What is more important...

I would say female due to the fact that offspring actually get more genetic material from the mother then they do the father.

 

Some of the most notable dog men in history with the greatest stud dogs of all time like dibo, bullyson, etc. would breed to a cold bitch or one who probably wasn't even looked at... But would not do the same for males.

I also think it could vary from breed to breed. We are talking millions of combinations of genes and sire or dam may have more of an influence on genes that produce one trait oppose to another. So the female contributes more DNA technically than the male does but I do not think that translates to the female contributing more to the specific traits that are bred for with these dogs if that makes sense.

 

I think it depends on the individual dogs being bred.

 

I totally agree Crash. The bottom line not to many people are going to loan you a good brood bitch. You gotta put in that work yourself, but you can do your research and find a stud producing the traits you are looking for.

 

I've heard cold dogs can produce game ones, almost like it's some kind of malfunctioning variant of gamensess. Look at a bitch like honeybunch though and it's clear that the female makes just as much of a contribution as the male. Both dogs r gonna pass 50% any way u look at it. I would think cold would be better than untested though, from an odds perspective. Having said that most good breeders would probly say ur better off with both game tested in any case.

 

It's simple,if either are lacking find better dogs to breed. I would hate to spend a lot of money for a good stud to breed to a subpar bitch or vice versa.

 

Scientifically, it has been proven that it is 50/50 plus the bitch contributes her mitochondria. It makes sense to use the best bitch and stud you can get your hands on whenever doing a breeding. But if you do have a bitch that lacks, breed to a dog that can add what she lacks and hopefully one of her daughters is much better than her. Remember, the only way to know what a bitch can produce is by breeding her....

 

For me both male and female are equally important at the time of selection and both should be proven game dogs that are competitive (a well formed, complete package). However, after the breeding I feel it is the bitch who is more important. As well as her mitochondial dna it is up to her to provide all nutrients which will directly affect the litter's development. After they are whelped it is up to the dam to impart her teaching and kick start the natural instincts. Even though both parents contribute half the genetics they are not equal. The genetic structure of the female is larger and weighs more than that of the male.

Historically, Tudor would select the bitch(es) he wanted to use and cull the rest. He never bothered much with the males and would even sell, give or trade a male. But he kept his bitches real close to him and guarded them zealously.

 

i agree with you grngo.
but would you say that Tudor had $ in his eyes or was there another game plan ?

 

Well at that time, during the great deppression and the dust bowls of Oklahoma, everyone was always thinking of money in order to have a meal that day, and some days you ate and others you weren't so lucky. At that time Tudor held cock fights for 25 cents on Fridays and dog matches for $5 on Saturdays. In this way he was able to survive in Oklahoma when the rest had to take their chances out west and became part of "The Grapes of Wrath".
Even during this very difficult time, Tudor was not known to let out his bitches. This shows the high value he put on his bitches. Without a good brood bitch, no matter how good the male is, you are forced to outcross and within a couple of generations are left with very diluted blood which is very different from the original. Keeping control of the bitches was Tudor's way os safeguarding his bloodline.

 

GP & venom....... I tend to agree. The old boys wanted a big strong female with wide hips that would produce strong chunky pups. Half would be axed so that there was more milk for the rest. Dams give you type and Sires bring the fire. Dont get me wrong some ol'dogmen did match females but they werent their brood bitches.

 

I agree with what you said and think the same. I have also seen the same. When breeding a male with fire as you put it even to laid-back female the offspring seem to get the fathers heat but the other way around its more hit and miss.

In terms of which is more important both are very important but for different reasons. For your own yard good females are more important because it is usually possible to pay a stud fee to breed off a good stud

 

DNA is always 50/50 in every living creature or human. Genes however can be dominant or recessive and be split differently. Meaning one pup can look more like a certain parent. Especially if its a tight line breed or inbreed you can increase your chances of passing on or bottle necking traits.

 

Line/inbred blood is bred until the progeny are consistant in all aspects. When you have reached a consistant high average, physically, mentally and liveability(hopefully prior to any filial degeneration), IMO is the beginning of the foundation stock. Keeping your average high is difficult unless you have been a part of every aspect of the generations bred. They say that breedings will revert back to the average of the line, by keeping the 'average' of the line at a top level (keeping the 'dirt' out) your odds of producing above average dogs are very good. Even when breeding into a dirty line..(not that you would do that)ROFLMAO
Hope I explained it right...lol

 

http://www.greerquarterhorses.com/largeheartgene.htm
I read someplace that with horses, certain traits are passed on from the sire, vs. the dame. It may be true with other animals.

This is what I mean

The most successful Quarter Horse sires that pass on the large heart have large-hearted Thoroughbred lines on their bottom sides. Thoroughbred heart lines on the top side will not do any good because the characteristic isn't on the Y chromosome, which comes from the sire.

This topic has long been known to be important among the elite breeders and recently has received notoriety through Marianna Haun's book, "The X Factor". In her book, Marianna makes a convincing argument that the attribute of a large heart is passed on through the X chromosome. This is what she calls "The X Factor". Her book is highly recommended reading for all breeders of race horses.

 

More:
The conclusion about heart size being determined by the X chromosome alone explains the pattern of broodmare sires. These are sires who are not, in general a huge success as studs directly, but whose daughters end up superior to the brood mare population in general. All the sire’s daughters inherit his X chromosome, and if it carries the large heart, all of them will have at least one, and some of them 2 X chromosomes, that pass on the large heart trait. Although he cannot influence his son’s heart size, his daughters rate above average. Their offspring will benefit, and thus the sire gains a reputation as a broodmare sire. When looking at pedigrees, it is useful to determine the "heart-line" in the pedigree, to look for evidence that the horse in question has a large heart. Since the trait is carried on the X chromosome, the heart-line is traced from sire to daughter, and dam to son or daughter. If a sire is known to have a large heart, then he definitely passes it to his daughters, but definitely does not pass it to his sons. If a Dam is known to be a double copy mare, she definitely passes the trait to all her offspring, both sons and daughters. A single copy mare has a 50% chance of passing the trait to any given son or daughter. Tracing a heart line requires some knowledge of which horses in pedigrees carry the trait. The book "The X Factor" lists many known large hearted horses, common in pedigrees. This fact alone makes the book worth picking up.

 

Do you remember some of the conversations that happened in Don's room, Tree? While a bit of it was sometimes 'out there', and not just from Don either...LOL
For the most part, it was great, but one session in particular, really got down to it..it started with all of us showing pics and then yappin paper hung dogs and how you can tell certain family strains by the phenotype alone..blah blah
Then, his recollection of litters and consistency from different strains and if he had noticed anything different come about, as they inbred deeper into the line(other than recessives showing up, filial degeneration) Deep in/linebreeding each side of the family and keeping both sides separate for their specific traits. He saw exactly what I was seeing.. the litter had 3 sets of twins...I thought it was coincidence until I thought about it and wondered if he was right..
He was...
So that's my proof, that its definitely equal input 50/50

 

BTW..made that same breeding 3 times..3 sets of twins each time