PDA

View Full Version : Bateson report



Margaret C
14th January 2010, 10:33 AM
I'm not able to get into the report findings on the Dog breedind Inquiry website, probably the site is too busy.

The Dog World paper has updates being sent by Twitter-
http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/02-Bateson

sins
14th January 2010, 10:36 AM
http://breedinginquiry.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/final-dog-inquiry-120110.pdf

yes, seems like there's heavy traffic,but persevere,it'll open eventually.
Sins

Brian M
14th January 2010, 10:40 AM
Hi

And a link to K9

http://www.dogmagazine.net/

Murphy
14th January 2010, 11:18 AM
Bateson Report now on KC website.
Elspeth

sins
14th January 2010, 11:41 AM
That's quite an amazing report.
One bit really surprised me..


The extent of the trade in dogs is astonishing. One member of my Advisory group visited a dog breeding establishment in the Republic of Ireland where 5000 dogs are bred per year in this one establishment. Many other dog farms exist in the Republic. The great majority of the puppies are sold in Southern England

Good grief....:-?

Sins

Margaret C
14th January 2010, 11:45 AM
Hi

And a link to K9

http://www.dogmagazine.net/

Ryan O'meara is always so quick off the mark with detailed comments and analysis

Juney
14th January 2010, 11:50 AM
Margaret I sent you a PM last night. Hope you got it.

sins
14th January 2010, 11:52 AM
And the dogworld article:
http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/02-Bateson

Bet
14th January 2010, 11:58 AM
I have just printed off the full Report,maybe us intersted folk can have a Discussion about it in a wee while....

Bet
14th January 2010, 12:50 PM
Just had to make this comment and it was made on the CC List ,it Scunnered me, Scots word for Sickened, ..

That there would be some rubbing their Hands with Glee at more Breeding Bashing .

Can't some Cavalier Breeders understand that the out-come of the Bateson Report might at last be giving Dogs the chance of Healther ,Longer Lives.

What is wrong with some Cavalier Breeders, what is their Problem. !!!!

Bet
14th January 2010, 12:55 PM
Forgot to say Margaret,

Best of Luck this after-noon, and Thanks again to You , Carol , Karlin, and Jemima,

The Bateson would never have seen the Light of Day if it had not been for you Folk .

Bet
14th January 2010, 01:40 PM
Just watched the BBC TV News at 1 pm

There was a News Interview about the Bateson Report ,which began with the showing of about a dozen Cavaliers, then it showed a Cavalier Screaming and Scratching which the Commentator described as Syringomyelia ,which is caused in Cavaliers, because the Fashion for Cavaliers is for Small Heads ,that it's now got to the Stage where their Brains are too Large for their Heads.

I sure feel Vindicated to-day ,after hearing this.

I have said for a few years now , that the Cavaliers' are Smaller than they were about 20 or so years ago.

Bet
14th January 2010, 01:43 PM
Should have said that Cavalier Heads are Smaller than they were 20 or so years ago

Bet
14th January 2010, 02:14 PM
Just Phoned the BBC about their 1pm TV News Program, and said to who I was speaking to ,that they were Spot On about about mentioning that our Cavaliers have Smaller Heads than they had about 20 years ago.

They were interested in what I had to say about this, and when had I begun to notice when this was beginning to happen.

I did mention that this was the Fashion that was winning in the Show Scene ,and the Person at the BBC said this would be the Reason.

sins
14th January 2010, 02:33 PM
Bet,
Take a look at my cavalier Daisy.
She's an old fashioned Irish cavalier,going very quickly back to old UK/Irish lines....good sized elongated head....skull flat between the ears.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4273548149_d9372b48b6.jpg

If head shape were the only answer,then how can she have two syrinx's?
You assisted various researchers in tracing pedigrees back to the 1950's. Is it not possible the SM was with the breed from the very beginning and only with the advent of sophisticated diagnostic equipment and improved animal welfare that the condition has come to the fore??
Just a thought.
Sins

EddyAnne
14th January 2010, 03:32 PM
This is what Bateson mentioned in his report about Syringomyelia.

