in breeding

[roxy and bear patterdale 3]

well after getting some advise from the good pepole on here i may just see it through. as for the sire it was 100% my dog although i think i already said that

[patterdale666 1,620]

these are 3 of the 4 pups from that breeding

Crackin pups bud, I really like the one on the right

[Alli 923]

well after getting some advise from the good pepole on here i may just see it through. as for the sire it was 100% my dog although i think i already said that

well after getting some advise from the good pepole on here i may just see it through. as for the sire it was 100% my dog although i think i already said that

I LINE BREED WHENEVER POSSIBLE, IVE JUST DONE MOTHER SON MATING PUPS 100PCT OK,

[roxy and bear patterdale 3]

cool cheers for that. just spoke to my mate thats into breeding labs and he said its well frowned apon

Edited November 24, 2011 by roxy and bear patterdale

[Alli 923]

cool cheers for that. just spoke to my mate thats into breeding labs and he said its well frowned apon

LABS, FROWNED APON. WORKING TERRIERS KEEP IT CLOSE, :yes:

[brog 670]

these are 3 of the 4 pups from that breeding

NICE, can i have the one on the left

is the one is the one in ur left hand taken??

there all taken mate gifted to digging pals cheers for the comments

[long dogs 580]

these are 3 of the 4 pups from that breeding

NICE, can i have the one on the left

is the one is the one in ur left hand taken??

there all taken mate gifted to digging pals cheers for the comments

good luck with them,look crackers

[SON OFF SHAM 34]

Nothing wrong with keeping a line close bred accidentally on purpose, or not. Seen some good workers bred that way deliberately. Don't knock it !!!

Edited to say more father/daughter, mother/son matings. Can't see any problem as long as they're going to be used for work among close friends. Check it out ! Could be surprised at the result.

Edited November 24, 2011 by SON OFF SHAM

[Mosby 355]

If your dogs are an outcross and then bred brother to sister there is no other breeding that will give you more diversity in a litter. Recessives and dominants can all come out. Cheesy example but the real popular breed cross is the lab with the poodle - so called labradoodle. When you do a first cross you will get dogs that look very similar. The dominant traits align to create a litter of similar confirmation. When you then breed the brothers to sisters of that cross you will see a wide variety of types with qualities from both the lab and the poodle in varying degrees. Coats could be smooth or curly. You can get lean or barrel chested. But once you choose a type from that 2nd cross you start narrowing type and genetics with a 3rd brother sister cross. From the third cross on you are getting a smaller and smaller pool. Therefore, if your dogs are out crossed then you will have a wider variety of genetic types to choose from. If your dogs are already a set type and line then you will get more like it. The risks of deformity and genetic malady is just as likely with an unknown outcross as an unplanned inbreeding. Breeding a father to a daughter or a mother to a son is actually much quicker at narrowing the gene pool than an initial inbreeding of brother to sister. Interesting which one is the more controversially. I would keep the litter. If the dogs were both good dogs I wouldn't shy from doing it intentionally.

[stormyboy 1,352]

So are you ,going to see the mating through,got people to take on Pups,or is it the Jab ? My point was,about unplanned mating,Timing etc.Not about Inbreeding ,I don't see a problem if you Know the "Mating",just sometimes unplanned matings ,can be put across as Planned and Pedigree get's made up,Due to the Fact,THE SIRE IS NOT KNOWN FOR SURE .

 

With respect,may i make an observation? 1. Quote-"My point was,about unplanned mating,Timing etc.Not about Inbreeding " The thread is about INBREEDING.

2. quote-"sometimes unplanned matings ,can be put across as Planned and Pedigree get's made up,Due to the Fact,THE SIRE IS NOT KNOWN FOR SURE . ". He knows the parentage-the dogs tied,and the bitch had not been near any other dog.

3. quote-"I don't see a problem if you Know the "Mating". See point 2.

 

Why post?

 

Good post Mosby.

Edited November 25, 2011 by stormyboy

[roxy and bear patterdale 3]

If your dogs are an outcross and then bred brother to sister there is no other breeding that will give you more diversity in a litter. Recessives and dominants can all come out. Cheesy example but the real popular breed cross is the lab with the poodle - so called labradoodle. When you do a first cross you will get dogs that look very similar. The dominant traits align to create a litter of similar confirmation. When you then breed the brothers to sisters of that cross you will see a wide variety of types with qualities from both the lab and the poodle in varying degrees. Coats could be smooth or curly. You can get lean or barrel chested. But once you choose a type from that 2nd cross you start narrowing type and genetics with a 3rd brother sister cross. From the third cross on you are getting a smaller and smaller pool. Therefore, if your dogs are out crossed then you will have a wider variety of genetic types to choose from. If your dogs are already a set type and line then you will get more like it. The risks of deformity and genetic malady is just as likely with an unknown outcross as an unplanned inbreeding. Breeding a father to a daughter or a mother to a son is actually much quicker at narrowing the gene pool than an initial inbreeding of brother to sister. Interesting which one is the more controversially. I would keep the litter. If the dogs were both good dogs I wouldn't shy from doing it intentionally.

 

cheers for that. both are very good dogs and so are there parents. i have decided to see it through(let nature take its course) she may not even be pregnant but they did get locked together.

[roxy and bear patterdale 3]

small update on this she is due anytime now.

[sheaba 30]

keep the updates comen.

[hogdog 61]

The risks of deformity and genetic malady is just as likely with an unknown outcross as an unplanned inbreeding.

 

That's simply not true, almost all genetic diseases are recessive and so the mathematical chances of two unrelated dogs having the same recessive genes (and therefore allowing their expression) is infinitely higher than with a related dogs.

 

Breeding a father to a daughter or a mother to a son is actually much quicker at narrowing the gene pool than an initial inbreeding of brother to sister.

 

Again, not true. The coefficient of inbreeding in mother-son/father-daughter is 12.5 %, the average* coefficient of inbreeding for brother-sister is 25%.

 

*I will concede that brother-sister breedings can result in higher or lower than 25% COE.

 

The other stuff you said makes alot of sense though, good stuff.

Edited January 10, 2012 by hogdog

[roxy and bear patterdale 3]

4 so far and dont think shes done yet