The Ins
and Outs of Pedigree Analysis, Genetic Diversity, and Genetic Disease Control
by Jerold
S. Bell, D.V.M.
(This is an updated version
of an article that originally appeared in the American Kennel Club Gazette in
September 1992 entitled, “Getting What You Want From Your Breeding
Program.” It is reprinted with the
permission of Dr. Bell.)
IT’S ALL IN THE GENES
As dog breeders, we engage in
genetic "experiments" each time we plan a mating. The type of mating selected should coincide
with your goals. To some breeders, determining which traits will appear in the
offspring of a mating is like rolling the dice ‑ a combination of luck
and chance. For others, producing
certain traits involves more skill than luck ‑ the result of careful
study and planning. As breeders, we
must understand how we manipulate genes within our breeding stock to produce
the kinds of dogs we want. We have to
first understand dogs as a species, then dogs as genetic individuals.
The species, Canis familiaris,
includes all breeds of the domestic dog. Although we can argue that there is
little similarity between a Chihuahua and a Saint Bernard, or that established
breeds are separate entities among themselves, they all are genetically the
same species. While a mating within a
breed may be considered outbred, it still must be viewed as part of the whole
genetic picture: a mating within an isolated, closely related, interbred
population. Each breed was developed by close breeding and inbreeding among a
small group of founding canine ancestors, either through a long period of
genetic selection or by intensely inbreeding a smaller number of generations.
The process established the breed's characteristics and made the dogs in it
breed true.
When evaluating your breeding
program, remember that most traits you're seeking cannot be changed, fixed or
created in a single generation. The
more information you can obtain on how certain traits have been transmitted by
your dog's ancestors, the better you can prioritize your breeding goals. Tens of thousands of genes interact to
produce a single dog. All genes are
inherited in pairs, one pair from the father and one from the mother. If the pair of inherited genes from both
parents is identical, the pair is called homozygous. If the genes in the pair are not alike, the pair is called
heterozygous. Fortunately, the gene
pairs that make a dog a dog and not a cat are always homozygous. Similarly, the gene pairs that make a
certain breed always breed true are also homozygous. . Therefore, a large
proportion of homozygous non-variable pairs - those that give a breed its
specific standard - exist within each breed. It is the variable gene pairs,
like those that control color, size and angulation, that produce variations
within a breed.
BREEDING BY PEDIGREE
Outbreeding brings together two dogs less related than the
average for the breed. This promotes
more heterozygosity, and gene diversity within each dog by matching pairs of
unrelated genes from different ancestors.
Outbreeding can also mask the expression of recessive genes, and allow
their propagation in the carrier state.
Most
outbreeding tends to produce more variation within a litter. An exception would be if the parents are so
dissimilar that they create a uniformity of heterozygosity. This is what usually occurs in a mismating
between two breeds. The resultant
litter tends to be uniform, but demonstrates "half‑way points"
between the dissimilar traits of the parents.
Such litters may be phenotypically uniform, but will rarely breed true
due to the mix of dissimilar genes.
A reason to outbreed would
be to bring in new traits that your breeding stock does not possess. While the
parents may be genetically dissimilar, you should choose a mate that corrects
your dog's faults but phenotypically complements your dog's good traits.
It is not unusual to produce an
excellent quality dog from an outbred litter.
The abundance of genetic variability can place all the right pieces in
one individual. Many top‑winning
show dogs are outbred. Consequently,
however, they may have low inbreeding coefficients and may lack the ability to
uniformly pass on their good traits to their offspring. After an outbreeding, breeders may want to
breed back to dogs related to their original stock, to increase homozygosity
and attempt to solidify newly acquired traits.
Linebreeding attempts to concentrate
the genes of a specific ancestor or ancestors through their appearance multiple
times in a pedigree. The ancestor
should appear behind more than one offspring.
If an ancestor always appears behind the same offspring, you are only
linebreeding on the approximately 50 percent of the genes passed to the
offspring and not the ancestor itself.
It is better for linebred ancestors to appear on both
the sire's and the dam's sides of the pedigree. That way their genes have a
better chance of pairing back up in the resultant pups. Genes from common ancestors have a greater
chance of expression when paired with each other than when paired with genes
from other individuals, which may mask or alter their effects.
A linebreeding may produce a puppy
with magnificent qualities, but if those qualities are not present in any of
the ancestors the pup has been linebred on, it may not breed true. Therefore, careful selection of mates is
important, but careful selection of puppies from the resultant litter is also
important to fulfill your genetic goals.