6.17 Strong evidence suggests, however, that certain specific phenotypes have a negative impact on welfare by creating pain or suffering; or by impeding the normal behaviour of the animal. Prominence has been rightly given to syringomyelia in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. In this case the brain continues to grow after the skull has ossified with the result that the canal between the ventricles of the brain and the spinal cord is occluded. The eventual result is evident pain in the dogs and fitting. However, prior to that the dog may not manifest obvious clinical signs but become quiet and inactive. I was given details of one case in which the dog, termed by its owner as lazy, was given a pain-killer by the veterinary surgeon. The dog perked up after the analgesic was administered and immediately became more playful. The expression of its face was also reported to have changed. Before and after analgesia expressions are shown in the photographs.
.

Margaret C
14th January 2010, 04:05 PM
This is what Bateson mentioned in his report about Syringomyelia.

6.17 Strong evidence suggests, however, that certain specific phenotypes have a negative impact on welfare by creating pain or suffering; or by impeding the normal behaviour of the animal. Prominence has been rightly given to syringomyelia in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. In this case the brain continues to grow after the skull has ossified with the result that the canal between the ventricles of the brain and the spinal cord is occluded. The eventual result is evident pain in the dogs and fitting. However, prior to that the dog may not manifest obvious clinical signs but become quiet and inactive. I was given details of one case in which the dog, termed by its owner as lazy, was given a pain-killer by the veterinary surgeon. The dog perked up after the analgesic was administered and immediately became more playful. The expression of its face was also reported to have changed. Before and after analgesia expressions are shown in the photographs.
.

I think the photos are of Tania's little cavalier.

EddyAnne
14th January 2010, 04:13 PM
I think the photos are of Tania's little cavalier.
Below the photos it is mentioned.
"Credit: Tania O’Donnell"
.

Margaret C
14th January 2010, 05:59 PM
I have not managed to sit and digest all the report yet. There is a lot to take in, but my first impression is this is going to be very good news for all dogs.

I would like to say thank you to Carol Fowler, who showed me that anything is possible if you are determined enough, Clare Rusbridge & Penny Knowler for their amazing work in identifying the SM problem, and Jemima Harrison for making the film and exposing the health issues in pedigree dogs.

WoodHaven
14th January 2010, 06:40 PM
Should have said that Cavalier Heads are Smaller than they were 20 or so years ago

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2310/2537389504_f2f7c9b8b4.jpg

Does this look like smaller HEADS

EddyAnne
14th January 2010, 08:34 PM
Here is something interesting in the latest BBC News.

Sir Patrick also revealed today that in the late 1980s he had been part of a working party which had recommended that new rules should be introduced for dog shows which would "disqualify animals with physical defects specifically encouraged by fashion and which compromise the health and welfare of the animals involved."

"I was shocked then and I remain shocked that so little has changed," he says.

Clearly, Sir Patrick does not need persuading of the seriousness of the problems. But has his report gone far enough?

Sir Patrick clearly has high hopes for the new dog advisory council but without statutory powers to back its recommendations, I think there is a very real danger that the Kennel Club will dismiss suggestions as being "unworkable".

Anyway have a read which includes - "Jemima Harrison, the film's producer/director, welcomes the recommendations but believes they may not be implemented fully." BBC article at this link address.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8460012.stm
.

ByFloSin
14th January 2010, 09:17 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2310/2537389504_f2f7c9b8b4.jpg

Does this look like smaller HEADS

I agree with that Sandy. All of mine have generously shaped heads, particularly Rebel, who has both asymptomatic SM and Chariari Malformation. He has several syrinxes.

I feel the need to make it perfectly clear here that when I mention Rebel's MRI results I am not boasting, neither am I in any way flaunting his condition. On the contrary, I am trying to emphasize at every opportunity that there are probably a great number of as yet untested dogs living quite normal lives while having these conditions. Until we test we just do not know who is and who is not clear of malformation.

