The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: DNA Determined Defects....

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    283

    Default

    So an FC EIC carrier bitch should not bred???? Wow, this might be the worst post I have seen in a while. Sorry, not usually negative, but WOW!!!

    Happily getting a Slider X Callie carrier female puppy in two weeks. Can't wait!!!

  2. #12
    Senior Member Hunt'EmUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by steve schreiner View Post
    If we breed the clears out of the this breeding to other clears from other such breedings will we have lost anything..? I am not a breeder just a trainer ....Steve S
    If the clears out of this and the clears out of that won't pick up a bird, can't a mark post, all rip ACL's @ three, and don't have the brains god gave a gnat (yes I think you've lost something) . Genetics are not simple; I'd rather worry about a few absolutely necessary traits & genes that we only believe we control (through selective breeding) than worry about a stupid little recessive gene that we absolutely control with a test.

    What is accomplished by not breeding carriers?
    It produces dogs that are clear, why do we need dogs that are clear? All it does is enables anyone to breed anything safely and not have to check. Is it a good idea to make it easier for anyone to breed anything? I just wonder what else will they be too lazy to check?
    Last edited by Hunt'EmUp; 05-02-2014 at 06:01 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) Rip. July-2014
    MHR HRCH Lakota MH (most importantly Upland/Duck Enthusiast)
    HR Storm.. the Pup (Beginning Upland & Waterfowl Enthusiast)

  3. #13
    Senior Member fishin444's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    279

    Default

    Well I'll throw my two cents in. One of my best bitches out of Downtown Dusty Brown turned out clear when tested. If your premis was followed then he should never have bred to any females. What a loss IMO.
    As a breeder of labs I believe in having all dogs tested and if I have a carrier dog who would make good breeding prospect I just need make sure that they get bred to a clear one. Just because a dog carries the gene doesn't mean they or their pups are affected by it. The worst would be that they are carriers. I would also let my customers know the possibilities when looking at a pup. Would I like to see the genetic problems in labs eliminated? Yes of course, but at what cost to the breed. Limiting the gene pool isn't the answer. Responsible breeding is.

  4. #14
    Senior Member wheelhorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    576

    Default

    I found that there was semen left on a long deceased Ch/MH, QAA stud. He was perfect in every way I needed and matched my girl perfectly. Guess what... he was an EIC carrier. I still bred to him because of everything that he brought to the table and my girl was EIC clear. I now have an amazing 2 year old that the sky (and me) is the limit.

    IMG_3804a.jpg
    Kathleen

    "Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you're not, in fact, just surrounded by a**holes" -William Gibson

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Cape Girardeau Mo.
    Posts
    1,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt'EmUp View Post
    If the clears out of this and the clears out of that won't pick up a bird, can't a mark post, all rip ACL's @ three, and don't have the brains god gave a gnat (yes I think you've lost something) . Genetics are not simple; I'd rather worry about a few absolutely necessary traits & genes that we only believe we control (through selective breeding) than worry about a stupid little recessive gene that we absolutely control with a test.

    What is accomplished by not breeding carriers?
    It produces dogs that are clear, why do we need dogs that are clear? All it does is enables anyone to breed anything safely and not have to check. Is it a good idea to make it easier for anyone to breed anything? I just wonder what else will they be too lazy to check?
    I agree we don't want these either ....Yes we have lost a lot if a breeding of two dogs clear , infected ,carrier ,out cross or inbred produce what you have described...I believe anytime you breed two animals there is somewhat of a crap shoot on how the results will be..as you stated genetics are not simple...Line breeding is a lot more excepted in bird dogs and beagles than it appears to be in retrievers...Is the reason because we have more bad genes than the other breeds..? Just asking not stiring the pot....or taking sides in any way ....Steve S
    "Your dog learns as much by doing his work right,by your praise and encouragement, as he does by your displeasure and correction." DLWalters

  6. #16
    Senior Member Montview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    806

    Default

    I think those who bother to do the genetic testing are already likely using those results to move away from carriers/affecteds by breeding carriers/affecteds only to clears. Over time, if people are doing this, the genes should diminish within the population.

