Showlines and Workinglines are Genetically Different - Interesting Study - Page 4

VKGSD

I had a beautiful show line female who was bred to a Salztalblick male and produced 4 beautiful puppies.  Two went on to become police dogs including one female.   I also have a female three years old now whose mother was SG rated showline with OFA excellent hips and bred to Hessel from Odonnels .. she is an elite athlete and no dog that I have male or female can do the speed and agility things she can do.  She is super fast, will run smack over the helper, and is a joy to watch run.  There are plenty of snobs on both sides of the breeding line stupidity but the helper had better have his shoes laced tight for this girl cause she is coming and she is coming fast with no hesitation whatsoever.

Joanro, my point was that Norwich and Norfolk descended from the same dogs as did Red Iriish and Red and White Irish. Breeders changed them phentoypically by selective breeding, their gene pool did not change. The Wirehaired Fox and the Smooth Fox will not have the same  gene pool due to the addition of other breeds to farther "roughen" the coat.

VKGSD, most I know aren't obsessed with one line or the other either. I never heard such line snobbery and bashing of lines until I signed on this database. I find the diversity of the breed to be a plus. I don't judge a dog by its pedigree and generalizations are not valid pro or cons. I like what  you are doing with your dogs and if I were planning to breed a litter I would do exactly as you and BooBoo are doing.

Blitzen, that was my point in using those as analogy. Wires and smooth were from the same litters. My first smooth was before the varieties became separate breeds. She had wires in her ped, as they were still one breed. Same dogs.
Ability of the two kinds of gsd is not what I'm speaking about. I'm talking about looks. My wire could go to ground and pull a 'possum out of a den as good as my smooth. They would retrieve a thrown stick with the same crazy drive, and were equally devoted to me. but they looked different. That's all.

Joanro, you really are misunderstanding me. But my brain is too muddled with this darn virus to try to explain how population genetics works.  (I tried, but wound up deleting my post... )

Different populations of a species will have minor genetic differences due to the way the environment acts on the animals, selecting the ones that are best adapted to that particular environment. If there are enough measurable differences, scientists will say they are sub-species. And when we talk about dog breeds, that's what we are talking about: artificially created sub-species of the species Canis familiaris. Or do they call it Canis lupus var. familiaris now?  I've been out of school too darn long!

Look at the differences between the four Belgian Shepherd Dogs -
but they are genetically the same breed.  They are not even different
enough to make them into 'sub-species' of the same species, if you
want to continue with the Giraffes and Zebras analogy.

Back to GSDs:
There are a hell of a lot of alleles involved, and they get 'shuffled' with
each pairing - that is why dog breeding is still more Art than Science.  
Plus you need to take into account the odd mutation of a gene or three.  

So of course if you breed a dog from a family of working dogs they may be
(slightly) different  IN THE EXPRESSION OF THEIR GSD / DOMESTIC DOG 
genes;  same again if you breed one or another type of Showline from a
history of dogs who were bred specifically for Shows / phenotypical express
-ion, over sports / working / temporamental abilities.  And so then if you mix
the lines up again, you'll get some differences show up for those too.  But
we are still talking one breed.  The Finnish researchers may have found a
1000 owners & dogs, but without knowing a lot more about the breeding and
genetic background of those 1000 dogs  (e.g.  4 generations home-bred in
Finland vs. 1st generation or direct import from Germany, etc etc), it is hard
to see that these 'findings' are either provable, relevant, or useful.

That's interesting, Joanro. I guess I misunderstood what you said. Sorry. So why did they introduce another breed in order to to get rough coats if they already had them?

At one time, (Decades ago) A stud dog's son was used in place of his famous father. 
Somehow they were genetically different enough as they discovered this to be a true claim. All the progeny had to be tested and it was a true mess.
Some came back as from the father others from the son. 

To the OP, your link just shows charts (I'm guessing the genetic marker charts) no text or article.

Today's man is a lot different from the one that existed hundreds of years ago, does that make today's man genetically different from his ancient ancestors 

Blitzen, I don't know where or when you're talking about another breed introduced for the wire coat. Far as I know it was already there. Before the varieties were made two separate breeds, you had to indicate coat type. So the wire already was there. since the Fox Terrier has been established as a breed (18 something) I don't think they've mixed anything in.