Without this, you are reducing your chances of concentrating the genes
of the linebred ancestor.
Increasing an individual's
homozygosity through linebreeding may not, however, reproduce an outbred
ancestor. If an ancestor is outbred and
generally heterozygous (Aa), increasing homozygosity will produce more AA and
aa. The way to reproduce an outbred ancestor is to mate two individuals that
mimic the appearance and pedigree of the ancestor's parents.
Inbreeding significantly increases
homozygosity, and therefore uniformity in litters. Inbreeding can increase the expression of both beneficial and
detrimental recessive genes through pairing up. If a recessive gene (a) is rare in the population, it will almost
always be masked by a dominant gene (A).
Through inbreeding, a rare recessive gene (a) can be passed from a
heterozygous (Aa) common ancestor through both the sire and dam, creating a
homozygous recessive (aa) offspring. Inbreeding does not create undesirable
genes, it simply increases the expression of those that are already present in
a heterozygous state.
Inbreeding can exacerbate a
tendency toward disorders controlled by multiple genes, such as hip dysplasia
and congenital heart anomalies. Unless
you have prior knowledge of what milder linebreedings on the common ancestors
have produced, inbreeding may expose your puppies (and puppy buyers) to
extraordinary risk of genetic defects.
Research has shown that inbreeding depression, or diminished health and
viability through inbreeding is directly related to the amount of detrimental
recessive genes present. Some lines
thrive with inbreeding, and some do not.
PEDIGREE ANALYSIS
Geneticists' and breeders'
definitions of inbreeding vary. A geneticist views inbreeding as a measurable
number that goes up whenever there is a common ancestor between the sire's and
dam's sides of the pedigree; a breeder considers inbreeding to be close
inbreeding, such as father‑to‑daughter or brother‑to‑sister
matings. A common ancestor, even in the eighth generation, will increase the
measurable amount of inbreeding in the pedigree.
The inbreeding coefficient (or Wright’s coefficient) is an estimate of
the percentage of all the variable gene pairs that are homozygous due to
inheritance from common ancestors. It
is also the average chance that any single gene pair is homozygous due to
inheritance from a common ancestor. In
order to determine whether a particular mating is an outbreeding or inbreeding
relative to your breed, you must determine the breed's average inbreeding
coefficient. The average inbreeding
coefficient of a breed will vary depending on the breed's popularity or the age
of its breeding population. A mating
with an inbreeding coefficient of 14 percent based on a ten generation
pedigree, would be considered moderate inbreeding for a Labrador Retriever (a
popular breed with a low average inbreeding coefficient), but would be considered
outbred for an Irish Water Spaniel (a rare breed with a higher average
inbreeding coefficient).
For the calculated
inbreeding coefficient of a pedigree to be accurate, it must be based on
several generations. Inbreeding in the
fifth and later generations (background inbreeding) often has a profound effect
on the genetic makeup of the offspring represented by the pedigree. In studies conducted on dog breeds, the
difference in inbreeding coefficients based on four versus eight generation
pedigrees varied immensely. A four
generation pedigree containing 28 unique ancestors for 30 positions in the
pedigree could generate a low inbreeding coefficient, while eight generations
of the same pedigree, which contained 212 unique ancestors out of 510 possible
positions, had a considerably higher inbreeding coefficient. What seemed like an outbred mix of genes in
a couple of generations, appeared as a linebred concentration of genes from
influential ancestors in extended generations.
The process of calculating coefficients
is too complex to present here. Several
books that include how to compute coefficients are indicated at the end of this
article; some computerized canine pedigree programs also compute coefficients. The analyses in this article were performed
using CompuPed, by RCI Software.
Pedigree of
Gordon Setter Laurel Hill Braxfield Bilye
( a spayed female owned by Dr. Jerold and Mrs. Candice Bell, and co-bred
by Mary Poos and Laura Bedford.)
