[Selena van Leeuwen]

Daryl have summarized an introduction to Understanding Linebreeding & Outcrossing, to help people understand it a little better....

http://www.ehretgsd.com/genetics.htm#InbreedOutcross

 

[Bob Scott]

Thanks Selena! Good explinations of linebreeding and outcrossing. It makes the hair on my neck stand up when I hear people commenting about a breed (any breed) that has so many problems because they are so inbred. :roll:

 

[Mike Schoonbrood]

I would just like to clarify, I have no problems with linebreeding, it's just weird to me to think \"hey my dog is the product of a mother and her son\" :lol: But if I was a breeder and I thought it would benefit my line to do this, then absolutely I would go that route. But as a human being that wasn't born or raised in Alabama, it's still kinda weird :lol: :lol: :wink:

Great article, good information, thanks Daryl for writing it!

 

[Julia Tompson]

Selena... great article but I am still a little confused. First I know very little about linebreeding. I hear some breeders brag about it like it’s a great thing so I assume it’s good even though I really don’t understand it. :?

If you see a linebreeding in a dog’s pedigree like the one below would that mean the last 3 generations were outcrossed? Would this be considered a distant linebreeding since it is 4 generations back?

When breeders linebreed famous dogs do they usually make public… what traits or goals they are trying to gain from the breeding?

Do they follow up with a report indicating whether the objectives were achieved or not?

Do you have the name of a famous dog that was a close linebreed? I am sure there are many I just don’t know where to look?

Sorry for so many questions but this is a subject that seems very tricky to understand.

Linebreeding - 5 generations
4 - 4............................................. in VA1 Ulk von Arlett
5 - 5............................................. in V Dolly von Arlett
5 - 5............................................. in VA1 Uran vom Wildsteiger Land
5 - 5............................................. in VA5 Yago vom Wildsteiger Land

 

[Selena van Leeuwen]

Is far linebreeding indeed, after 5 generations you don´t speak of linebreeding anymore.

Linebreeding´s purpose is for genetic tieying down the good behaviour and/or looks, simply said. By (tight)linebreeding you will make all charaterics more pronouced, the bad and the good ones. If you make an outcross you will choose a mate who can soften/eliminate the bad habits/looks in your line and will strenghten the good points. All ideally spoken ofcourse.

I know some famous dogs, but you probably won´t know them.
Example, a dog of my fathers
www.bloedlijnen.nl/stamboom.php?ID=11

father of this dog is a combination of full brother and sister

and

Our Benta & Spike
www.bloedlijnen.nl/stamboom.php?ID=3455

father/daughter combination

and if Benta is pregnant, this will be the father of the pups
www.bloedlijnen.nl/stamboom.php?ID=2541

so this wil be a half brother/half sister combination

The dutchie lovers here will probably see a familiar name: Robbie/Rockie is father/halfbrother of Athos.

 

[Daryl Ehret]

A a half brother/half sister combination is how one of my females was produced, creating a 2-2 linebreeding on Titus z Pohranicni Straze, a well known Czech border patrol producer. Not all linebreeding produces well though, and the tighter the linebreeding, the more familiar a breeder should be with the particular line and what it produces beforehand.

 

[Ken Thompson]

This is very interesting. I used to raise racing pigeons and we would inbreed the best to the best (Mother-Son, Father-Daughter, Brother-Sister). We would do this until all were physically the same (trying to remove the bad genes). When you do this you lose vigor and sometimes get genetic problems. With birds that's not a problem you would cull the bad ones. What was left, you would outcross to another family inbred the same way. What you would get is a type of hybrid with more vigor than you could imagine (not good for breeding but excellent raciers). I can see where line breeding would have some advanges but it may take many generation to form a breeding stock. This is why even the best dogs may not produce a high precentage of top quailty pups. Our best raciers were not usually the best breeders.

I'm not an expert on this by any means, this is just my thoughts. :?

 

[Jerry Lyda]

Ken, this line is also in Bear's pedigree,Pohranicni Straze. Good stuff.