Tania
14th January 2010, 09:39 PM
Below the photos it is mentioned.
"Credit: Tania O’Donnell"
.

I havn't seen the photos yet but I think they are of Molly....(they have used my maiden name)

Tania
14th January 2010, 09:53 PM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3426/3979256065_8eea575d6d_m.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3471/3979255323_e8ba6e7ab4_m.jpg




Clare Rusbridge uses the two photographs above to show the different facial expressions, before and after treatment.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2770/4023781978_9d974b88cb.jpg

Clare also uses the above photograph, the change in Dougall was immense after just being on a low dose of previcox.

In fact I have two different dogs since they have been treated :)

Ciren
15th January 2010, 12:15 AM
How many cavaliers is that? 4 or 5? i love this pic, when i saw it i called hubby over and said "look a puddle of cavs!"


http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://www.flickr.com/photos/13982218@N00/2537389504/sizes/m/http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2310/2537389504_f2f7c9b8b4.jpg

Does this look like smaller HEADS

WoodHaven
15th January 2010, 12:22 AM
How many cavaliers is that? 4 or 5? i love this pic, when i saw it i called hubby over and said "look a puddle of cavs!"

Blenheims left to right:
Dickens (in the back,you really can't see much of him), Dominique (head on tri), Hunter (looking mean at the camera) and the tail of my almost 9 year old Nicholas.
The tri is Emma.-- so that is 5.

Karlin
15th January 2010, 12:45 AM
The head issue has been discussed quite a few times now in recent research. The point made is not that heads per se are smaller; it is that the head SHAPE is creating a small interior space for the brain and that a certain shape of skull definitely seems to be more likely to have greater problems with this lack of space.

Researchers have emphasised that it is very difficult even for longtime breeders to assess this shape outwardly because of the way cavalier ears are positioned and because of their coat. But there has been correlation between internal shape (which is somewhat reflected in outward shape).

Also the general point is that it is all the toy breeds -- and especially those with shorter or flat noses -- that have the greatest incidence of syringomyelia, from evidence so far. Dogs with normal noses and of larger size do not get this particular form of SM that is related to the difference between brain size and skull volume. So there is definitely an issue of some sort with heads.

WoodHaven
15th January 2010, 12:50 AM
The head issue has been discussed quite a few times now in recent research. The point made is not that heads per se are smaller; it is that the head SHAPE is creating a small interior space for the brain and that a certain shape of skull definitely seems to be more likely to have greater problems with this lack of space.

Researchers have emphasised that it is very difficult even for longtime breeders to assess this shape outwardly because of the way cavalier ears are positioned and because of their coat. But there has been correlation between internal shape (which is somewhat reflected in outward shape).

Also the general point is that it is all the toy breeds -- and especially those with shorter or flat noses -- that have the greatest incidence of syringomyelia, from evidence so far. Dogs with normal noses and of larger size do not get this particular form of SM that is related to the difference between brain size and skull volume. So there is definitely an issue of some sort with heads.

There are breeds with FAR flatter and shorter muzzles than cavaliers, yet this breed seems to be hit far more with this disease.
One theory is that the brain and head cavity don't seem to grow (or stop growing) at the same time.

ByFloSin
15th January 2010, 09:00 AM
There are breeds with FAR flatter and shorter muzzles than cavaliers, yet this breed seems to be hit far more with this disease.
One theory is that the brain and head cavity don't seem to grow (or stop growing) at the same time.

That is the explanation which makes the most sense to me.

Some years ago I saw an exhibition in the Museum of Antiquities in Glasgow which tried to illustrate the evolution of man from Stone Age ape type to the way we are now. They showed where and when the skull in the case was found, the invention that was taking place, i.e. the axe was first used, and it brought home to me that the brain and skull had had to increase and perhaps change shape to permit the higher level of intelligence required to invent and innovate.

In this discussion the big question is HOW and WHY does it sometimes go wrong?

Bet
15th January 2010, 09:17 AM
Could I just mention again,that it is the DEEP STOP that so many Cavaliers have now -a -days, that they did'nt have about 20 years ago,.Is this giving the look of Smaller Heads, as Karlin says it's the space inside the Cavalier's that is Smaller.

