gene or locus is alien to the Labrador Retriever breed. This gene is simply not present in the breed as we know it. In order to keep the studbook closed, and maintain the purity of the Labrador Retriever breed, the Kennel Club should ensure that no genes alien to the breed are entering the breed. Covert operations like opening a closed studbook in a sneaky way is not what the public expects from a respectable organization like the Kennel Club.

In the United Kingdom it was never possible to register dogs with the “dilute” (dd) gene as Labrador Retrievers. Until recently. The “dilute” (dd) gene surfaced in the United States in the late forties and early fifties of the last century. In those years there were no DNA tests available, and unfortunately these dogs were registered as Labrador Retrievers. The breeder who produced these dogs, Mayo Kellogg from Kellogg Kennels, was an important customer of the American Kennel Club (AKC). Kellogg bred several breeds, including the Weimaraner, a breed which carries the “dilute” (dd), and the dogs often ran free. Initially these dogs were registered as “silver”, until the Labrador Retriever Club Inc. (LRC), the parent club of the American Labrador Retriever clubs, objected against these practices. From that moment the “dilute” (dd) dogs were registered with the recognized three coat colours of the Labrador Retriever.

More than half a century later we sadly have to observe that the American studbook of the Labrador Retriever, as maintained by the American Kennel Club (AKC), contains more than 35,000 dogs that carry the “dilute” (dd) gene. Not all carriers are also phenotypically affected. However, these dogs that only carry the gene are passing it on to their offspring. This means that we simply can not be satisfied with a phenotypical (” by eye”) check, let alone by simply looking at an AKC pedigree certificate. Genetic research of these dogs by means of DNA tests will need to take place to make sure that the stud book stays closed. Any presence of the “dilute” (dd) genes in the Labrador Retriever is unacceptable.

Three renowned genetic laboratories, Vetgen, Laboklin, and the Van Haeringen Group, have confirmed to me in writing that it is perfectly possible to show the presence of the “dilute” (dd) gene. These studies have already been developed and can be used today. The costs are about 50 pounds.

Now science has progressed, it can be shown that the DNA of a dog contains genes which are alien to the Labrador Retriever breed, which means that such a dog CAN NOT be a purebred Labrador Retriever. Kennel Clubs, including the AKC, are increasingly under fire because of these extremely bad and dangerous developments, which need to stop here and now. It’s only a matter of time before the first lawsuit in the United States against the American Kennel Club appears, as the AKC in their pedigree certificates quite wrongfully gives the impression that these “dilutes” are purebred Labrador Retrievers. If the National Kennel Clubs are not willing or able to effectively guarantee or monitor the purity of a dog, then who is? And what is the value of a pedigree certificate?

The National Kennel Clubs have the means to prevent non-purebred dogs to enter the studbooks. If in doubt about the presence of the “dilute” (dd) gene in Labrador Retrievers, one should require the applicant of a pedigree certificate to proof that this particular dog or litter is free from the “dilute” (dd) gene, by means of DNA testing by accredited laboratories.
I would like to ask the Board of the Kennel Club to require that any Labrador Retriever that is imported in the United Kingdom has to show the results of a DNA test proving that the dog is free from the “dilute” (dd) gene. This should also apply to any Labrador Retriever when there are doubts about the purity, regarding the presence of the “dilute” (dd) gene.

Finally, I would like to ask the Board of the Kennel Club to look into the practices of registering “dilutes” with the remark “Colour Not Recognized”. Although these practices might seem to be effective, they are not. Breeders and owners of “dilutes” are clever enough to register their dogs with the recognized colours black, yellow and chocolate, and some Kennel Clubs, like the AKC, willfully cooperate with these frauds. A “silver” Labrador is not a chocolate Labrador, a “charcoal” Labrador is not a black Labrador, and a “champagne” Labrador is not a yellow Labrador, not even when a foreign Kennel Club has registered the dog as such. They are simply not purebred Labradors. The task of the Kennel Club is to guard the purity of the breed. This is a very serious task .Should it turn out that the Kennel Club is not willing to take this task seriously (enough), then there is always the possibility to let the Courts decide about these issues.

Yours sincerely,

Jack Vanderwyk
 
See less See more
#120 ·
My point is this: Currently, AKC considers silver a shade of chocolate, which it is not, and allows silvers to be registered as chocolate. So, suppose AKC were to change their status and not allow silvers to be registered as chocolate any longer....how would AKC know that all chocolates registered really are chocolate, and that silver breeders weren't continuing to register them as such? They would have to inspect every chocolate puppy registered. Really, as it stands now, you could register a yellow as black and AKC wouldn't know it wasn't (not that I can imagine anybody wanting to do such a thing, but there's no way for AKC to know what color a dog really is when its registered. It's all the honor system, and therein lies the failure.
 
