John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
If you care to read the full article it will take you to Nerdsville.
Be prepared for a long read.
Be prepared for a long read.
dogs homozygosity
- Thread starter John Gryphon
- Start date
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Interesting - haven’t read it all, but fundamentally spending huge sums of money on a top pedigree dog is unlikely to give you a fantastic dog.
Much much more important is how well it is socialised, trained etc etc
Makes sense in many ways. If you look at highly trained working dogs doing complex tasks, such as those used by the military, police, mountain rescue etc they are all a pretty mixed bunch come from all sorts of backgrounds. Many are “rescue” dogs. They are selected for their characters and the handler and the dog are trained as one partnership.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
YES!
Your dog is YOUR DOG,
bonding ,socialising and being out on tasks with training for what you want it to do , and patience is all you need ,
No matter what breed ( like humans though some are born with a screw loose lol), unless you want a robot !!! But trying to train any dog to be a robot , is NO good
It's a dog ffs , it needs to love its master, as its master loves it ,
The bond soon develops, and the dog will/ is your best mate and understands what YOU / HIS BEST MATE ,
Wants it to do , it's takes time and develops into a great relationship
Hence the saying ,,,,,,
Dog is man's best friend
Some of the best dogs I've had have been x breeds, and heinze 57 lol
They all lived to 16 ,some 18 , with no vet bills apart from stitch ups ,
And was grafters , didn't even have to give commands , no matter what disciplines / quarry I was shooting
Kjf
bonding ,socialising and being out on tasks with training for what you want it to do , and patience is all you need ,
No matter what breed ( like humans though some are born with a screw loose lol), unless you want a robot !!! But trying to train any dog to be a robot , is NO good
It's a dog ffs , it needs to love its master, as its master loves it ,
The bond soon develops, and the dog will/ is your best mate and understands what YOU / HIS BEST MATE ,
Wants it to do , it's takes time and develops into a great relationship
Hence the saying ,,,,,,
Dog is man's best friend
Some of the best dogs I've had have been x breeds, and heinze 57 lol
They all lived to 16 ,some 18 , with no vet bills apart from stitch ups ,
And was grafters , didn't even have to give commands , no matter what disciplines / quarry I was shooting
Kjf
Last edited:
The various kennel clubs have much to answer for. (pull pin throw grenade into pot, stand back). The kennel club have so messed up various breeds many organisations have had to start their own breeding programmes so they can get dogs with the required traits.
The Saarloos Wolfdog and the Czech Wolfdog are examples of attempting to breed out some of the domesticity that has become part of our pet dogs nature.
Quote from study. Thus, dog breed is generally a poor predictor of individual behavior and should not be used to inform decisions relating to selection of a pet dog.
I have two GSD’s, one a working line and one a show line, they have totally different characteristics and traits, confirming the study observation.
The Saarloos Wolfdog and the Czech Wolfdog are examples of attempting to breed out some of the domesticity that has become part of our pet dogs nature.
Quote from study. Thus, dog breed is generally a poor predictor of individual behavior and should not be used to inform decisions relating to selection of a pet dog.
I have two GSD’s, one a working line and one a show line, they have totally different characteristics and traits, confirming the study observation.
foxdropper
Well-Known Member
Whilst I agree with nurture over nature in some respects ,having bred terriers for the last 35 years that self entered by 12 months like clock work ,breeding defo comes in to it .In the hands of good dogmen mediocre breeding shines whilst given to a messer same dog will flounder .
Ive never intentionally stockbroken any of my terriers and I guess they learn by example being around chickens and sheep ,pigs and cattle from early age .
The saying you can’t make a silk purse from a pigs ear runs true in dogs imo but it needs the right man to get the best out of the breeding .
Ive never intentionally stockbroken any of my terriers and I guess they learn by example being around chickens and sheep ,pigs and cattle from early age .
The saying you can’t make a silk purse from a pigs ear runs true in dogs imo but it needs the right man to get the best out of the breeding .
So......This was the opening sentence....."Modern domestic dog breeds are only ~160 years old and are the result of selection for specific cosmetic traits"
And it is incorrect.
And it is incorrect.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
Said "modern" so i suppose its ones own interpretation of 'modern'
I am being a pedant.....But I do not think it is strictly true to say that modern breeds (160 yrs old) are the result of selection for specific cosmetic traits.
For example the English Pointer, The Sealyham Terrier, The Flat Coated Retriever 'were' not bred for specific cosmetic traits
Even today........Could we say that the Malinois or the Jadg Terrier are bred for specific cosmetic traits?
Perhaps it should have stated 'some' modern breeds.
It looks like a good read tbh and I will sit down and digest it over the weekend.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
I imagine a breeder of a 'new' type will endeavour to breed what he wants in it IE whether speed/point/courage/nose etc and then continue on for specific 'cosmetic' traits...why not breed a good looker ha ha.
Make sure that the Scotch is handy or there are a few pints in the fridge,its time consuming.