 

[Lynn Cheffins]

Nicely written article
http://www.westwindgsps.com/linebreeding.htm

 

[Don Turnipseed]

In reading Daryls article of linebreeding and the article put up by Lynn, I see areas of differing ideas on the "successful" or "right" way to linebreed. It is no wonder such confusion exists on the subject. I have opinions of my own that do not entirely agree with the articles. One would be the part of 10 to 20 % great dogs in a litter. The idea of successful linebreeding in my mind, is to achieve more of a 70 to 80% far above average, solid dogs. The purpose of linebreeding is to develope a line of solid, viable dogs, not the single grand nationals champion. With an expected success rate of 10 to 20% outstanding dogs, you are about as well off scatterbreeding and really mixing them up and hoping for the best. That low a percentage just wouldn't warrant the years of line breeding. IMHO The idea is to fix traits and every outcross adds 50% new genes to the mix and negates the linebreeding until the offspring can be bred back and reset them. EVERY outcross will do this.

 

[Daryl Ehret]

In the article I wrote, I didn't want to imply what would be "right or wrong", just inform what happens, and that to make the most of it, both methods are necessary. It's important that the actual breeding pair should be representative of the focus of the linebreeding characteristics aimed for.

The 10-20% figure is pretty subjective, and totally dependant on what's bred to what after all. Your best genes may go into 25% of the pool, but not necessarily into the same quarter of your litter, into the same pups. Depends on how many separate heterogenous characteristics you're hoping to make homogenous. Then you have to re-select from the results, and continue refining.

As a general rule, linebred dogs can be better for producing, and outcrosses are often better performers. And often, the best performers are not necessarily the best producers (depends on the mate matched with).

This distinction of producers vs. performers can even be seen between littermates. I guess my favorite example would be Ellute von der Mohnwiese and Eros von der Mohnwiese. One's a better producer, the other a better performer. They're linebred, but hardly in any significant way. 5-4 on one particular dog, but through alternating sexes (M>F>M>F>M--M>F>M>F). Their dam was somewhat linebred, but not in a very influential way.

If you have a subject that is very outstanding, but want to plan some improvement, linebreeding is a good way to really take advantage, and in a lesser amount of time. Then follow with a suitable outcross, an equally important component.

It's not any kind of magic formula, but it definitely helps keep a trait or characteristic within the line that may exceedingly be rare among the general gene population. It seems we are noticing some shortages out there for balanced-drives, genetic-grips, good-hips. Challenging to find one or two, much less all three traits in a single dog. Throw in a couple other desireable characteristics, and the math is less in your favor (10-20% might be optimistic).

That low a percentage just wouldn't warrant the years of line breeding.

linebreeding is actually the "quick-fix", it would take much longer with only very carefully selected outcrosses... lifetimes perhaps, depending how refined you want to go

The idea is to fix traits and every outcross adds 50% new genes to the mix and negates the linebreeding until the offspring can be bred back and reset them. EVERY outcross will do this.

the outcross is the "finished product"

 

[Don Turnipseed]

I see what you are saying Daryl in regard to the percentages. And you may be on the money. You, from what I am reading, look at linebreeding as a method to give the outcross the highest success rate. I view linebreeding solely as a tool that produce consistency in a line....as in the larger percentage should ideally be closer to being clones to the dogs the line is built around. Part of the frustration with a breed like Airedales is that very few are really in working hands. The result is that there are no specific lines, just dogs. The closest thing to a line is show bred and hasn't worked in decades. This makes a reliable "finished product" iffy in itself if the outcross is the finished product. The hybrid vigor is less than desirable in this case because the resulting pups can head out a totally new direction and, once again, leave a small percentage of viable super dogs. One spends years trying to acheive predictability through homozygosity, but, there is nothing left to breed to that has anything set outside of appearance.

You mentioned that outcrossing can take a life time and linebreeding is the quick fix. I would appreciate you going a bit farther on this. I never gave outcrossing continually much thought after the first few breedings. If memory serves, I decided after three litters that I was already to old for this method.

