We have stored pedigrees of more than 2800 SC's all over the world and we are working at it daily.
Arko Biely Rodo x-ray0-0,
Atlas Larin dvor-
Borderlove White Power/Jana Goliasova, x-ray 0-0
Cheron Biely demon/Jozef Misik,x-ray 0-1
Chlum Janin ranc/Petr Sourek,x-ray 0-0
Fanfan Mustang/Anna Sabolova,x-ray 1-1
Garyk Janin ranc
Hunos Frigo Janin ranc, x-ray 0-0, Memorial Winner 2007
Irro z Dlouhych drah, x-ray 0-0
Panos Janin ranc, x-ray
Paris Cerny Coralek, x-ray 0-0, M
Bade Bile Kralovstvi
arko
Car Cerny koralek, x-ray 0-0
...some of the males, active in breeding.
If you need infos/pictures about a dog, breeder, male for mating, or... let us know!
In the mid of the eighty's we started to get genealogial/table of Dingo z Polhino dvora, Grant z Kmochova rodiste etc.
And pups out of 5 litters too. A great way to learn a lot! Also we have given the prepared furs and bones of the most important dogs out of our kennel to an institute in Switzerland. The only one on the world working in this way. take a look to www.albert-heim-stiftung.ch At the Univerity of Giessen the preparator prepared my beloved dogs for a sienceobjekt of the future.
By Dr. H.J.Hewson-fruend BA Pedigrees -
More to it than meets the eyes
A pedigree, by definition is a genealogical table or ancestral line.
The genealogical table, or family tree, lists descendents of given parents; an ancestral line lists the ancestors of a given individual.
As a generalization, the dog world only uses the ancestral line form of pedigree.
At face value, the pedigree is little more than an organised list of names.
It will tell you which animals were imported, and which animals are related.
However, it tells you nothing about the individuals apart from their sex.
It is necessary to have a whole range of additional information about the individual dogs before a pedigree can take on much meaning.
Even then, the value of ancestral line pedigrees is over-rated. They give the false impression of heritable contribution from ancestors. Consequently, breeders assume more information from them than is valid.
The number of ancestors A 4-generation pedigree has 30 ancestors;
a 10 Generation pedigree has 2.046 ancestors;
a 20-generation pedigree has 2 billion ancestors.
If the dog has a 2 year genaration lenth, the pup with 30-generation pedigree had approximately 2 billion ancestors running around about 60 years (or more)ago. This is nonsense. It is nonsense because the structure of an ancestral line pedigree is misleading.
A genealogical-table pedigree is much more valid. It is structured according to reality, but it can become extremly complex if all mateings and all descendents are included. Breeders indulge in in-breeding in order to increase levels of homozygosity - to increase the levels of pure breeding for given desired qualities.
So - called prepotent animals are thought to have high levels of homozygosity. Unfortunately, in-breeding leads to homozygosity for undesired qualities as well as desired qualities. It also leads to in-breeding depression.
Hence successful breeding involves a balance of selection against (and a tolerance of) problems versus relatively close in-breeding.
It is known as line-breeding. For example, cousin to cousin; nephew to aunt; and uncle to niece mateings are known as line-breeding. This means that the ancestral-line pedigree has a large number of common ancestors on it.
Hence a 30 generation ancestral-line pedigree has far fewer unique ancestors than 2 billion!!!
The Degree of inheritance from Ancestors Breeders attempt to have famous dogs appear in their pedigrees. They trust that these dogs will contribute to the quality of progeny bred in their kennels.Galton' s law of Ancestral Inheritance has helped to reinforce their trust. The law assumes that each pup gains 50% of its total inheritance from each parent and so on.
This is usually estimated in terms of percentage "blood". In reality, it is only correct for the first generation.
Beyond that, due to the way genetic material is assorted during meiosis, the law becomes increasingly inaccurate per generation (unless large populations, rather than specified dogs, are under investigation).
In interpreting a pedigree, it should be born in mind, that it is genes that are inherited, not qualities..
