PEDIGREE's of WELL know GSD's that carry the blue and liver gene - Page 6

You actually see a fair amount of red and white Irish setters - they've also seperated from the solid rd show pony's their cousins have become - at least they have in Europe as far as I know :)

Breeding for color is a normal part of breeding...look at you're average showline...they breed for color as aptly as any liver, white, or blue breeder does - and while the saddle pattern may not be the most recessive allele at the agouti series, the Red is (the most recessive allele at the Intensity Series).  What's irritating is that in a breed that is supposedly supposed to be based on work ethic rather than looks that color really shouldnt matter, especially considering the original reason for seperation was health issues that dont exist.

Mendelain Genetics are quite alot of fun...I will give you that - but when you start into multi-allelic Loci you start to have problems...and mendelian genetics are nothing but an outline - mother nature frequently takes her own coarse - which is why you might have a whole litter of blacks out of two non black parents.  The sperm doesnt say to the egg there is 25% of that combination, and 50% of the heterozygous combination...so we must be the last 25% of the recessive homozygous combination.

lol - and then there are population genetics that generally require the HW equilibrium to get anywhere near the correct menelian #s.

~Cate

A few years ago I asked the webmaster of the site to the link you showed for *supposed* carrieres or producers of livers or blues to verify his/her sources for this FALSE information... as I happend to own one of the dogs listed on the site who NEVER produced either. He was a very nice OFA Excellent male that never produced livers, and never produced blues either, and he was tested every year and found to be free from Factor 8, 9 and vWd, hemophila etc, thyroid clear etc.... etc. NEVER produced a liver and was not one himself.

I never was given the courtesy of a  a reply, a sorry, an explanation as to who what were or why the FALSE information was posted..... a NATHA...so IMO this is a good example of why you cant believe everything you read.

I believe others had asked for conformation as well and NEVER rec. it. There are all kinds of scams.. and posting false information like this is just as harmful as NONE IMO.

Rather twisted if you ask me.

Debi

That really sucks.  As far as I'm concerned, the site loses any little credibility they might have had.   People need to remember that while the internet is a great tool, you must check, double check and then consider the source before you believe anything.

I'd really like to hear what those who support the nonsense on that site have to say to Debi.

>>>I heard of someone paying $20,000 for an import, a Canto grandson, which died of hemophilia not too long after his arrival in the US. Only a very  few hemophiliacs were openly acknowledged as existing, in the SV-Zeitung magazine.<<<

Okay, Sunsilver, I finally looked at your link that "proves" Canto had hemophilia.  I feel like this is beating a dead horse, but again, no proofs are offered. "I heard of" is not a valid source.  Some quoted pages of the mentioned SV-Zeitung magazine, or even scanned in and offered as a more legitimate reference would be nice.  Even the author of this page is not on it, we do not know for sure who wrote this hemophiliac list. 

I just do not have it in me to believe written "facts" that are not backed up with legitimate sources. 

I do have to say this gsd helpline webpage does have a knowledgable person as the president, Fred Lanting.  If he wrote it, I'd be much more inclined to believe there is truth in it.  Did Fred Lanting write it? 

I'll be over here playing with my grain of sense I am not supposed to have....

Veronica

Blue/liver/white = simple recessive

clear x clear = 100% clear

clear x carrier = 50% clear, 50% carrier

clear x affected = 100% carrier

carrier x carrier = 25% clear, 50% carrier, 25% affected

carrier x affected = 50% carrier, 50% affected

affected x affected = 100% affected

In a single litter these percentage may not work out to be exact as they are based on flipping the coin at least 100 times. For example it is possible to breed a carrier to a carrier, get a litter of 5,6 puppies with none affected. You might repeated that same breeding and get another litter of 5 or 6 and all could be affected. In the long term, if you repeated the same breeding enough times to produce 100 puppies, the odds would be very close to those listed above.

It takes 5 generations to "breed out" a simple recessive assuming no other affecteds or carriers are introduced into the mix. It would be possible to breed out the liver, blue, or white gene in 5 generations but it would take a diligent effort.

Blitz - it's not possible to breed out a recissive gene with any surety without testing. 

Dominant traits can be bred out easy - but most good geneticists will tell you that trying to breed out a recessive gene is close to impossible without knowing who the known carriers are and then removing them and their offspring from the gene pool.  You can get a very high accuracy that there is no more of that gene in the line...but it wont be 100%

That diligent effort would have to be more than mere selection - it would require removing all the known carriers , and doing test breedings or DNA tests in order to find out who all the carriers accross the entire breed.