Dual CH Loch Adair Monarch
CH Sutherland MacDuff
| CH Sutherland Dunnideer Waltz
CH
Sutherland Gallant
| | CH Afternod Kyle of Sutherland
| CH Sutherland Pavane
| CH Sutherland Xenia
CH Loch Adair Foxfire
| |
Afternod Fidemac
| | CH Loch Adair
Peer of Sutherland, CD
| | | CH Wee Laurie Adair
| CH Sutherland Lass of Shambray
| |
CH Afternod Callant
| CH Afternod Karma
|
CH Afternod Amber
CH Braxfield Andrew of Aberdeen
|
| Afternod
Fidemac
|
| Am.Cn.CH Afternod
Scot of Blackbay, CD
|
| | CH Afternod Alder
|
| Am.Cn.CH Forecast Trade
Winds, CD
|
| | | Bud O'Field Brookview
|
| | CH Oak Lynn's Bonnie Bridget
|
| | Borderland Taupie
|
CH Afternod Ember VI, CD
| | CH Afternod Simon
| |
Afternod Profile of Sark
| |
| CH Afternod
Heiress of Sark
| CH Afternod Ember V
| | CH Afternod Callant
| CH Afternod Maud MacKenzie
| CH
Afternod Amber
LAUREL HILL BRAXFIELD BILYE
| CH Afternod Callant
| Dual CH Loch Adair Monarch
| | Loch Adair Diana of Redchico
| CH Sutherland MacDuff
| |
| CH Afternod Anagram
| | CH
Sutherland Dunnideer Waltz
| | CH Hi‑Laway's Calopin
|
CH Kendelee Pendragon
|
| | CH
Afternod Callant
|
| | CH Wee Jock
Adair, CD
|
| | | Loch Adair Diana of Redchico
|
| CH Afternod Nighean
Kendelee
|
| | CH Afternod Simon
|
| CH Afternod
Wendee
|
|
Afternod Dee of Aberdeen
CH Halcyon Belle‑Amie
| Dual CH Loch Adair Monarch
| CH Sutherland MacDuff
| | CH Sutherland Dunnideer Waltz
| CH Sutherland Gallant
| | | CH Afternod Kyle of Sutherland
| | CH Sutherland
Pavane
| | CH Sutherland Xenia
CH Loch Adair Firefly, WD
| Afternod
Fidemac
| CH Loch Adair Peer of Sutherland, CD
| | CH Wee Laurie Adair
CH
Sutherland Lass of Shambray
| CH Afternod
Callant
CH Afternod Karma
CH
Afternod Amber
To
visualize some of these concepts, please refer to the above pedigree. Linebred
ancestors in this pedigree are in color, to help visualize their
contribution. The paternal grandsire,
CH Loch Adair Foxfire, and the maternal grandam, CH Loch Adair Firefly WD, are
full siblings, making this a first‑cousin mating. The inbreeding coefficient for a first
cousin mating is 6.25%, which is considered a mild level of inbreeding. Lists of inbreeding coefficients based on
different types of matings are shown in the accompanying table.
In Bilye’s pedigree, an inbreeding
coefficient based on four generations computes to 7.81%. This is not
significantly different from the estimate based on the first‑cousin
mating alone. Inbreeding coefficients
based on increasing numbers of generations are as follows: five generations,
13.34%; six generations, 18.19%; seven generations, 22.78%; eight generations,
24.01%; ten generations, 28.63%; and twelve generations, 30.81%. The inbreeding coefficient of 30.81 percent
is more than what you would find in a parent‑to‑offspring mating
(25%). As you can see, the background inbreeding has far more influence on the
total inbreeding coefficient than the first‑cousin mating, which only appears to be its strongest influence.
Knowledge of the degree of
inbreeding in a pedigree does not necessarily help you unless you know whose
genes are being concentrated. The percent blood coefficient measures the
relatedness between an ancestor and the individual represented by the
pedigree. It estimates the probable
percentage of genes passed down from a common ancestor. We know that a parent passes on an average
of 50% of its genes, while a grandparent passes on 25%, a great‑grandparent
12.5%, and so on. For every time the
ancestor appears in the pedigree, its percentage of passed‑on genes can
be added up and its "percentage of blood" estimated.
In many breeds, an influential individual may not appear until later
generations, but then will appear so many times that it necessarily contributes
a large proportion of genes to the pedigree. This can occur in breeds, due either prolific ancestors (usually
stud dogs), or a small population of dogs originating the breed. Based on a twenty-five generation pedigree of
Bilye, there are only 852 unique ancestors who appear a total of over
twenty-million times.