Consequently, two blue Australian Cattle dogs can produce red pups. Moreover, the capacity to produce chocolate pups may go unexposed for generations, or conversely, be lost.
The implication is that a particularly great dog ancestor may have passed on a given quality that is undetected for a few or several generations. Similarly, a known carrier of a given quality may have failed to pass that quality on to his descendents on the pedigree. A geneological-table pedigree, which includes all mateings and progeny, will reveal more of the genetic make up of a particular ancestor.
The probability of revealing segregation for a given quality, say red, is increased. Line-breeding is not what it appears Each unique ancestor will have a particular probability of contrbuting a particular allele.
However, the same does not hold for the ancestors of common ancestors. If the subject of our pedigree has a common gransire/dam, the proposition that the gransire/dame's parents will provide more than one contribution is invalid.
This is best understood using a genealogical-table. It means, that each individual, depending on how in-bred it is, may have very few unique ancestors in its recent ancestry.
A brother/sister mateing has 16 ancestors and a cousin/cousin mateing has 24 (assuming that they had no common ancestors). It also means that the appearance of a particular ancestor more than once on a pedigree, may lead to false expectations of itscontribution to your pup.
For example: If the common grandsire referred to above, had a famous sire, that sire would appear on both sides on the pedigree - good line breeding!! But, in reality, that great grandsire has made one genetic contribution only.
Thus, the so-called good line-breeding was on the common grandsire only. Pedigree Judging Some breed clubs are now indulging in pedigree judging at some of their specialty shows.
In effect, the best exemplars, using traditional conformation assessment based on their pedigree.
The basic for this is that "blood" is of greater importance than the animal. It is assumed that an outstanding specimen with a mediocre pedigree, may be outstanding due to chance or a favourable environment. Furthermore, since an animal can only pass on a 50% sample of its genetic information (not a specific combination), it may not be a good sire or dam.
The corollary is that an outstanding animal with excellent pedigree will be a good sire or dam (it will be more homozygous or more prepotent). At best, this is a form of praising the pprogeny tested ancestors of the subject of the pedigree.
At worst, it is full of fallacies, some of which are noted above. In addition, the (pedigree takes no account of external factors.
To quote Willis (1976), "a poor specimen is not improved by possecion of a prestigious pedigree, though a very badly-reared animal may be genetically better than he looks".
Moreover, the runt litter-mate posses the same pedigree as the outstanding specimen, reminding us that their parents passed on vastly different combinations of genetic information. To compound this, some pedigrees are falsified and do not state who all of the ancestors really are.
Progeny Testing The determination that a particular pedigree is excellent is based on the performance of ancestors on the pedigree.
That performance is estimated from both the quality of the dog and the quality of its progeny. Progeny testing is most successfuly carried out on males, because they can sirelarge numbers of progeny, where bitches are restricted in that way.
To be done effectively, a large number of artificial factors;choice/availability of quality bitches; breeders providing optimum conditions for pups to grow in; itself, progeny testing leads to an unjustifiable bias against 50% of the genetic contribution - that of the bitch.
What performance is overlooked is the fact that if a line of prepotent males is to abe maintaned (e.g., all EE) then not only must the sire contribute E to all and every pup, but also the dam must contribute E also.
When the pedigrees of the progeny of a given sire are thus rated for pedigree judging, the inherent bias follows. Logically, the only animals on the pedigrees that will be rated as being in any way significant, are the great producing sons of sons of sons etc. i.e., the top (outer) row (line) sires, because they themselves have been progeny tested.
This bias is reinforced by kennels striving top estabablished lines of great animals from father to son to grandson etc., but as has been pointed out by Willis (1989) "this line, 9 the tall line) is no more important than any other line/s in the pedigree."
Conclusion The conclusion must be that ancestral-line pedigrees have limited value to breeders when analysing or planning breeding programs. Genealogical-table pedigrees are much more practical and reliable. Moreover, breeders must check out claims made about inheritance based on the animalsappearing on the pedigrees.
Many of the claims will prove to be biased (at best), or even erroneous (at worst). Inbreeding for the sake of producing offspring that look like their parents is a crime against nature