    I personally think that these tests are not an end-all, but a wonderful tool to be able to make good, ethical breeding decisions. To eliminate all carriers/affecteds because of a gene alone is extremely short-sighted IMHO. Many of the best dogs in the history of our breed would have already been eliminated from improving our breed if this had been the case in the past....
    -Julie, Monty (2005 YLM), Rogue (2009 BLM), and Eddy (2013 BLM)

    "To err is human, to forgive, canine." - Anon

    LIFE IS GOOD. "Do what you like, like what you do."

  7. #17
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    NW WI
    Posts
    3,686

    Default

    Dead horse, yes, been done to death, but, we continue it anyway. Breeding around EIC, CNM and PRA is now simple, with a test. We can avoid producing affected dogs very simply and cheaply without removing good dogs from breeding. We still can't avoid producing hip and elbow dysplasia despite screening, because there is no simple test, no simple mode of inheritance. We try to reduce the rate, we try to avoid bad nicks and breeding to dogs we see start to throw a higher than normal average of stuff like dysplasia or CCL ruptures. But those take time and happen after a number of dogs have been already bred.

    Really worried about the Lab gene pool? Worry about the sneaky silver and "dilute" breeders. The list of them has grown exponentially over the years. There are stud owners with MH, HRCH, QAA, nicely bred dogs, advertised right here on RTF and other forums, selling their stud services to silver breeders. I'm seeing ads that flat out shock me. And others that are hiding the fact they are breeding silvers. Have slick websites, buy some nicely bred NFC, NAFC, FC, MH sired pups, breed them to their own silvers (which say chocolate if you look at their registration and pedigree) and those pups, now carrying silver, are sold to the unsuspecting, who think they have a great thing, NFC grandpup, and off they go. Maybe these dilute people want to get that silver gene out there so it starts popping up "out of nowhere" to bolster their claims that it's always been there. I don't know. Maybe it isn't a big deal anymore, silvers, charcoals, champagnes, are here to stay and we just accept it and let them in. Personally, like health clearances, I have to do more digging these days. I'm not willing to knowingly throw open my arms to dilute junk, I don't want my name on it. If I get tricked, so be it, they are getting pretty sneaky in how they cover up their agenda, but, still, try to search the background more thoroughly on puppy buyers, and when I have a stud again, will be far more wary than just accepting clearances and a pedigree. That's my concern about "defects" in Labs. I think we have an awesome breed, I don't think we have a huge host of physical problems, there are many worse breeds in that department. I have no idea why there's a group willing to "dilute" it with garbage that doesn't belong in Labs, but it bothers me way more than breeding PRA, EIC & CNM carriers to clears.
    Kim Pfister, Rainmaker Labs

  8. #18
    Senior Member Swack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Dead horse, yes, been done to death, but, we continue it anyway. Breeding around EIC, CNM and PRA is now simple, with a test. We can avoid producing affected dogs very simply and cheaply without removing good dogs from breeding. We still can't avoid producing hip and elbow dysplasia despite screening, because there is no simple test, no simple mode of inheritance. We try to reduce the rate, we try to avoid bad nicks and breeding to dogs we see start to throw a higher than normal average of stuff like dysplasia or CCL ruptures. But those take time and happen after a number of dogs have been already bred.