Pedigree Analysis of Laurel Hill Braxfield Bilye
(computed
to 25 generations)
1st
Generation
Linebred Percentage of appearance # times in
Ancestors of
Blood in pedigree pedigree
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑---------------------------‑‑‑
CH Afternod Drambuie 33.20% 6 33
CH Afternod Sue 27.05% 7 61
CH Afternod Callant 26.56% 5 13
AGrand-Parents@ 25.00% 2 1
CH Sutherland Gallant 25.00% 3 2
CH Sutherland MacDuff 25.00% 3 3
CH Sutherland Lass of Shambray 25.00% 3 2
CH Wilson's Corrie, C.D. 22.30% 7 200
CH Afternod Buchanon 20.22% 7 48
Loch Adair Diana of Redchico 17.97% 5 12
CH EEG=s Scotia Nodrog Rettes 17.76% 8 181
Afternod Ember of Gordon Hill 17.14% 8 76
CH Afternod Hickory 16.21% 6 27
CH Black Rogue of Serlway 15.72% 9 480
CH Afternod Woodbine 14.45% 6 15
CH Fast=s Falcon of Windy Hill 13.82% 8 66
Afternod Fidemac 13.67% 5 7
CH Page's MacDonegal II 13.43% 7 56
Afternod Hedera 13.38% 7 56
CH Downside Bonnie of Serlway 12.90% 10 708
Peter of Crombie 12.76% 11 3,887
AGreat-Grand-Parents@ 12.50% 3 1
CH Afternod Amber 12.50% 5 5
Ben of Crombie 11.83% 11 7,584
Stylish William 11.18% 13 23,764
Stylish Billie 11.08% 14 70,542
Stylish Ranger 10.80% 15 297,331
CH Afternod Kate 10.74% 6 17
Heather Grouse 10.61% 16
1,129,656
Afternod Hedemac 10.45% 7 28
The above analysis shows the
ancestral contribution of the linebred ancestors in Bilye’s pedigree. Those dogs in color were present in the
five-generation pedigree. CH Afternod
Drambuie has the highest genetic contribution of all of the linebred
ancestors. He appears 33 times between
the sixth and eighth generations. One
appearance in the sixth generation contributes 1.56% of the genes to the
pedigree. His total contribution is
33.2% of Bilye’s genes, second only to the parents. Therefore, in this
pedigree, the most influential ancestor doesn't even appear in the
five-generation pedigree. His dam,
CH Afternod Sue, appears 61 times between the seventh and tenth generations,
and contributes more genes to the pedigree than a grandparent.
Foundation dogs that formed the
Gordon Setter breed also play a great role in the genetic makeup of today’s
dogs. Heather Grouse appears over one
million times between the sixteenth and twenty-fifth generations, and almost
doubles those appearances beyond the twenty-fifth generation. He contributes over ten percent of the genes
to Bilye’s pedigree. This example shows
that the depth of the pedigree is very important in estimating the genetic
makeup of an individual. Any
detrimental recessive genes carried by Heather Grouse or other founding dogs,
would be expected to be widespread in the breed.
BREEDING BY APPEARANCE
Many breeders plan matings solely
on the appearance of a dog and not on its pedigree or the relatedness of the
prospective parents. This is called assortative
mating. Breeders use positive
assortative matings (like‑to‑like) to solidify traits, and negative
assortative matings (like‑to‑unlike) when they wish to correct
traits or bring in traits their breeding stock may lack.
Some individuals may share
desirable characteristics, but they inherit them differently. This is especially true of polygenic traits,
such as ear set, bite, or length of forearm.
Breeding two phenotypically similar but genotypically unrelated dogs
together would not necessarily reproduce these traits. Conversely, each individual with the same
pedigree will not necessarily look or breed alike.
Breedings should not be planned
solely on the basis of the pedigree or appearance alone. Matings should be based on a combination of
appearance and ancestry. If you are
trying to solidify a certain trait ‑ like topline ‑ and it is one
you can observe in the parents and the linebred ancestors of two related dogs,
then you can be more confident that you will attain your goal.
GENETIC DIVERSITY
Some breed clubs advocate codes of
ethics that discourage linebreeding or inbreeding, as an attempt to increase
breed genetic diversity. The types of matings utilized do not cause
the loss of genes from a breed gene pool.
It occurs through selection; the use and non-use of offspring. If some breeders linebreed to certain dogs
that they favor, and others linebreed to other dogs that they favor, then breed-wide
genetic diversity is maintained.
In a theoretical mating with four
offspring, we are dealing with four gene pairs. The sire is homozygous at 50% of his gene pairs (two out of
four), while the dam is homozygous at 75% of her gene pairs. It is reasonable to assume that she is more
inbred than the sire.
A basic
tenet of population genetics is that gene frequencies do not change from the
parental generation to the offspring.