#123 ·
Your right it is about honor or lack of.
It just sad there's a guy on another site looking to breed his silver lab and he got beatup on line over it. I don't believe he know what he was buying when he got the pup and he is now trying to breed it.
 
#129 ·
Amy, do you have a link to the article you wrote for which you interviewed him?
It was in the retriever journal but I don't believe they posted it online. Not much of what Dr. Neff said made it into the article. I think the main thing was that it is a misconception to assume that color is independent of all other traits.

I don't even remember what year that was, but the title was something like, "the color prejudice."

Amy Dahl
 
#192 ·
I think the main thing was that it is a misconception to assume that color is independent of all other traits.

Amy Dahl
I think that was pretty well illustrated in the Russian fox domestication project, which solved the riddle of how dogs came to have so many different coat types despite being descended from gray wolves. I.e., the same gene that controls tameness affects coat color, pattern, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
 
#130 ·
Also, for anyone who wonders why so many good breeders sell on Limited registration unless they know the buyer....this is one good reason.

When I was still breeding Labs, I started doing all limited (unless it was someone I knew) after one of my pups ended up in a silver breeder's hands (of course, they made sure to not mention that when they bought her). Fortunately, they never got a silver pup from her and my name won't ever be tied to that.
 
#131 ·
The Canine Genome Project was the subject of a lead article in National Geographic. I read the article last year, but don't know what month or if it was even current. Regardless, it was a fascinating article that went way beyond color issues. The objective is to find ways to improve human health, but on the way they made some great observations about breeding for one trait bringing all kinds of unlooked for consequences. Anyway, I would not doubt Amy's comments for sure!
 
#137 ·
I have read most of this thread, I agree Black Yellow Chocolate is all the colors. I have seen another breed or breed type that is crossed with labs. That is American Pit Bull Terrior. They have Diluted genes also. Seal, Blue, and Tri color. I am no genetis just say'n.

Tony
 
#147 · (Edited)
ALL breeds of dogs were created from other breeds of dogs.

Every single one of them.

A breed is "complete" when we have selectively removed ALL of the Recessive Alleles and/or ALL of the Dominant Alleles from specific Loci in the dogs that fall within the registry.

That way, it's not possible for two dogs within the registry to produce offspring that express a Dominant or Recessive trait that is not found within the breed.

No matter what two dogs are bred within the registry, you will never spontaneously produce a Recessive, or Dominant Allele, where neither Parent has one.

These traits are not found within a breed, for the simple reason that they were intentionally removed from the breed.
 
#150 ·
I don't know squat about genetics or breeding but I do question how this could have been done considering breeds were created over a hundred years ago when they didn't know what DNA was. This "silver" gene was obviously in the wolf from which all dogs derive. How could they say FOR CERTAIN that there was not a single Labradoe that carried it?
 
#154 ·
In addition to Jere's nice, clear explanations let me point out that, prior to DNA testing, it was not feasible to breed out an unwanted recessive. As the incidence gets lower and lower in a population, carriers are bred to one another more and more rarely. "Affecteds" or double-recessives almost never show up. It would be possible to maintain a few affecteds to use in test crosses, but test crosses are subject to statistics, meaning that a single test cross gives only a probability, never a certainty, that the parent in question is homozygous dominant. You can increase that probability with more test crosses, but taken to extremes an animal's whole reproductive life would be taken up with test crosses. You have the expense of breeding plus all of the unwanted, known carriers to dispose of--all for something so rare it effectively never crops up anyway. Breeders are going to put their effort into some of the other, many traits that are important to the quality of the animal and the definition of the breed.

Amy DAhl
 
#155 ·
Oh, and just for fun--back when I was researching my color genetics articles, I believe I found a paper that concluded that Labrador E is a mutation of e. Neither one is the wild-type allele. Because of the nature of the protein coded for, mutations occur relatively readily, which is why we see so many mosaics. Well, that and the Internet!

Amy Dahl
 
#156 · (Edited)
When I was a kid I had pet gerbils. They were all agouti color---your basic brown. That's all there was back then.

A generation later, I go to the pet store to get my child a gerbil. Guess what, gerbils come in all shades nowadays. Black, white with black skin, fox red, black and white, all kinds of pretty colors to choose from. Some had long hair, some had short hair.