The UK CKCS CLUB Cavalier Breed Standard says,


STOP SHALLOW.

Is this ,as was mentioned on the BBC TV News item about SM , part of the Fashion for Cavaliers winning in the Show Ring.

If that's the case ,is it Judges and Breeders who are involved with this change, and are not Breeding to the UK CKCS CLUB'S Breed Standards.

Is this where the problem could lie, the Deep Stop.?

Bet
15th January 2010, 06:10 PM
Sorry Folks, but I have just read on the CC List, when I mentioned about Cavaliers having a Deep Stop ,that it's not a Deep Stop they have .It's to do with their markings !!!

So I guess when the UK CKCS CLUB in the Breed Standard say that Cavaliers should have a Shallow Stop, it's just to do with the Cavalier Markings.

Bet
15th January 2010, 06:35 PM
Forgot to say ,that there was a Cavalier B/T

Kobba of Korunda,born 30-5-28,who Mrs E. Booth described in her Book ,his sweet Head would be the envy of many Present Day Cavalier Breeders.

He had the Deep Stop Iv'e been mentioning.

Her Book was published in 1983, this look that Iv'e been trying to describe ,was starting to appear about the time, were the Cavalier Breeders trying to get back to the Head Type of Kobba of Korunda.

RodRussell
16th January 2010, 12:16 AM
... One theory is that the brain and head cavity don't seem to grow (or stop growing) at the same time.

This is my understanding, too, based upon the article cited here:

Comparison of cerebral cranium volumes between cavalier King Charles spaniels with Chiari-like malformation, small breed dogs and Labradors. H. R. Cross, R. Cappello, and C. Rusbridge. J Small Anim. Pract. 2009 Aug; 50(8):399-405.

in which the authors state:

"When compared with Labradors, CKCS had proportionately the same volume of parenchyma in their caudal fossa, hence there is a mismatch of volumes with too much parenchyma in a too small caudal fossa causing overcrowding. This supports either theory of pathogenesis of CM as mesoderm insufficiency during embryology − causing insufficient scope for the mesoderm and ectoderm layers to develop ... − or alternatively premature growth plate closure. Other small breeds of dogs had a proportionately smaller volume of parenchyma in their caudal fossa which can explain why, despite having a similar sized caudal fossa to CKCS, they do not experience overcrowding."
--
Rod Russell

Karlin
16th January 2010, 12:54 AM
There are breeds with FAR flatter and shorter muzzles than cavaliers, yet this breed seems to be hit far more with this disease.
One theory is that the brain and head cavity don't seem to grow (or stop growing) at the same time.

Well, yes -- it clearly isn't just how flat the dog's face is or how small the body, but that these predisposing factors (which on all evidence, sometimes risk triggering that failure of the skull to continue to grow to fit the brain as happens normally) are on genes that have been selected for by accident within the cavalier breed in particular.

So, in cavaliers an early genetic predisposition in some dogs has, perhaps due to popular sire syndrome, become quite concentrated in the breed overall to such a degree that researchers think probably all cavaliers are carriers and many are eventually affected, with most having the Chiari-like malformation that perhaps forms because of that skull development issue or is related in some way. It would seem reasonably likely (according to several researchers I have spoken to) that selecting for features considered attractive for showing has arbitrarily also selected for the genes that carry SM. There is research from LIVS that indicates the shorter face of cavaliers does trigger some skull changes, for example.

I have absolutely no doubt that many other breeds risk heading (no pun intended!) the same way. Griffons have been the most prominent at-risk example, but it is still easy to find many fully clear griffons (and extended families) with neither SM nor CM.

WoodHaven
16th January 2010, 12:59 AM
Well, yes -- it clearly isn't just how flat the dog's face is or how small the body, but that these predisposing factors (which on all evidence, sometimes risk triggering that failure of the skull to continue to grow to fit the brain as happens normally) are on genes that have been selected for by accident within the cavalier breed in particular.