This will occur regardless of the homozygosity or heterozygosity of the
parents, or whether the mating is an outbreeding, linebreeding, or
inbreeding. This is the nature of
genetic recombination.
There is a lack of gene
diversity at the first (olive) gene pair, so that only one type of gene
combination can be produced: homozygous olive.
As the sire is homozygous lime at the third gene pair, and the dam is
homozygous blue, all offspring will be heterozygous at the third gene
pair. Depending on the dominant or
recessive nature of the blue or lime genes, all offspring will appear the same
for this trait due to a uniformity of heterozygosity.
If offspring D is used as a
prolific breeder, and none of the other offspring are bred to a great extent,
gene frequencies in the breed will change.
As dog D lacks the orange gene in the second pair and the purple gene in
the fourth pair, the frequencies of these genes will diminish in the
breed. They will be replaced by higher
frequencies of the red and pink genes.
This shifts the gene pool, and the breed’s genetic diversity. Of course, dogs have more than four gene
pairs, and the overuse of dog D to the exception of others can affect the gene
frequency of thousands of genes. Again,
it is selection (for example of dog D to the exception of others), and not the
types of matings he is involved in that alters gene frequencies.
Breeders should select the
best individuals from all kennel lines, so as to not create new genetic
bottlenecks. There is a tendency for
many breeders to breed to a male; who produced no epileptics in matings to several
epileptic dams, to an OFA excellent stud, or to the top winning dog in the show
ring. Regardless of the popularity of
the breed, if everyone is breeding to a single studdog, (the popular sire syndrome) the gene pool
will drift in that dog’s direction and there will be a loss of genetic
diversity. Too much breeding to one dog
will give the gene pool an extraordinary dose of his genes, and also whatever
detrimental recessives he may carry, to be uncovered in later generations. This can cause future breed related genetic
disease through the founders effect.
Dogs who are poor examples of the
breed should not be used simply to maintain diversity. Related dogs with desirable qualities will
maintain diversity, and improve the breed.
Breeders should concentrate on selecting toward a breed standard, based
on the ideal temperament, performance, and conformation, and should select
against the significant breed related health issues. Using progeny and sib-based information to select against both
polygenic disorders and those without a known mode of inheritance will allow
greater control.
Rare breeds with small gene pools
have concerns about genetic diversity. What constitutes acceptable diversity
versus too restricted diversity? The
problems with genetic diversity in purebred populations concern the fixing of
deleterious recessive genes, which when homozygous cause impaired health. Lethal recessives place a drain on the gene
pool either prenatally, or before reproductive age. They can manifest themselves through smaller litter size, or
neonatal death. Other deleterious
recessives cause disease, while not affecting reproduction.
Problems with a lack of genetic
diversity arise at the gene locus level.
There is no specific level or percentage of inbreeding that causes
impaired health or vigor. It has been
shown that some inbred strains of animals thrive generation after generation,
while others fail to thrive. If there
is no diversity (non-variable gene pairs for a breed) but the homozygote is not
detrimental, there is no effect on breed health. The characteristics that make a breed reproduce true to its
standard are based on non-variable gene pairs.
A genetic health problem arises for a breed when a detrimental allele
increases in frequency and homozygosity.
GENETIC CONSERVATION
The perceived problem of a limited
gene pool has caused some breeds to advocate outbreeding of all dogs. Studies in genetic conservation and rare
breeds have shown that this practice actually contributes to the loss of genetic
diversity. By uniformly crossing all
“lines” in a breed, you eliminate the differences between them, and therefore
the diversity between individuals. This
practice in livestock breeding has significantly reduced diversity, and caused
the loss of unique rare breeds. The
process of maintaining healthy “lines” or families of dogs, with many breeders
crossing between lines and breeding back as they see fit maintains diversity in
the gene pool. It is the varied opinion
of breeders as to what constitutes the ideal dog, and their selection of
breeding stock that maintains breed diversity.
The Doberman Pincher breed is
large, and genetically diverse. The
breed has a problem with von Willibrand’s disease, an autosomal recessive
bleeding disorder. Based on genetic
testing, the frequency of the defective gene is 52.5% (23% normal, 49% carriers
and 28% affected). Therefore, there is
diminished genetic diversity in this breed at the von Willibrand’s locus. Doberman Pincher breeders can identify
carrier and affected dogs, and decrease the defective gene frequency through
selection of normal-testing offspring for breeding. By not just eliminating carriers, but replacing them with
normal-testing offspring, genetic diversity will be conserved.
