Breeding practices (pre class training)

Ok. First off, I didn't start this thread to insult or belittle anyone. Nor is this an expression of cockiness or professionalism. I would just like to take this time to explain what I have learned about breeding dogs the past 14 years,with the addition of my girlfriend being a student in Animal medicines specifically genetics. My knowledge first hand comes from experience as well as facts from books, magazines, and vets. (animal specialist). This is just an introduction to what will turn out to be a full discussion to every aspect of breeding the American Pitbull Terrier. One may say this thread is going to be opinionated, while others will find what I try and explain to be very useful. My first introduction is a question I would like to shed light on that TRipple J mentioned in a previous post. He was wondering why when he bred two quality bulldogs together, and in the first breeding it was great! Well rounded animals that were second to none. However, int he second breeding, he didnt get squat. You would have to look deeper into the situation. A dogs genetic makeup starts from 78 chromosomes. The mother and the father account for 39 a piece from the start. Keep in mind that each chromosome carries various genes that are generated from the ancestor dating back to the fourth generation. This is what is called a gene pool. In Tripps case, the dogs in the first breeding paired good genes, or the very good genes from both families of dogs. A better way to explain would be like a bag of skittles with all sorts of colors. If there were 100 skittles and say 60 different colors...and I told you to pair 10 different sets, the results may lead to redxblue yelloxpurple redxred orangexpink. Long story short, this is how the makings of pups take place. All though they each pull from the same common gene pool, no two genetic make ups are exaclty alike. Their are just too many possibilities for this to prove true. The second time J attempted this breeding, the paired genes (combinations) just didnt click like the first breedings did. I tried to put this in a nutshell. There may be questions, but I will have answers, as I know this may be unclear. There are many aspects when it comes to breeding, and the more you know about genetics, the better off you will breed in my opinion. But, on the same, a wise dogmen once called the breeding game a "CRAP SHOOT", and that's exactly what it is. Even understanding genectics can't always prove to produce the BEST DOG OF ALL TIME. Sometimes, it simply falls on luck of the draw. FIS BLUE!

 

Just the kind of thread I've been waiting for...thanx.... Now, was this a repeat breeding that was done or was it a best to best breeding of the offspring... I know when my uncle and aunt breed,they may breed the same pair 4or5 times and more often than not 1 of those litters may not be worth sh*t and they get culled.. Even though we all know its a crap shoot some with more experience can shed light on how to get the best results.. Also if two dogs are from scatter bred lines and it was a best to best breeding,that first litter could have got the good genes from the good dogs and the next litter coulda gotten the unwanted genes from the lesser quality dogs...

 

That's why all good breeders "stack the deck" with quality line bred animals. To increase their chances of getting more of the same.

 

General Biology 101. Thats why in order to get a good chance of breeding dogs that carry much of their parents traits breeders keep the bloodlines very tight. Good post.

 

I agree that you will have better chances by "stacking the deck"....not just breeding the best to the best but rather the best to best within a tight proven family. It's a better chance you'll get solid bulldogs if all the dogs (within 4 generations) behind your "best" two dogs are proven dogs. Otherwise, it is just a crap shoot, some folks are just better at narrowing down the odds than others. It is possible to get good bulldogs from outcrossing...hell, some of the better dogs in history were crosses but why roll the dice when you can produce consistently with family bred dogs? If your dogs are lacking something, I can see doing an out or if you need to freshen up the gene pool, so to speak, then I would understand but I would then tighten it back up with family blood. I like the old saying "if ain't broke, don't fix it". I would personally stick with one family of PROVEN dogs before using an out, but to each his/her own.

 

thank you, looking forward to info on stuff like that

 

Bump...bump...bump....bump

 

great topic, i have worked on several cattle propertys where genetics play a big part on breeding quality stud bulls and breeding cattle with embryo transfers with the cows. to breed well muscled cattle. with a good growth rate. where semen is taken to use for breedings in the future. it is something i am interested in. i owned a cattle dog bitch years ago, that was a great worker. i mated her to another good working male. and she threw some great working dogs. couple of years later i used another good male over her. and the pups where useless as working dogs. all that litter was culled except one.
breeding is a gamble, you can have dogs with a good pedigree and throw average dogs, or breed best to best. and get good dogs. like forest gump said life is like a box of chocolates , you never know what your going to get lol

 

Thanks OldSlow. Good info.... The skittles really helped clear it up.


