how genetics work

lots of folks breeding dogs some good & some bad. that's a given but if you notice there's guys that consistently breed great dogs. generation after generation and some guys weren't ever hands on with there stock. boyles & hollingsworth are just two examples but there's more. cold dogs produce aces & aces produce curs it's all a part of the business. most folks read a pedigree & figger stuf like 50/50, 7/8 etc thinking offspring are getting half from each. well folks there's something called genetics that write the story before the pups ever hit the ground. everything they are & everything they will become is due to the genes the dogs have. they are animals nothing more nothing less. they are born & this is what they are. hopefully some of you will spend more time understanding what really make the dogs we chosen to keep.

 

[video=youtube;ubq4eu_TDFc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubq4eu_TDFc[/video]

 

[video=youtube;tJjXpiWKMyA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJjXpiWKMyA[/video]

 

[video=youtube;-Yg89GY61DE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yg89GY61DE[/video]

 

[video=youtube;kLpr6t4-eLI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLpr6t4-eLI[/video]

 

[video=youtube;QCm2x9OABI8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCm2x9OABI8[/video]

 

Well BB how do you feel about breeding based on color selection? I've seen article I'm referring to on here.... Think maybe Limey Kennels wrote but basically it's says something to the terms of if for instance I was breeding say Nigerino dogs that you only want to keep the dogs that look like Nigerino in color because they are carrying more of his genes than say a black pup out the same litter would. Now I have my own breeding style have always believed raising and culling is the best way to go, it takes time money and a lot of space tho..... Does anyone else think that breeding based on color selection has any scientific standing or makes any dam sense? At first I dismissed it as total garbage but after thinking about it more and more I have noticed that a lot of times my best ones all look alike in build and color so maybe it does make some kinda sense..... But I am always worried that if I get rid of a pup that might be tha one that was gonna be my game changer. So BB what's your take on that from a genetic stand point

 

it's not really how bb feels because things work one way. sa far as how genes work. what limey is talking about is geno/phenotyping by using color. i don't get 99% of what he post normally lol. but yes i think certain genes are matched with traits i prefer & some times in combo with color genes. i spot it in my own stock & hardly ever wrong about it. breeding based on one thing only is just dumb.

 

The reason in my opinion people(even some less experienced)are able to get good results is cause they do whats necessary to have a winning line.Mr.Hollingsworth did great things in a very short time because he was logical in hi approach.They are patient.They are selective.They cull if necessary.And the big one is they inbreed /linebreed.If you want consistency and less variables that is the key.Too many outcrosses etc. can cause way too many variables.People have this stigma about inbreeding.That stigma creates bad breeding decisions.If you keep going outside the family there is far less consistency.Now if you take 2 good lines and bring them together thats great and you will get a good one here or there.What has to be done is once you have the selective few you want you start to go back to mom or dad raise them,figure out what you have,and keep doing that....This is very simplistic and a lot missing from what I am saying but its true.The very best breeders keep it in the family or work the new line hard for many years.Most want to take a short cut..The key to getting consistency is to decrease your variables.The reason most are not successful breeders cause they dont want to put the time in....They just want to breed and hope.

 

ive met a few folks that have this way of thinking about gene selection, and i personally thin k it is flawed........

if genes came in pairs then i would say sure.....and eventhough i would personally like to believe that i am MORE ALIKE one of my grandfathers than the other i personally believe that as much as i am alike him, i am also VERY different in my own way........ to make this your process of selection would eventually steer you wrong.....

i believe theres only one way to look at & match the performance characteristics of offspring and that is to put em in the activity.....

i dont believe all the buckskin jeep dogs are turning out just like jeep lol, i wish it was that easy....