Dalmatians have a defective
autosomal recessive purine metabolism gene that can cause urate bladder stones
and crystals, and/or a skin disorder called Dalmatian Bronzing Syndrome. It is believed that all Dalmatians are
homozygous recessive for the defective gene.
At one time, the breed and the AKC approved a crossbreeding program to a
few Pointers, to bring normal-purine metabolism genes into the gene pool. The program was abandoned by the National
club for several reasons including; concern about the impact of other Pointer
genes foreign to the Dalmatian gene pool, and unacceptable spotting patterns in
the crossbreds. The crossbreeding
program still exists, and greater than ten generations from pure pointer
influence is producing properly spotted, normal-purine Dalmatians. If the breed ever allows these dogs into
the gene pool, they will have to be concerned about popular sire effects and
limited diversity from using the normal-purine dogs too extensively.
The Akita has several
breed-related autoimmune disorders that although infrequent, occur at
frequencies greater than other breeds.
These include uveodermatological syndrome, pemphigus, sebaceous
adenitis, juvenile arthritis, myasthenia gravis, and autoimmune thyroiditis. Research has shown that there is a lack of
diversity at a major histocompatability gene in the breed, with a single allele
occurring at a very high frequency. The
major histocompatability complex is integral to a properly functioning immune
system. The relationship of this lack
of diversity to autoimmunity is being studied.
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Decisions to linebreed, inbreed or
outbreed should be made based on the knowledge of an individual dog's traits
and those of its ancestors. Inbreeding
will quickly identify the good and bad recessive genes the parents share in the
offspring. Unless you have prior
knowledge of what the pups of milder linebreedings on the common ancestors were
like, you may be exposing your puppies (and puppy buyers) to extraordinary risk
of genetic defects. In your matings,
the inbreeding coefficient should only increase because you are specifically
linebreeding (increasing the percentage of blood) to selected ancestors.
Don't set too many goals in each
generation, or your selective pressure for each goal will necessarily become
weaker. Genetically complex or dominant
traits should be addressed early in a long‑range breeding plan, as they
may take several generations to fix. Traits with major dominant genes become
fixed more slowly, as the heterozygous (Aa) individuals in a breed will not be
readily differentiated from the homozygous‑dominant (AA)
individuals. Desirable recessive traits
can be fixed in one generation because individuals that show such
characteristics are homozygous for the recessive genes. Dogs that breed true
for numerous matings and generations should be preferentially selected for
breeding stock. This prepotency is due to homozygosity of dominant (AA) and
recessive (aa) genes.
If you linebreed and are not
happy with what you have produced, breeding to a less related line immediately
creates an outbred line and brings in new traits. Repeated outbreeding to
attempt to dilute detrimental recessive genes is not a desirable method of
genetic disease control. Recessive
genes cannot be diluted; they are either present or not. Outbreeding carriers multiples and further
spreads the defective gene(s) in the gene pool. If a dog is a known carrier or has high carrier risk through
pedigree analysis, it can be retired from breeding, and replaced with one or
two quality offspring. Those offspring
should be bred, and replaced with quality offspring of their own, with the hope
of losing the defective gene.
Trying to develop your
breeding program scientifically can be an arduous, but rewarding, endeavor. By
taking the time to understand the types of breeding schemes available, you can
concentrate on your goals towards producing a better dog.
About Dr. Jerold Bell
Dr. Bell is director of the
Clinical Veterinary Genetics Course for the Tufts University School of Veterinary
Medicine and national project administrator for numerous genetic disease
control programs of pure-bred dogs. He
performs genetic counseling through Veterinary Genetic Counseling and practices
small animal medicine in Connecticut.
He and his wife breed Gordon Setters.
This article can be reprinted with the permission of Dr. Bell
(geneticvet@aol.com).
Further Reading:
If you are interested in learning
more about these subjects, consult the following books:
Abnormalities of Companion
Animals: Analysis of Heritability.
C.W. Foley, J.F. Lasley, and G.D. Osweiler, Iowa State University Press,
Ames, Iowa. 1979.
Genetics for Dog Breeders. F.B. Hutt, W.H. Freeman Co, San Francisco,
California. 1979.
Genetics for Dog
Breeders. R.
Robinson, Pergamon Press, Oxford England. 1990.
Genetics of the Dog. (equally applicable to cats &
other animals) M.B. Willis, Howell Book
House, New York, New York. 1989.
Veterinary Genetics. F. W. Nicholas, Clarendon Press,
Oxford England. 1987.