EIC Clear x EIC affected=no affecteds: any problem?

[Henry V]

Many if not most folks here are on the record saying that there is nothing wrong with breeding carriers as long as you breed them to clears. As has been discussed this is a legitimate breeding strategy that will keep EIC at about 40% with random mating (assuming it is at 40%).

Many have stated that “THE” goal should be “to not produce EIC affected dogs”.

Many folks have also stated that they are very concerned about the size of the gene pool and genetic diversity and do not want to eliminate any carriers for fear it would substantially reduce the size of the gene pool.

Assuming the above is your goal and you are worried about the size of the gene pool, it logically follows that you are OK with breeding a talented FC/AFC who is EIC affected (and there are some from what I understand) with a talented dog that is EIC clear.

For folks who hold the above goal and the concern about the size of the gene pool are you OK with this as a breeding strategy? If not, why not?

[Howard N]

I know there are some affected's that are asymtomatic but I have a hard time wrapping my head around an affected earning an FC. It seems pretty impossible. But if it happened I couldn't disagree with your logic.

Affected x clear is 100% carriers. It would have to be a very very special affected!!!

[_Evelyn_]

I had that discussion with the optigen test and pra...
and I would always use an affected male to my bitch.
if he is the right one???

but most people have a prob. with that.

a carrier is not a different carrier when he is out of an cl x a litter.
also a cl x ca can be all carrier.
so please where is the difference.
IMPORTEND is the test is sure.

the eic test is for me to fresh to say so...
cause we have seen the beginning of the optigen test, that he was changed after...?

lg evelyn

[Bud Bass]

No evelyn, you are wrong. The difference is huge. breeding carrier with clear you can get all carriers or all clear, its a roll of the dice, the odds are even, at 50:50. this is a big difference from breeding clear with affected. there it is spelled out clearly, all pups will be carrier and unless you as a breeder are very careful, you will pass along some pups to those who will breed with other carriers and produce affected pups. my having had a eic affected dog, I will strive to prevent this from occuring. I can see Howards point however, it would have to be a very special dog to do a breeding like is proposed, affected or carrier with another carrier. the breeder would have to be very cognizant of his responisbility in breeding such a pair and do what he can to prevent eic from spreading. bud

[_Evelyn_]

yes this can happen, but it can happen also with a carrier pup out of an cl x ca litter....

or would you keep all carrier dogs???

I did an optigen cl x ca litter, testing all pups and writting the result on my website.
this was all I could do

lg evelyn

[_Evelyn_]

the odds are even, at 50:50. this is a big difference from breeding clear with affected. bud

no it is not, because at the next generation you are there, and the next next generation if you want you can breed clears.

so it is just one generation more!!!!



lg evelyn

[badbullgator]

I would use caution in interpreting the eic data so far. It is fantastic that the we now have a test to detect it, however, the number of dogs tested thus far is far to low to be throwing around numbers like 40% (MHO is that is WAYYYYYY off). This is not a toughly randomized study and has very low numbers of test subjects (remember that there are 300K labs registered each year with AKC). A test pool of 500 dogs is nothing. Again that is not to discount the work that has gone into this, just saying that at this point we really have NO IDEA the effects on the population as a whole and we will not probably for many years. I would like to see the power analysis that was (or should have been) done on this study to determine the significance of it.
That said…to your original question. I have mixed feelings on this issue. While technically speaking carriers are not affected and therefore no problem as far as breeding with a clear goes. I am one who has always said no problem with this breeding, however, my statements to that affect have been strictly form a standpoint of not producing affected dogs. Ethically, I have a bit more of an issue with it. Not to say it is necessarily right or wrong, but more in regards to the fact that because we now have a test for EIC, it could theoretically be breed out of the breed in a few generations, but not if you continue to breed carriers. At the same time there could be some special dogs that would be lost from the gene pool.
What IF…a dog like LM was a carrier and had been taken out of the breeding pool? Where would the FT/HT/Hunting lines be now? Would we be better or worse? I tend to think we would be about the same and maybe a little better because might have more diversity in the gene pool. I am not sure what dog is so special that it would be too detrimental to the breed to eliminate it from the gene pool. I kind feel that even our group (FT/HT) gets the same syndrome as back yard breeders sometimes in that we feel “our dog” (and in this case I am talking about a big name winning dog) is more special than they are.

[Henry V]

I would use caution in interpreting the eic data so far. It is fantastic that the we now have a test to detect it, however, the number of dogs tested thus far is far to low to be throwing around numbers like 40% (MHO is that is WAYYYYYY off). This is not a toughly randomized study and has very low numbers of test subjects (remember that there are 300K labs registered each year with AKC). A test pool of 500 dogs is nothing. ..................

What IF…a dog like LM was a carrier and had been taken out of the breeding pool? Where would the FT/HT/Hunting lines be now? Would we be better or worse? I tend to think we would be about the same and maybe a little better because might have more diversity in the gene pool. I am not sure what dog is so special that it would be too detrimental to the breed to eliminate it from the gene pool. I kind feel that even our group (FT/HT) gets the same syndrome as back yard breeders sometimes in that we feel “our dog” (and in this case I am talking about a big name winning dog) is more special than they are.

Good discussion BBG. I hope that EIC is not at 40% but the researchers did get a pretty good representative sample from field trial dogs from what I can tell. I hope they are way off. Time will tell.

Your last paragraph is on the mark (what if? -HaHa). All I would add is that folks need to look around at all the great FC/AFCs that rarely get bred. Some don't ever get the opportunity to prove themselves. A missed opportunity to maintain or increase the size of the gene pool and maybe find that next prepotent sire.

[Melanie Foster]

The difference is huge.

It is only a huge difference if you are of the school that all carriers should be culled. I, for one, don't believe that is necessary and I am not alone.

[helencalif]

Melanie,

I can't speak for akblackdawg .. but I think he was referring to a 'huge difference' point made earlier and he spoke to that remark and he then said what can happen %-wise when breeding an EIC carrier to an EIC clear and what the results might be.

I don't think he meant that culling all EIC carriers out of the gene poll was absolutely the way to go.

It is my hope that the owners of EIC carrier stud dogs will breed only to EIC clear bitches.

It is my hope that owners of EIC clear bitches will be very selective in the stud do they choose... and that if they choose to breed to an EIC carrier, that they either have their litter tested to identify the EIC status of the pups or they warn their puppy buyers that the litter has the potential of having EIC carriers and it's a crapshoot as to what they might get.

Regarding the 40% EIC per cent, I do recall that dogs at field trials held in WI and that region were randomly tested as part of the study. I do not know how many dogs had blood drawn for the test nor at which trials the blood tests were taken.

I am wondering if the results were that high (or that low?) because the testing was regional in nature ... i.e. did a lot of those dogs at those field trials who were EIC carriers share the same field lines, have the same sires and/or same dams ?

For example, at most trials held in N. CA, OR, or WA you are going to find dogs running in trials that are mostly from Fargo, Auggie, and Carbon with a few other local stud dogs sprinkled into the mix. There are a few from out of the region, but dogs Fargo, Auggie, and Carbon seem to be more numerous.

What if the EIC crew came out west and started taking blood draws at CA, OR, and WA trials ? Would EIC results be the same? Higher? Lower?

What about the regional factor?