Vic

 

Lol. I figured it would be better to paint a picture u can visualize, instead of just words..ya know? This breeding thing really is crazy. I just figure the more of you know about genetics, the better "fighting chance" you give yourself....however, it's still just a crap shoot. Next, I think the class should go into deep discussion about the different forms of breeding. I think lots of people are mislead when it comes to breeding what is truley considered inbreeding. Also, there is plenty of time for line breedings, and outcrosses. I'd like to start more threads inbetween class called "POINTS 2 PONDER". The first topic I'd like to debate is the "fact" that brood dogs produce better than "outcrossed or battle crossed". Again, one may decide to call it opinionated, but I bring plenty of fact to back up any thread I may start. Please Hold Me 2 This!:rolleyes:

 

Well you have my attention so lets have it, im all ears....ehm....eyes

 

I 2nd this

 

oldslowblue thats just NUTS that brood BS. thats pedalling talk guys that are heavy into dogs know they can produce without so called brood. Why breed untested non proven dogs just becuas of the blood.IDK to me brood means for breeding only you know keep it safe.produce is a loose turm there is guys out there that can hunt with anything & succeed do it all over again . the same dogs may not work for the next guy & that dont mean they produce. breeding is all a gamble no matter how you look at it. the real producer is the men behind the dogs that is the most important factor. you can produce anything you want just play the numbers game sometimes they arnt even real LOL. If you are good you can get anything to produce just look at carver.:eek:

 

If you can be honest about your program, put ego, greed and pride aside and evaluate a litter with a critical eye and cull accordingly ..then and only then, good bulldogs can be produced. If you got good stock and you're working within a family of dogs, you will quickly learn their strong points and their shortcomings. This gives an advantage over outcrossing which carries heterozygous (sp?) traits. I do get what you're saying ben, about playing number games. The most heavily sought after dogs usually come of big yards like TG's but think about all the substandard dogs that don't get culled that go on to produce more substandard dogs like themselves because someone bred a pedigree. Sure, not many folks are gonna produce as many serious hog hunters as the big guys but I rather keep my cullings to a minimum, therefore I would rather stick with one good family and build from there using as few outs as possible. Like I said though, you have to be honest with yourself and your program before you can produce some good ones, IMO.

 

Good points very good.

I agree. I was under the impresion that bood stock was tested. and had to be proven. If not I think thats bull. It seems dumb as all hell to be using unproven dogs as brood and expecting them to produce. It would be more of a gamble.

 

I'ma have to agree with you guy's on that brood stock should be tested. As too the facts about the percentage of dog's in the past being brood or not having produced good dog's. Question I always had was what happened with Tornado she never produce anything as far as I know! I would have to stick with goin with some proven parents and ancestory. IMHO tho I'd feel more appreciative of the dog as a whole then just for the blood. I'ma tell tho I've seen some brood itsh produce FIRE!

I'ma have to say that with right luck and a grasp of the program (best to best) at hand is all a roll of the dice. I have seen some great dog's go and can't produce alick of NADA! Seeing from first hand tho hooked with the right mates could give you BULLDOG'S. It's just the type of paint u us!

 

Nice point big Ben, but I put that statement in the form I heard it in, or hear it often I should say. When I said " the "fact" that brood dogs produce better....." That's the reason for the quotes around the word fact. Fact is, it isn't really a fact, just what I hear all of the time. I believe different, and have proof for the difference. I didn't mean for it to sound like I was calling it a fact. However, I don't want to get too deep into this, as we have plenty of time for that thread under points to ponder. Good eye though, I think you just mis-understood me.

 

you know me my eye dont mis nothing lol. like i say the man makes the dog the dog don't make the man. IMO 30% of the credit goes to the dog 70% should go to the man behind the dog.

 

i agree with you on this one smith. if you stay with one family, your chances are much better than just a "gamble". like someone else stated, stacking the deck so to speak. and as far as productivity, that's a loose term as there are too many variables. if any of the greats had never won a single match (pre-76), would that still have made them less of a dog? does that make their sire or dam less of a producer? assuming they were raised the same, as the one constant in these dogs is the that the dogman is making the most of the dog, possibly taking a sub-standard dog and applying his years of knowledge to create a freak.

p.s. Blaze, it's still rolling dice, but look at it this way; say you are trying to roll all ones right? (aces so to speak) if you are rolling with six dice, your chances are a lot slimmer of rolling all ones than if you are only rolling three dice. (as it pertains to outcrossing or staying within one family of dogs)

 

Blue I know the breedings you are talking about. I did not have to cull all the dogs from the repeat breeding some were good dogs but not aces like the first one. That brreding was done 3 times and every time we got good dogs but like I said never as good as the first. It is all ways a crap shoot. This happens all the time not just to us I know of a lot of dog men that had great dogs the first time and not qiute as good on the repeats. IE airhead bred Tkks-Monsterman( Paladin and a 1/4 redboy) To Ch candy(Boyles -Ironruns dime) About as much a cross as it gets and got fastlane dogs. Thats do to Candy clicking well with monster man. Not to mention that when tkk bred Buster to tina louies that made the liter of candy in her litter all of the dogs made high rank. This is just an example for what I mean that GOOD DOGS make good dogs and if you breed just the best to best most of the time you will get good dogs no matter what the blood line is. Now I my self breed tighter than alot but in no way am I kennel blind and will allways breed a good one no mater what the blood line is if they them selfs are down from good ones. Breeding is the biggest gamble in dogs. No Bones about it. J