I probably shouldn't get into these subjects requiring thought at 3 in the morning but it is still close to a full moon and Airedale can howl, 25 can really howl. I cringe when that full moon is cycling up each mo.

 

[Don Turnipseed]

Daryl, here is a pedigree I am considering in a couple of years. Magnum , the sire is out of a litter of 8, pretty much carbon copies. Magnum is about 6 mo olkd and is going back to Oh with me in March to run the Master Fur at the Nationals. I could have taken any othe the pups in the litter and run this because they have the capability. While one person looks for the 10 to 20% finished dogs to compete at a high level(Outcross), I want to see solid consistency and have no use for the once in a life time time dog. Molly Dolly Varden is Winchesters Grandaughter and most of the top side of the pedigree goes back another 3 to 5 genrations with HC.....as does the bottom. Any outcrossing is done elsehere and when a new pup comes here, It is already 50% out of my stock as is the possible dam HC. Chloee. I got into breeding to work my own dogs and never found 10 to 20 % an acceptable figure figure.

 

[Daryl Ehret]

I view linebreeding solely as a tool that produce consistency in a line

That really is the best way to view it, from a breeder's standpoint. But only considering that you already have in your lines the best possible breeding stock to work with. If you are satisfied with 70-80% of what you produce, and feel there's no need for improvement, then linebreeding with occasional type-to-type outcrossing (from a similar genetic population/ancestry) is all you need to maintain this. Linebreeding near the founding times of the GSD, was in a way a necessity, to establish a consistent type for the breed. As mentioned before, those percentage figures are really subjective, in that they are depending on what you're original breeding stock consisted of, and the goals or satisfaction level you seek. If you start with less than ideal material to work with, then maximizing for hybrid vigor is the aproach you may want, then refine.

 

[Don Turnipseed]

Daryl, I want to make it clear I am not disagreeing with you even though my thoughts may wander a different direction now and then. I thoroughly enjoy discussions on line breeding and it is difficult to find someone with your understanding of the subject to discuss it with. I find every discussion gives me new perspective on the subject. As they say, there is always more than one way to skin a cat. I have found this to be somewhat true in line breeding. One can approach it intensely, or, with a much less intense style. I started slowly and was dead set against line breeding at the outset. I was less than happy with the results I was seeing in litters. I had a mother and son that were really intense dogs that had no fear and more prey drive than any dog needs. They were constantly laid up for grabbing 300lb hogs or bears by themselves. The first few years in line breeding I bred for the hard big game dog because that is what I did. I soon realized that fur hunting with dogs will end some day with the current trend and I had developed a specialty dog that could get thrown 8 ft in the air and cut up by hogs only to get up and engage again and cry to do it again the next day. It was natural ability I was looking at and I realized that few people needed dogs like this. I also learned, through talking to people such as yourself, that hardness isn't the same as grit in many circles. I was made aware of training hardness, which I noticed was lacking in my original lines. They did it their way or they wouldn't do it. What they did they did very well but that is where it ended. I bred a softer female into the line and the change was phenomenal. Now instead of having very aloof one dimensional dogs, I have to endure dragging pups all over the yard attached to my legs and arms, they are no longer aloof, much more vocal and very trainable. I found, through necessity, you can change the program mid stream while line breeding.

 

[Mica Korab]

A very interesting read, just caomes at this time when I am looking for a stud dog for my black bitch, I am looking at a niece to uncle mating, quite tight there I think, but I can go back through both sides and 'know' the dogs inside out.. any thoughts?

 

[Jeff Oehlsen]

How the **** did I miss this thread??

 

[Mike Schoonbrood]

You were sick that day.

 

[Hil Harrison]

How the **** did I miss this thread??

wrong glasses on Jeff?:lol:

 

[Jeff Oehlsen]

Ok, so you are jamming the lines to get the dog that you want, my curiousity is what are you seeing from your culls as far as genetic problems??? Or in Don's case however long ago that was....LOL.

Also, how many lines do you have going at once???