A couple of nice glasses of red will do nicely
This piece made me chuckle the other day - again I would not say that it is wholly correct but there are some salient points....Although to be honest, it was just this particular bit that I really liked "Hybrid vigor in dogs does NOT exist in practice. It only exists in theory - much like Communism"
See link below
My Labrador was not high dollar but from proven hunters on both sides, well socialized with small children from birth, very willing to work birds or ride in the jeep no matter to Sam he was there for the fun. Never did he quit on the hunt even when conditions were well below zero on the F scale, or when in the high 80's on doves. Best dog I ever knew. Perhaps his only defect was wanting to share my food ( my fault for this really) and the resulting scent after was able to clear a room.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
It does though IE simple greyhound x deerhound = what we call a Staghound,you blokes know as a lurcher.
The HV is readily evident there in the Aussie bush coursing `roo`s...greyhounds often last one chase.
The main concern with hybrid vigor is that is tends to give the public the notion that they can breed their dogs with anything and anyone and it will automatically be "healthier." This cannot be further from the truth. Two unhealthy dogs do not produce healthy puppies (*unless you are really lucky. In that case, buy me some lottery tickets). The types of "breeders" (term used loosely) that push the "hybrid vigor" myth are the types that get poor purebred quality dogs, then produce poor quality mixed breeds. No responsible breeder would do that. And there is not a single breed club in America that endorses that practice nor do I know of a single vet that endorses that practice. The people who do that are only after the mighty dollar. *There may be a handful of reasons to cross dog breeds for a specific purpose by responsible breeders, but I have yet to meet one.
What a crock! Basically every dog is a hybrid. All those famous stand alone US hounds....hybrids ha ha.
I know it exists......I just liked the reference to communism. Although......it doesn't always 'behave' like people expect - it generally improves fertility as opposed to cancelling out genetic diseases. And you can get unhealthy mongrels along with very healthy pedigree/registered dogs
Oh and regarding the increased fertility bit....don't let the mule find out
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
Or the Mallard in Aus.I know it exists......I just liked the reference to communism. Although......it doesn't always 'behave' like people expect - it generally improves fertility as opposed to cancelling out genetic diseases. And you can get unhealthy mongrels along with very healthy pedigree/registered dogs
Oh and regarding the increased fertility bit....don't let the mule find out
While the 'hybrid vigour' piece is rather polarised and OTT, there are a number of points that I cannot disagree with....
1. Health problems cannot be avoided by mixing breeds - they can only be reduced through responsible breeding
2. Additionally, purebreds are not unhealthy due to inbreeding. That is also a myth. Unhealthy purebreds are a result or poor and irresponsible breeding.
3. Two unhealthy dogs do not produce healthy puppies (*unless you are really lucky. In that case, buy me some lottery tickets)
4. There is no guarantee of health - mixed or purebred
5. Having a gene pool full of genetic disorders - large or small - and breeding irresponsibly is a problem
1. Health problems cannot be avoided by mixing breeds - they can only be reduced through responsible breeding
2. Additionally, purebreds are not unhealthy due to inbreeding. That is also a myth. Unhealthy purebreds are a result or poor and irresponsible breeding.
3. Two unhealthy dogs do not produce healthy puppies (*unless you are really lucky. In that case, buy me some lottery tickets)
4. There is no guarantee of health - mixed or purebred
5. Having a gene pool full of genetic disorders - large or small - and breeding irresponsibly is a problem
It is an interesting read and I will re-read again.
Another sentence that stands out is this one.................."We developed Darwin’s Ark as an open data resource for collecting owner-reported phenotypes and genetic data and invited any dog owner to enroll their dog"
Hmmmm so the study is based on information from has come from 'any dog owner' and these owners have reported back on 'phenotypes' or 'observable characteristics' on their own dogs.
How many times have you been told that 'Rex' is a very bold and confident dog only to find him as a pretty average type or perhaps more 'high energy' than bold? How many times have I seen dogs with 'very high prey drive' chase a hare for a couple of hundred yards then peel off back to the handler?
The information is certainly interesting and I will enjoy a second read.
Another sentence that stands out is this one.................."We developed Darwin’s Ark as an open data resource for collecting owner-reported phenotypes and genetic data and invited any dog owner to enroll their dog"
Hmmmm so the study is based on information from has come from 'any dog owner' and these owners have reported back on 'phenotypes' or 'observable characteristics' on their own dogs.
How many times have you been told that 'Rex' is a very bold and confident dog only to find him as a pretty average type or perhaps more 'high energy' than bold? How many times have I seen dogs with 'very high prey drive' chase a hare for a couple of hundred yards then peel off back to the handler?
The information is certainly interesting and I will enjoy a second read.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
My old dogs had it...shut eyes and wade right into the biggest feral tomcats.
I don't doubt it bud....I bet 90% of the people that contributed to that study were from the 'fur-baby' brigade
Similar threads