I was amazed. I am guessing that the genes for all this variation were present in the gerbil population of 1970, and that through selective breeding the new varieties appeared.

Could something similar have happened in Labrador retrievers? That the variant was present but very rare, and through selective breeding became more common? I don't think so, but never say never.

The mutation that causes the dilute coat color appears to be the same in all breeds of dogs, and appears to have existed prior to the domestication(s) of dogs (http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/suppl_1/S75.short). It is unlikely that the mutation causing the silver coat color in labradors appeared after the breed was established.
 
#157 ·
I think that experiment with the Russian fur foxes is instructive. They rerun a documentary every so often--can't remember if it's Nova or what show, but look out for it. The key point is that the researchers began selecting one group of foxes for minimum aggression and fear toward humans, and another group for maximum fear and aggression. The one group eventually became quite tame, like domestic dogs--and with the tameness, a bunch of other traits showed up: splashes of white, other colors never before seen (and this was a population that had been bred in captivity for many generations), lop ears, curly tails. Someone on the show expressed the opinion that selection for "tameness" seemed to promote a tendency for mutations to occur in these other traits. I infer, but am not certain, that they ruled out the possibility that greater inbreeding in the tame group was causing rare recessives to surface (of course in dogs, lop ears are dominant, so the gene wouldn't be hidden).

The takeaway is that perhaps all of these traits weren't present in the ancestral wolf population, but are a by-product of domestication and somehow associated with the loss of fear. Interesting stuff.

Amy Dahl
 
#162 ·
I decided to read the whole silver labrador website posted here earlier. I found my favorite part

Board Members:
Chairman: Cheryl Flynn of Silver Rain Labradors
CPLR.board@gmail.com
Vice Chairman: Odin Harvell
Secretary: Pidge Daniel
CPLRsecretary@gmail.com
Treasurer: Robert Stoeberl
Parliamentarian: CPLR.parliamentarian@gmail.com

Directors:
Director of Membership: CPLR.membership@gmail.com
Director of Member Communications: CPLR.dNews@gmail.com
Director of Public Communications: CPLR.publiccommunications@gmail.com
Director of Fundraising: CPLRfundraising@gmail.com
Director of Genetics:
Director of Education: san781@mail.usask.ca
Webmaster:
CPLR.publiccommunications@gmail.com

Director of Genentics......LMFAO since this whole post has been on genetics well then nuff said.
 
#163 ·
I can't reply directly to Jere's last post, due to the way that it was quoted.
In answer to the question. All of them.

If you are looking at spontaneous mutation as the basis for the "silver" Lab, I say that you are hearing hoofbeats, and looking for Zebras.

And it doesn't matter how the Recessive d came to be in these lines anyway.
These Breeders are INTENTIONALLY reproducing it.

If they honestly came across it by accident, they would have neutered the Sire, spayed the Dam, and not registered the litter.

That's not what they did.

They bred Daughters to Sires, Dams to Sons, and Brothers to Sisters. And they continued to register the offspring that was produced.

They INTENTIONALLY reproduced it.
For the almighty dollar.
 
#164 ·
Two things.

One, breeders and stud owners may have a huge amount invested in those sires and dams, not only in those individuals but in the line behind them, of which they may be the primary representative (in as much as we are all limited in the number of dogs we keep). It is not realistic to cashier a whole line, or even one breeding animal, throwing away all of that selected and proven quality, just because the animal is discovered to carry one unwanted recessive. I forget the estimated average number of recessive defects carried by each dog--eight maybe, or fifteen. It is a fundamental premise of breeding that there are no perfect dogs; in selection we balance the good and choose what bad to accept, in trying to produce better dogs overall.

A typical and practical solution would be to avoid repeating the breeding, choosing a different stud for that bitch next time.

Two, it takes all kinds to make up a world. I personally don't suffer much damage as a consequence of people's breeding silvers. I do keep trying to educate dog owners and prospective puppy buyers in my own way (trying to avoid being preachy). As long as there is a big pool of would-be owners primed to go for the next fad, they will fall prey to the hype for block heads, white Labs, white Goldens, silver Labs, English or British Labs (I acknowledge that our British neighbors breed some quality dogs, but I've seen some real crap hyped under those labels), and if not those, then for Labradoodles or some other "designer" breed, or, worse still, they'll buy a Chesapeake thinking it'll prove them "different" and macho all at the same time, and it'll end up in a shelter or worse. Removing silver Labs from the picture isn't going to save those folks from themselves.