So, in cavaliers an early genetic predisposition in some dogs has, perhaps due to popular sire syndrome, become quite concentrated in the breed overall to such a degree that researchers think probably all cavaliers are carriers and many are eventually affected, with most having the Chiari-like malformation that perhaps forms because of that skull development issue or is related in some way. It would seem reasonably likely (according to several researchers I have spoken to) that selecting for features considered attractive for showing has arbitrarily also selected for the genes that carry SM. There is research from LIVS that indicates the shorter face of cavaliers does trigger some skull changes, for example.

I have absolutely no doubt that many other breeds risk heading (no pun intended!) the same way. Griffons have been the most prominent at-risk example, but it is still easy to find many fully clear griffons with neither SM nor CM.

If a cavaliers COI was Horrendous, I would agree. There are numerous breeds that are much higher inbreeding coefficients. The HIGHEST one of mine has is 11%-- many of mine are well under 8%. I've been hunting for 8 generations for my dogs to get the most accurate numbers. I have many dogs that I can go back 9+ generations without a 'hole'(missing dog).

Oreo
16th January 2010, 05:02 AM
Just some thoughts.

Less inbred by recent generation COI doesn't, in itself, mean dogs will necessarily be healthier than others in another breed.

A lot depends on what deleterious genes happened to be in the foundation, what happened to be accidentally selected for while selecting for other traits in the breed, population bottlenecks, including those created when popular sires are selected to the exclusion of others, etc . . .

As I understand it, keeping COIs lower in a litter doesn't necessarily help the individual pups produced (- although studies in the Standard Poodle and Rhodesian Ridgeback indicate that on average it offers an advantage.) Keeping COIs lower in litters does help to maintain effective population sizes in a full breed. If you are speaking to preserving breeds, this is important.

I kept this information from the Cangen list, posted there on May 2008. Is this relevent to SM and MVD? I don't know but if I share it others can mull it over as well.

According to the poster, the KC database shows that statistically, 1 in 10 Cavalier matings since 1970 were closer than first cousins. That would be a 6.25% COI or higher on a 10 gen pedigree. 9 of 10 pairings, therefore, produced pups with a lower than 6.25% COI.

The Cavalier breed also has an effective population size of 78. That is larger population size than a number of dog breeds, but as well for reference, it should also be considered the Siberian Tiger is considered endangered, and it has an effective population size of 250.

According to Clare Rusbridge site, the average heterozygosity is 0.46, which keeps it at similar levels to other small breeds.

http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=177150&st=450

There is also this post by Patt at the link just above that talks about effective population size (symbol Ne). (according to an earlier post, Patt works in statistics and is doing work in models of inheritance).

Some points I took from it to mull over:

-Rule of thumb is that for contained wild populations, Ne should be greater than 500 to avoid inbreeding depression.

-When Ne = 50 you have a very serious problem YET there are exceptions, like the Chillingham herd with an Ne of 8. (Of course, the toll - nature's tough culling - to get them there would not be considered acceptable practise for pets.)

-In regards to an artificially selected population there are not established guidelines. The skill of the breeders would have to be higher if they are involved with lower effective population sizes. (I dare say, when thinking about linkage, some luck has to be involved as well).

So I guess what has to be thought about is that 78 might be the Ne, in Cavaliers, that gives trouble for a variety of reasons which include the fact that there were genes which predisposed to SM and MVD in the foundation of the breed. In other breeds that number might be different.

I think some of Sarah Blott's work is aimed at keeping that Ne where it is, while still trying to sort out the right candidates for breeding forward from.

Oreo

Bet
16th January 2010, 09:18 AM
Could I comment on the Bateson Report Page 32,and here are the exact comments from Professor Sir P Bateson.

"Prominance has been rightly given to Syringomyelia in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels .

In this case the BRAIN continues to GROW after the SKULL has OSSIFIED ,with the Result that the Canal between the Ventricles of the BRAIN and the SPINAL is OCCLUDED.

The eventual Result is Evident Pain in the Dogs and Fitting.

