Producers

The thing is you dont fullyunderstand what recessive and dominant genes are
http://www.canine-genetics.com/Genetics.htm

 

i iwill break it down in a simple simple way JD. a bowl o skittles has so many of each color in it. each time you pull out a handfull there is a determined amount of each color. after a few handfulls you should be able to determine the avg of color skittles in the handfull. now if you want more green then red simplify the amount of green to red. take a few more handfull & find the avg but remember there is other color not just red/green so it will take a little longer then before. after a few handfull the avg will start to show mor consistently. you want more purple skittles repeat what you did with the green skittles. now with dogs it's more difficult because to truly understand the avg you need to know what made the dogs your trying to capitalize on. when you breed your breeding to what made the dog not just the dog itself. the genes in the first 4 generations contribute the most to the offspring. so by knowing the avg you will have a better understanding of what's dominant / resisive. sure bulldogs come from bulldogs & you can get good ones from breeding good dogs. but if you understand & grasp the skittles concept & the family avg concept as well as ugenic's(sp). & have a eye for detail it is easy to know what your looking at in a short amount of time. that's why tudor & others could spot a bulldog in a 10min roll or some old dogman could breed gamedogs without even matching.

 

lucky is one,genes are the second we saw in all those yrs good dogs,ace dogs ch.,gr.ch. who only produce currs and we saw too cold dogs that produce very,very good dogs some of them are top dogs in the history of the bred so that's a hard question in my opinion.

 

Thanks for the link lol I have read that before.

 

lol i should've figured that much! I got found it on this site awhile back.

 

thanks for you example ben.

 

Genetics is fairly complicated and still not completely understood. Its not as simple as Mendel's theory which is usually what they teach in highschools (AA=shows domainant, aa=shows recessive, Aa=shows dominant but able to pass recessive, with one of the letter genes coming from each parent).

And thats a very poor summary of basic genetic theory. But not every quality in a dog can necessarily be matched to a specific gene. Lets use mouth for example. Is there a specific gene that determines whether the dog bites hard or not? No. It can't be (or at least hasn't been) isolated like that. It most likely comes from a combination of genetic traits, with each specific gene having dominant and recessive alleles (and there can be more than just the 2 alleles in the pool within the species). And when you breed a dog who's known for his hard bite in an effort to produce that, he's only able to pass 1/2 of the genes that compose his genetic makeup to each pup. And each pup is going to get a different combination of that 1/2...

I don't want to bore you guys, I hope I've explained myself well enough with that. Modern science hasn't invested much in researching genetics specifically in gamedogs, but they have in other performance animals like racehorses. And there's a lot of money in racehorses. If there was a gene for running fast they'd be engineering their stock to win in the lab. But they haven't been able to. Instead their breeding programs are similar to our own: Some horses from amazing breeding wont be the top performers their papers would lead you to expect.

You can't really label gameness, wind, mouth,ability, etc as dominant or recessive traits specific to a certain dog. Doesn't work like that.

 

Amen brotha amen

 

well Mfern004 you are right about a few things. especially the hard mouth thing a lot of folks don't understand that. dogman have pretty much got these dogs down to a science by now. because genetics is the core of the game. i think if more dogman were into horses they would be running a lot faster then ever lol.

 

Ben- you may want to look up and comprehend the definition for mean, median and mode before you give a lesson on averages.

Mfern- dont forget Lamarkian theory. The Russians have been on it for awhile and now the Americans are starting to see the light.

 

junebug we ain't talking statistics as in mathematics. maybe you should work on reading comprehension. before you make yourself out to be a jackass.

 

thanks mfern. thats what i meant when i said that it doesnt work like that. talkin aboutmouth wind or gameness being a dominant or recessive gene.

 

Whats the LAMARKIAN THEORY all about please explan this theory if you could ?


JD

 

a theory of evolution. basically saying if there is no game testing then you will breed the game right out of the bulldog.

 

I'm no genetecist or biologist, Lamark's theory is a little outdated. He basically thought characteristics that could be passed on to offspring were acquired during the parent's lifetime. Thats like saying I'm an average guy but I'm a good football player (because I trained hard and acquired the skills throughout my lifetime) so then my children are more likely to be good football players because I will pass on those skills.

Applied to gamedogs, Lamark's idea would suggest that the more you match your dogs, the better the ability of the offspring will be. Lets say you breed a dog, who's never been touched, to a good bitch. Then you go on to school, test, and campaign said dog and he makes GrCh. Since he's a hell of a dog so you decide to breed him again to that same good bitch. Do you honestly believe the pups from the second litter are going to have more ability than the first because now the sire of the pups has acquired all that experience in his carrer? No they're still pieced together from the same genetic material as the first litter, and neither litter can be given labeled as better until you've seen the quality of the dogs it produced. Of course some pups from either litter could end up with a killer combination of genes and traits that produces a good dog, but that has no correlation with the matches the sire has been put through. The matches only served to prove exactly how good he was so we'd consider him worthy of breeding.

I brought up Mendel's theory because thats what most people have been taught and they seem to think the genetics of reproduction is really that simple. They think there is a specific gene for every specific trait and that gene can only have a single dominant allele and a single recessive allele. I just wanted people on this forum to realize thats not exactly how it works. That model works great when you're teaching someone the basics of reproduction in organisms but if you start breeding dogs it doesn't happen like that.

 

^^^^^bump....

 

mfern-
1st paragraph- correct up until "pass on skills". Parents may pass on genetic characteristics that may help or hinder their offspring which the parents acquired during their lifetime ie. health.

2nd paragraph- an oversimplification would be an understatement. Wrong would be more accurate.

3rd paragraph-"they seem to think the genetics of reproduction is really that simple. "
You said a mouthful there which negates your previous two paragraphs.

 

point is that scientist dont really understand genetics fully. no1 knows exactly how it works so i would stick to what has worked in the past. test and breed.

 

ben- Mathematics is not a science which is one of the reasons why it is not awarded a nobel prize (or is it because Nobel's wife left him for a mathematician?). Math is a tool used in a number of different scientific endeavors including but not limited to genetics.

 

this entire post is whats wrong with the game. a bunch of people trying to make $$$ or a NAME for themselves...boy do i miss the days when people were in it 4 the love of the sport, not so sum1 can say "so n so is a great dogman"....but i will say ur a better greeder than say tg(we know his stuff hasnt been tested in at least 20 years

ps. yes yes i know ur great and have 1000 champs and have bred 80 rom dogs blah blah blah