 

Coach I understand exactly where you are coming from.... That's my philosophy, gotta breed tight and cull hard.... That's the proven way I have used for years. As far as that breeding by color stuff, I've seen instances where I've had a dog that was spitting image of a dog from past and had same characteristics but you can't think that way of breeding will pay off

 

Never in these dogs should a person breed for color....If one decides to do this they in many cases they let other very important factors go by and not even know it...Mental Stability,Intelligence,gameness....these need to be in the dogs pedigree to be a good consideration.What could happen is lets say a blue dog throws a Black,game,intelligent,stable dog but the breeder wants Blue only.He culls the better dog that happens to be black.And the other blue dogs lack what the black one had internally.Then he continues to breed dogs with these low levels of intelligence etc. In these dogs Color means nothing.This is why we have unstable dogs in the wrong hands because of bad breeding habits.Some of the Gamest bulldogs make the most outstanding companion/family dogs.There are exceptions of course but in general the TRUE APBT if bred properly,is perfect in so many ways.

 

Perfect, you are correct! Man most of my family hated bulldogs when I got my first, over the last 15 years everybody in my family has come to love em. Now I don't think the thread about breeding for color was about breeding for specific color, but more along the lines of keeping dogs from lines that are the same color as sire or grandsire, in the belief that the ones that look the same will have higher % of same genes. Either way tho I believe is flawed, unless heavy culling is implied. And I don't mean culling by color. Me personally I could care less about color! That ain't what motivates me, could be purple... If its game ill feed it. I don't really like outcrossing either, maybe cross two pure lines, and hope for good [] dogs, but overall all I think line breeding with inbreeding and lots of culling will get you what you want. Now you can use this and do well or do this and fuck it up bad.... All in the eye of the culler!!! Lol

 

unfortunately where i come from we try and stay away from red nosed dogs because its a red flag. But other than that a good dog can't have a bad colour. I think what limey was saying was that the dogs in his line with the same colour as the ancestors also turned out to have very similar desirable traits, so for his family of dogs taking note of colour may have worked. But for say that jeep example crisis gave us, there are to many buckskin, rose eared dogs out there that are not worth feeding.

everyone has there own theory on breeding, selection and culling. The guys that get the most experience are the ones with big yards, i mean producing 100 dogs or more consistently. the guys with the best dogs are the ones that produce that many dogs but are also very good at selection!

 

Yea I got what he was saying and like I said I've seen that happen before in my dogs.... Me personally I just wouldn't do it that way, I believe you gotta keep around long enough to see what you got. I know in a lot of places that's hard..... Hell I live in the Deep South got a few acres and its not easy for me, almost impossible if you live in any city to do so I could understand why one might keep a dog based on this theory, but to me it's just a theory. Now he has been using it a long time so I'm sure he has refined it but I guarantee somewhere some noob is reading that shit and ready to start breeding based on color lol

 

Some good advice although a gene-centered view of development/organism is out-dated. Concepts like epigenetics , norms of reaction, temporal and sequential components etc...( "Which genotype caused the best growth without specifying the environment in which the growth occurred?") Even Lamarckism is making a comeback!

 

Think its much more then just sticking two animals together genes play a major role in a.dog make up u cant not start with a d grade animal and breed up a a class family of animal u may get one or two good ones but unless u cull.all other classes less then an A++ u will always be at the very same place! Also thought the whole reason for inbreeding is to cap on genes that u like and or work not just to say my animal is8,000x whom ever unless that animal is thro those traits that o are looking for and for me line breeding is to give my tight stock that is cap off full of those traits abd genes that I look for and out that has like family memmber it! When starting a.new family of animals u could use two animal.from diffrent lines as long as the add to each other and u see wat ur looking for from that breeding then u can move onto the next step if u dont cull and move on now if u get those traits u have bred for add a parent to the better offspring and so on and so!.just never lose sight of that goal and not cull just because he or she is throwback to jeep or honeybunch but is D grade animal if u put those genes back imto ur program u will see that D grade trait p up 10-20years later all because u want to add that throw back who was a D grade to begain with! Just how my brain takes to breeding and the role genes play!