However, Prior to that, the Dog may not manifest obvious Clinical Signs but become quiet and inactive."

I did'nt know what OSSIFIED meant,it means Hardened in Bone.

I don't know what OCCLUDED means ,can any-body help me here.

It was so interesting to read both Karlin and Orea's Posts.

I would think what Professor Sir P. Bateson means , is that when the Cavalier's Skull has formed the Brain is still growing ,what do you others think.

Could this now be why Thousands of the Public who have read the Press and saw on the TV News will have seen the comments about the Bateson Report ,that the Cavaliers' Heads are too Small for their Brains.

At the moment ,as Margaret has said many times , the only way to save the Cavalier Breed from this dreadfull Disease is to MRI Cavalier Breeding Stock.

I know that the EBV SCHEME will also have to be being involved ,but will some of the Cavalier Breeders ,who are given the information about which Cavalier to use in their Breeding Program, not take the advice because that Cavalier will have no chance of winning ing the Show Ring.!

Kate H
16th January 2010, 09:45 AM
A really interesting thing to come out of the Foetal Tissue research at the Royal Veterinary College is that there seems to be a lack of communication in Cavaliers between the brain genes and the skull genes. Normally, when the skull reached its maximum size, it sends a message to the brain to stop growing. Something in Cavalier genes stops the message arriving, so the brain goes on growing. It seems to be more a matter of the brain growing too big for the skull, rather than the skull being too small for a normal-size brain. One of the questions raised is when this mismatch occurs in the puppy's development, and I know Geoff Skerritt at Chestergates is scanning litters of puppies at regular intervals to monitor brain/skull development.

Bet - occluded is just medical-speak for closed up or blocked - in other words, what we all know about, that Chiari Malformation impedes the flow of cerebral-spinal fluid from the spinal cord round the brain and back again.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Bet
16th January 2010, 12:43 PM
Thanks Kate H for that, this is what the SM Researchers say that ,when the Cerebro Spinal Fluid can't get round ,the Syrinxes Form. This explanation has fallen into place.

WoodHaven
16th January 2010, 01:09 PM
Just some thoughts.

Less inbred by recent generation COI doesn't, in itself, mean dogs will necessarily be healthier than others in another breed.

A lot depends on what deleterious genes happened to be in the foundation, what happened to be accidentally selected for while selecting for other traits in the breed, population bottlenecks, including those created when popular sires are selected to the exclusion of others, etc . . .

As I understand it, keeping COIs lower in a litter doesn't necessarily help the individual pups produced (- although studies in the Standard Poodle and Rhodesian Ridgeback indicate that on average it offers an advantage.) Keeping COIs lower in litters does help to maintain effective population sizes in a full breed. If you are speaking to preserving breeds, this is important.

I kept this information from the Cangen list, posted there on May 2008. Is this relevent to SM and MVD? I don't know but if I share it others can mull it over as well.

According to the poster, the KC database shows that statistically, 1 in 10 Cavalier matings since 1970 were closer than first cousins. That would be a 6.25% COI or higher on a 10 gen pedigree. 9 of 10 pairings, therefore, produced pups with a lower than 6.25% COI.
Oreo

Sorry, that was my round about way of trying to make a point. There are people that are pushing the reason cavaliers aren't healthier is because they are so inbred. I know of many cavaliers that have higher COI's and are living long and healthy. There are many signs when animals get overly inbred and one of them is lack of fertility.

Bet
16th January 2010, 01:22 PM
Just read the Kennel Club's Reply on the Bateson Report,one interesting mention is that the Kennel Club is concerned that the Report could have gone further ,that the Kennel Club would have liked to have seen regulation for Compulsary Health Testing.

That the KC is now working towards UKAS Accreditation of the of the ABS as suggested by Professor Bateson.

The KC want the Veterinary Profession to gather Data to show the Prevelance of Certain Diseases ,and that an Advisory Council should develope Evidence based on Breeding Strategies.

The Advisory Council whose members will work with the Kennel Club to advise on decisions about Breeding and Health .