I'm not worried about silver breeders polluting the "gene pool," either. Ask yourself this: would any breeder that you would ever consider, ever breed to a dog that had untitled, inbred "chocolate" dogs with a suspect kennel name in its pedigree? Dogs don't just "get into" pedigrees; people choose them based on their breeding priorities.

Amy Dahl
 
#167 ·
Their position is that they don't care about anybody else.

Screw the Registry.
Screw the LRC.
Screw you.
Screw me.

They want dilute Labrador Retrievers to BE within the Breed Standard. No matter what anybody else says.

And they are eventually going to get what they want.
 
#171 ·
To me, "successfully competing" means earning CH, FC, and/or AFC. And I agree, someone whose best claim to fame is that a properly-colored offspring of their inbred mismarks has, say, an MH or a class ribbon in a dog show is a long way from a seat (much less a majority) on the LRC board.

There are lots of things that worry me more!

Amy Dahl
 
#184 ·
Yes Amy not only chocolates were frowned upon but also yellows, If not for our Canadian neighbours , ehh.. who pursued chocolates in that netherland time period we would not have the quality we have now. I speak from thirty seven years of field trial efforts. We must always remember to breed only for color is folly and with a closed registry w/ intense breeding to "top" males we have some problems.
If you can't cull don't breed or at least neuter.
 
#187 ·
the next necessary clearance for Labs is a coat color DNA on each dog..... :-(
 
#188 ·
The problem with the Silver breeders is that they are taking a fairly rare (it would seem) recessive and breeding for it and keeping those dogs in the registry. So, over time there will be more and more of them, and ain't nobody got time for dat. Once that happens, as Bridget posted, there will need to be a genetic test to check for the dilute carrier, in order not to have litters with the undesirable non-conforming color.

I have no problem with folks breeding to have whatever kind, type, color, etc they want, but make it your own breed or cross - Labradoodle for example, and don't dishonestly register these dogs as Chocolate Labradors because they're not. For breeders to breed for them and then market them to the ignorant masses as somehow being a rare and desirable color is just flat out lying.

As Copterdoc said, the breed would be theoretically complete/finished when all of the non-conforming recessives are bred out of the gene pool. Not something that seems really possible, but that should really be the goal of breeding, to further the breed by eliminating the non-conforming genes where possible, and the silver breeders are doing exactly the opposite of that which is detrimental to the breed.
 
#189 ·
The problem with the Silver breeders is that they are taking a fairly rare (it would seem) recessive and breeding for it and keeping those dogs in the registry. So, over time there will be more and more of them, and ain't nobody got time for dat. Once that happens, as Bridget posted, there will need to be a genetic test to check for the dilute carrier, in order not to have litters with the undesirable non-conforming color.

I have no problem with folks breeding to have whatever kind, type, color, etc they want, but make it your own breed or cross - Labradoodle for example, and don't dishonestly register these dogs as Chocolate Labradors because they're not. For breeders to breed for them and then market them to the ignorant masses as somehow being a rare and desirable color is just flat out lying.

As Copterdoc said, the breed would be theoretically complete/finished when all of the non-conforming recessives are bred out of the gene pool. Not something that seems really possible, but that should really be the goal of breeding, to further the breed by eliminating the non-conforming genes where possible, and the silver breeders are doing exactly the opposite of that which is detrimental to the breed.



Since when is this the definition of a breed? Scientists do not even agree on the definition of a species.

So do you think we should breed out the recessives that lead to Dudleys? :wink:

Or how about we breed out the recessive genes that lead to the dogs being too tall, or too short? How about those recessives that occasionally show up and produce white patches or brindles? :rolleyes:

If you are going to throw out silvers, then you need to cull all the labs out there that don't meet the standard in other ways.

Mine has got a white on her foot. Uh oh.
 
#191 ·
Let's take the argument that the silver is caused by a weim cross. So what?

If we look at the Dalmatian/pointer backcross project that sought to correct uric acid production in Dalmatians, it was generally accepted that by the seventh generation after outcrossing, the dogs were in effect purebred Dalmatians again -- and healthier than before.

http://www.dalmatianheritage.com/about/nash_research.htm

So, if weims were crossed in at some point (not saying they were), big deal...at what point would they be considered purebred Labs again?

If you say 'never,' regardless of number of generations, phenotype, temperament, et al., you're ignoring the evolution of purebred dogs wholesale.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top