 

We have never selected on color alone!. But on TYPE and color. please understand the rezen we did so was due to the Famouse Nelis x Tug Spike x tug breedings. they produced a 75% black 25% deep red ofspring in there litters. with a nearly 80% of those individuals where of show quality and proven in doing so. Al these indivudual had the abilety to REPRODUCE, hense we iven weeded out and let go of the dogs of quality that where of diferend type and coloration when we started to inbreed on these super dogs.
For the simple rezen when you inbreed you also get the dubble up gene pool that was IS in front of these great individuals.

wich is someting we did not wanted.
We where locking on the gene pool that produced this super click!!!. and staying as close to it as posible. Meaning if we would breed for Eli Jr ore Bullyson we dont whant buskskin /white/ brindle ecetera coloration along with the quality and type. sure if you have 2 out of 3 the dog is still blessed lets say of eli jr typ of build behavier and caracter iven the way the dog was able to work.
Yet his coloration gene pool was from dogs PRIOR to him and ore from the mixst in blood he was bred to.
If we have 2 out of 3 we might as wel go for the 3 as wel. as that coloration comes tru him. and thats the way the cooky crumbles in our case. trying to get as mutch posible from the origenal dogs you breed on...
when i look for Eli/ bully blood i dont look for frisco ore Nigerino blood il go to Boudraux ore Clemmonds, who sirprizingly have 80% of the black stuf on there yards!!. more so then any other eli based famely around. i wonder why.......... On thing is for sure we dont see the ""Blind Billys and the bouidraux scrubs poping up in these yards do we!!!...

Hens coloration and type reconision was IS used to hold on to that producing capabilety. in doing so we did not out crosed ore needed to do so for 17 ore 18 years !! without loosing % ore quality.
It was only when we saw signs of degeneration in the likes of little phisical faults popping that we started to cross out. with what we considerd the ""best of the rest"" at that time... with these crosses varius diferen typs and coloration came along. most of them had the single most importend gene everybody looks for . But the uniform qualitys in the likes of all being conditiond the same way and feeding them the same behaving the same ecetera became more random iven the will to work...
sins that cross breeding time we are STILL purefying up back to those foundation dogs to get more uniform dogs in color and type behavier . to produce a more uniform bunsh of dogs wich is a ongoing prosses for the last 12 years!!. due to the low nrs of breedings done and not ore very sporeticly selling of dogs. Its only now that we slowly see more of those origenal dogs that we reconize as sutch creep back in.....

Reading books and looking at documenteries is always good to educate yourself. however there is no animal in the world that has been bred in its purety of inbreeding as our breed. Geneticly there are dogs walking around who look stunning . being able to produce the same wich acording to the genetics and there ecsplenation of such would be imposible!!.. and should have tails on there forheads and piss out of there mouths to say it blundly. Forgetal that stuf and learn how to read dogs.

To many people are inbreeding ore practis pure breeding and dont know the rezen why and how to select a gene pool they inbred on in the first place. A great performer that walks and looks and works like a dream could have less ore no genetic breeding valiuew at al compeard to this triple inbred dog that looks and behaves halve desend...

At the same time when we practis sevear in breeding and totaly disreguard the color and type selection you open the door for the genes pools that are generations befor the dogs you are inbreeding on.
meaning, you shoot PAST your goal!!!.now IF you care in breeding a uniform famely. then the coloration selection>>Breeding TOOL<< to me is a must... so to get some mis understanding out of the oquesion. Its a breeding tool added in being able to breeding on a specific individual ore gene pool..

 

I agree with cha... I have a couple right now and I want to do it right myself

 

Well I think it's all what you are looking for when breeding, but when you want to establish a family which consistantly produce the same traits, I purely look at traits and nothing else. I have seen dogs with different colour from the original pair of animals, but the traits are the same or better (eg mouth or smarts). When outcrossing I will look at the same family which someone else is running and use an animal with the same traits or acting and preferably looking the same. That way chances are that the variables are much less than the similarities.
This way worked for me and if I should start up again I will be looking to the same family because I know what to expect and how to outcross. This might not work for all, but it worked for me. Some tried breeding exactly the same with brothers and sisters of our dogs, trying to reproduce our dogs, but failed because they purely looked at pedigree but not at traits.
I breed the way I see fit because if all the theories were correct then we would've had all those clever people studying genetics having the only winning and reproducing winning dogs, but that aint true now or is it?