Oreo
16th January 2010, 04:44 PM
Sorry, that was my round about way of trying to make a point. There are people that are pushing the reason cavaliers aren't healthier is because they are so inbred. I know of many cavaliers that have higher COI's and are living long and healthy. There are many signs when animals get overly inbred and one of them is lack of fertility.

Sandy, by many studies on other animal populations, and by the two studies done on dog breeds, a higher COI is riskier regarding longevity, but that is on average. Of course when you are looking at averages, there will be individuals that don't fall within those parameters. They don't disprove the average.

When people are talking about the reason for the troubles in Cavaliers being the inbreeding, they are not talking just about individual COI numbers. They are talking about the heterozygosity of the breed. They are talking about the effective population size.

That is why I posted what those numbers are in Cavaliers, and they are not exceptional within the small breeds. What might be different is that the Cavalier founders, and after that those that the breed was built on, had a hidden genetic load that was greater.

Most of the working breeds tend to have a higher heterozygosity level (more diversity of genes in their gene pool).

But in regards to inbred - yes the purebred dog populations, as a whole, ARE inbred which is why their effective population sizes are so small, and this IS what is bringing many conditions to the surface in percentage numbers that would not occur without man's selection. Inbreeding brings the benefits of predictability in many areas, but it cannot be denied that health risks do come with that.

This is from Professor Bateson when interviewed, and Chrissy Smith asked him if he was impressed by the responsible breeders that gave evidence. (14.30 into the interview).

"Oh yes, I was. I mean I visited several breeders and I thought they were thoughtful intelligent, very caring, loved their dogs, and, you know, were really genuinely trying to avoid difficult problems.

I mean I think some of them are still pretty naïve about inbreeding, I mean, you know, they have this notion about line breeding which actually is just another word for inbreeding, and I think that some of them have got a lot to learn about the effects of inbreeding and don’t seem to at all realize that if you inbreed too much you will expose your dogs to much higher levels of illness."
http://dogworld.co.uk/Features/03-Bateson-interview?year=2010&month=01

Oreo

sins
16th January 2010, 06:07 PM
If I may make a comment on the microchipping of puppies....
It's been mandatory to microchip puppies in Ireland if you want to register them with the IKC for about the last four years.
It costs about €35 per pup at the vets and the net result in my opinion has been a lot of poorly bred pups hitting the marketplace,and a rise in the "purebrednonregistered" ads on the internet.
This must have meant a loss in revenue for the IKC and in order to prevent this in the UK,the only solution is to make it both compulsory and affordable to chip all pups.
Having said that a lot of people don't seem to care if a pup is registered or not..........:mad:
On the plus side,many pups have been microchipped at eight - ten weeks of age with no problem so it's nothing to worry about.
I'd been used to getting adult fosters chipped for Karlin,most were done under anaesthetic and those which weren't didn't bother the dog very much.
Daisy has arrived at 11 weeks already chipped so I was a bit worried when Holly was chipped at 14 weeks,but she didn't even notice it was being done.So again nothing to worry about..
Sins

Brian M
20th January 2010, 09:19 PM
Hi
Can I clarify something on post 24 its tanias post which photo is the one after treatment to me the descriptions look the wrong way around.:confused:

Tania
20th January 2010, 09:55 PM
Hi
Can I clarify something on post 24 its tanias post which photo is the one after treatment to me the descriptions look the wrong way around.:confused:

Your are right Brian, the photo they have as their before, which is actually after treatment, you can see from her face how sweet and smiley she is and her eyes are sparkling! Their after, which is before (confused yet! :confused:) she has what I call has a hang dog look, her eyes are dull, her face is long and drawn!

Molly and Dougall are the same age, Molly never got any attention when we went out and people used to think she was an old dog and fat!
I got quite offended and wanted to hand the person a mirror ask them to take a good look at themselves :huh:

Not long after treatment she won "Prettiest Female" in a local show. You have know idea how much that meant to me !

I have made a page in my albums "Amazing Face" all her different expressions! People can't believe she is the same girlie! :)