Otherwise you get something very uncommon - like a spotted shepherd - showing up hundreds of generations later because that one nearly impossible mating of two, very unlikley dogs, produced something that no one had seen in years (at least not something I have read about since Stephanitz's time)

Even in the German litters where the white gene was thought to be all but extinct pups popped up sometimes I imagine....but what breeder is going to let that out?  No...it's much more convenient for them to break the neck and pretend like it never happened.  Hey - people do it with health - why not with color?  I believe some of the BBS go back to German lines - as unlikley as that sounds.  Somewhere someone had a white dog in their litter and didnt kill it - as unlikley as it sounds.  Tne gene was never removed from the population...it's frequency was merely lowered and hidden...as is the case with all the dastardly colors.

If you like I can pull out some Gene and Genotypic Frequency calculations and run some numbers - ya'll might be surprised....but it is so much easier on paper because on paper you know which animals are the heterozygotes....when determining selection based of phenotype...well...recessive traits hide very well.

~Cate

Ak you are beating a dead horse. Canto's  hemophilia WAS revealed years ago by Malcolm Willis the geneticist and discussed in his book. The SV was not intially forthcoming on this issue at all.  For those of us around at the time, it was well known to avoid Canto daughter lines since as in humans the females carry the gene and the male expresses it.  If a Canto son or grandson was tested free he was safe to use which is why you do see so much Canto in the lines. The knowledge of his hemophilia  is also what brought us in this country 25+ years ago to start testing for bleeding disorders including Von Willebrands where Jean Dodds( of vaccine fame) got her start. Not many people in this country bother to test any more because it was never a significant problem here.

Re the veracity of the listings on the first site the OP listed one thing to lok at is as Dr. Phil says - do they have a dog in the fight. Lo- guess what on the front page it specifically offers GSDs of ALL colors. If there is a vested interest as there is here, the very legitimate question becomes does the poster have something to gain by tarring with a very broad brush well known dogs in the breed.  The obvious answer until proven differently is yes.

Such compilation of known faults/problems especially health problems in a breed can be extremely useful but must always be used with extreme care and not as a means of wholesale exclusion without thought. However before any such list should be used for any purpose other than idle curiosity there has to be a verification and veracity system in place and it is best developed by someone who does not have a vested interest in a certain outcome.

I also found this quote on the side to be very interesting coming from someone who signs themselves as Drgsdgenes -  re a dog of her breeding "He seemed to produce better structure and soundness when combined with some lines than with others. "  Well DUH - and this is surprising why? Isnt that what breeding is all about - figuring out what the good combinations are?

Ceph, according to Mendel and a canine geneticist  my dog club worked with designing a program for us to eliminate a specific simple recessive from our geneback,  in theory it  is possible to reduce the chance of that gene's remaining in the pool after 5 generations. At that point the risk of its still being there drops to around 6%. Another generation and it is less that 3, so saying it is possible to breed out a simple recessive is not incorrect science.  The more generations you have, the lesser the odds that the gene is still present.  Recessives do not "skip" generations, either the dog carries them or the dog does not.  Many AKC breeds have successfully bred out simple recessives by either identifying the carriers with test matings and/or carefully avoiding affecteds,  known carriers and dogs with high probablities of being carriers. Is it 100%? Of course not, but it is very close.  In the big picture a very tiny percentage of carriers will slip through the cracks unidentified but not enough to have a big impact on any breed.  The same can be said about test matings; they will not identify all carriers, but they will identify most.

Most breeders I know would not think that identifying carriers of specific colors was important enough to test breed for unless that color brought with it some some of undesirable/fatal gene. If testing a suspect by breeding it to an affected, you would need at least 10 puppies, all unaffected to clear the unknown dog.  Test breeding is not 100%  as some carriers will not be identified with test matings  because there may not be enough puppies, some puppies will die in utero and be resorbed and some stillborn.  The only sure method is DNA. Using a carrier for a test mating of an unknown would make it necessary to have at least 25 normal puppies. Not hard to see why most breeders reserve test breedings for vital issues, not simple things like coat color even if that color is a DQ in the breed standard. Most breeders probably won't assign color enough importance to even consider test breeding or avoidance. If you produce a liver/blue/white and don't like the color, then don't repeat the breeding and understand the odds  the balance of the litter has of carrying the gene recessively. Avoid breeding those dogs to other dogs that are known to carry that color gene or to an affected.

DNA, when available, can be useful to identify carriers of certain colors in canines. The company that offers DNA to identify carriers of the long coat gene is now offering genetic color ID on some breeds.  So far the GSD in not included.  Coat color inheritance is very, very complicated and what is known about one breed doesn't always translate to another. Not all piebalds/pintos are the result of the Irish spotting gene for example. Fortunately some GSD breeders have made in depth studies of coat color in this breed and a lot of good info on color inheritance can be found on the net.