    Really worried about the Lab gene pool? Worry about the sneaky silver and "dilute" breeders. The list of them has grown exponentially over the years. There are stud owners with MH, HRCH, QAA, nicely bred dogs, advertised right here on RTF and other forums, selling their stud services to silver breeders. I'm seeing ads that flat out shock me. And others that are hiding the fact they are breeding silvers. Have slick websites, buy some nicely bred NFC, NAFC, FC, MH sired pups, breed them to their own silvers (which say chocolate if you look at their registration and pedigree) and those pups, now carrying silver, are sold to the unsuspecting, who think they have a great thing, NFC grandpup, and off they go. Maybe these dilute people want to get that silver gene out there so it starts popping up "out of nowhere" to bolster their claims that it's always been there. I don't know. Maybe it isn't a big deal anymore, silvers, charcoals, champagnes, are here to stay and we just accept it and let them in. Personally, like health clearances, I have to do more digging these days. I'm not willing to knowingly throw open my arms to dilute junk, I don't want my name on it. If I get tricked, so be it, they are getting pretty sneaky in how they cover up their agenda, but, still, try to search the background more thoroughly on puppy buyers, and when I have a stud again, will be far more wary than just accepting clearances and a pedigree. That's my concern about "defects" in Labs. I think we have an awesome breed, I don't think we have a huge host of physical problems, there are many worse breeds in that department. I have no idea why there's a group willing to "dilute" it with garbage that doesn't belong in Labs, but it bothers me way more than breeding PRA, EIC & CNM carriers to clears.
    Rainmaker,

    I agree that as Lab breeders the least of our worries are the problems caused by simple autosomal recessive genes for which we have a simple effective test. There are many more problems that we don't have effective screening tools to help us. You mention hip dysplasia. Despite our screening efforts for many decades it still can be an issue. I'm taking an on-line genetics course where they estimated the heritability of HD as being in the 20 - 30% range. That means the environmental factors outweigh the genetic contribution by at least a factor of 3, if not 4 or 5! Most of those environmental factors are within the control of a pup's owner, handler, trainer. It's not just a crap-shoot. We have some control beyond selection of sire and dam.

    As to the issue of the dilute gene; I think we have many more important traits to worry about in breeding quality Labradors without intentionally spreading (and promoting) a gene that clearly doesn't belong in our breed. I wonder what possible defects might come with this infusion of foreign genetics. It is mind-boggling that the LRC is tolerating this genetic invasion. Regardless of its origin, it clearly doesn't fit the description of our breed standard, assuming one can read and comprehend English.

    Swack
    Last edited by Swack; 05-04-2014 at 12:53 PM.
    Jeff Swackhamer

  9. #19
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,278

    Default

    I'm taking an on-line genetics course where they estimated the heritability of HD as being in the 20 - 30% range. That means the environmental factors outweigh the genetic contribution by at least a factor of 3, in not 4 or 5! Most of those environmental factors are within the control of a pup's owner, handler, trainer. It's not just a crap-shoot. We have some control beyond selection of sire and dam.
    This knowledge has been there for a long while about CHD. However, if we just let pups grow up, and let the chips fall where they may, might that mean that those who "survive" without any CHD are genetically superior in whatever other factors may play a role in the physical manifestation of CHD? I have Goldens, not Labs, but the only thing I tell pupowners is to keep their dogs at a healthy, lean weight and not do any obviously stupid things like letting their pup jump out of a truck or SUV until its growth plates have a chance to mature (usually 12-14 mos. old) Though depending on the ground-footing and height of the vehicle, it may never be a great idea to encourage jumping from heights a dog's structure was never intended to sustain, especially on a regular basis. Though even that may have more impact on the front end than the back end. I actually worry more about the front end in leaping ditches and cover in training, and starting agility obstacles too young for a still-developing pup.

    Since I don't have Labs, I'm pretty much out in left field on the color issues of Labs. Aside from the aesthetic aspect of silvers, are there any health issues associated with this deviation in color that would make it more abhorrent than ignoring proven health issues like CHD, ED, etc.?
    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.

  10. #20
    Senior Member windycanyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    3,820

    Default

    Some people are still so worried about breeding (or buying) an EIC or PRA carrier, but look at all the people still breeding and buying from allergy ridden dogs. Give me something I can test for ANY DAY!
    As for hips/elbows, I do think there is enough compelling evidence that genetics play a significant role. Yes, hips may be only moderately heritable, but have you read the papers on breeding Grade I elbows? It's on the OFA site. I'd not touch a dog w/o depth in elbow clearances because as stated above by Gerry, the front end assembly must bear FAR more weight in our dogs than the rear.

Posting Permissions

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