• If you're a past member of the board, but can't recall your password any more, you don't need to set up a new account (unless you wish to). As long as you recall your old login name, you can log in with that user name then select 'forgot password' and the board will email you at your registration email, to let you reset your password.

Some cavalier in-bred co-efficients

Bet

Well-known member
With the mention of the KENNEL CLUB'S forth -coming MATE SELECT ,on the CKCS CLUB , USA INC , is a List of some Cavaliers' IN- BRED CO -EFFICIENTS.

For any-one interested here are a few from the List.

I will just give the Cavalier Champions.

CH ABELARD of TTIWEH 22%

CH ALANSMERE MICHELLE 27%

Ch ALANSMERE SANDMARTIN 24%

Ch ALBERTO OF KINDRUM 21%

Ch CHANTIZ THYME 21%

CH CHARLOTTETOWN MacKINTOSH 22%

Ch CINOLA SUPER TRAMP OF DEERIEM 21%

Ch CRAIGOWL CASHMERE 25%

Ch CRAIGOWL HOPSCOTCH OF HOMERBRENT 23%

Ch CRAIGOWL STORM OF HOMERBRENT 23%

Ch HEIDI OF HOMERBRENT 25%

Ch HOMARANNE ANDY CAPP 24%

Ch HOMARANNE CAPTION 23%

Ch MERRYLAINE MADE TO MEASURE FOR SYMRA 22%.

Ch MILKEYN MASCOT 31%

Ch MILKEYN MATCHMAKER 31%

Ch ROSEMULLION OF OTTERMOUTH 20%

Ch TELVARA TOP HAT 25%

Bet
 
With the mention of the KENNEL CLUB'S forth -coming MATE SELECT ,on the CKCS CLUB , USA INC , is a List of some Cavaliers' IN- BRED CO -EFFICIENTS.

For any-one interested here are a few from the List.

I will just give the Cavalier Champions.

CH ABELARD of TTIWEH 22%

CH ALANSMERE MICHELLE 27%

Ch ALANSMERE SANDMARTIN 24%

Ch ALBERTO OF KINDRUM 21%

Ch CHANTIZ THYME 21%

CH CHARLOTTETOWN MacKINTOSH 22%

Ch CINOLA SUPER TRAMP OF DEERIEM 21%

Ch CRAIGOWL CASHMERE 25%

Ch CRAIGOWL HOPSCOTCH OF HOMERBRENT 23%

Ch CRAIGOWL STORM OF HOMERBRENT 23%

Ch HEIDI OF HOMERBRENT 25%

Ch HOMARANNE ANDY CAPP 24%

Ch HOMARANNE CAPTION 23%

Ch MERRYLAINE MADE TO MEASURE FOR SYMRA 22%.

Ch MILKEYN MASCOT 31%

Ch MILKEYN MATCHMAKER 31%

Ch ROSEMULLION OF OTTERMOUTH 20%

Ch TELVARA TOP HAT 25%

Bet


SOME CAVALIER IN- BRED CO-EFFICENTS


If I could add to my previous Post on this subject.

Over the years I have collected a List of Long Lived Cavaliers, in-fact the List of around 2,000 Names of Cavaliers with ages of 12 years and over along with the names and ages of their Sires and Dams is held in the Kennel Club Library.

I did'nt mention the ages of the IN-Bred CO-EFFICIENTS of some of those Cavaliers from my List that I gave yesterday was for a particular reason .

Even although they had lived to a good age and had quite High COI's for our Cavalier Breed , average being only 5.4 %,that it is no reason to think that it makes no difference that a Cavalier can have a High COI and be safely IN-Bred.

This can only be Proved if the COI's of Cavaliers are taken into account and the difference between the COI's of Cavaliers who have lived to a Good Age are compared to the COI's of those Cavaliers who have had Health Problems.

This is why the MATE SELECT and the EBV SCheme is so important both for Cavalier Breeders and Buyers of Cavaliers.

A Complete Picture will be made avaliable as to the Health of the Cavalier .

Bet
 
Could anyone explain what in bred co-efficient means? ( Sorry for appearing a bit ignorant!) :)
 
A common way of breeding any dog is what's called line breeding - using dogs who share a notable common ancestor, who may appear in many different generations of the joint pedigrees. For example, the same dog may appear as a grandfather, a g-grandfather once on both sides, a g-g-grandfather 4 or 5 times. This is quite common with Cavaliers, who have a fairly limited gene pool (choice of different dogs to breed from, especially in the early days of the breed). Line breeding can work fairly well if it isn't too close (when it become inbreeding) - IF the dog you are doubling up on is healthy. But if the dog you are line breeding to carries, for example, the gene for early onset heart disease, then that gene is getting replicated through each generation - which is partly why it is such a problem in Cavaliers.

So the percentages that Bet quotes represent the number of times a particular dog appears in Cavalier pedigrees. 20% means that going back a long way, one-fifth of a Cavalier's ancestors are the same dog (who may appear only a few times in each generation, but cumulatively his or her genes have a huge influence). So if you want to line-breed, it is safer to line-breed to a dog who appears less frequently in every Cavalier's pedigree (and has a lower percentage score), rather than to the very popular stud dog that everybody used (unless of course you know that he was completely healthy!). And not to inbreed at all - for example, mating half-brother and sister, so that there is a concentration of the same ancestors in the close generations.

Hope I've managed to be clear!

Kate, Oliver and Aled
 
Kate, thank you for explaining. I enjoy this forum as it's always informative on all things Cavalier.

Sonny was a rescue from the SSPCA shelter and Kaley was rehomed to me from TLDR so I've no knowledge of breeding and don't share the same knowledge as a lot of the members on here. I felt a bit of an idiot asking so thanks for clearing that up.
 
Crufts, COIs, Mate Select and outcrossing

Tania and I went to Crufts last Sunday, mainly to look at the stalls to see what was selling well and get some ideas for the CavalierMatters stall.

I hired a mobility scooter so did the window shopping in style. I resisted road rage temptation even when we saw certain KC members.

We were shown the new Mate Select programme by Nick Blayney, who is a Past President of the BVA. This project is the Kennel Club's great white hope for the future of pedigree dog breeding.
The KC intention is that breeders and buyers will be able to use this programme to get health & inbreeding information when considering a possible mating or getting details about puppies for sale.

We had a fairly wide ranging discussion during which Mr Blayney rather reluctantly conceded that the PDE film had been a considerable force for change, and that prior to 2008 the veterinary profession had stood by and failed to act despite the obvious health problems in pure bred dogs.

I had a real surprise when I put in the names of Faith, the cavalier that lives with my daughter, & the dog she has just been mated to.

This mating would be considered as an outcross in cavalier breeding circles and so I expected the COI of the potential puppies would be better than the breed average, especially as I was told that Select Mate would only use 3 generations for the calculations.
To my dismay the COI of this mating was something like 6.6 (worse than a first cousin to first cousin mating ) whereas the breed average was said to be 5.4
I had been sure this mating must have a much better COI than average.

Nick Blayney explained that that a lot of the same ancestors in the background could have the same effect as one ancestor in common in the last couple of generations and I have realised that I was only comparing this mating with very linebred show breeder matings, which on the whole would have very high COI indeed.

The relatively low breed average COI will be thanks to the 80% of non-breed-club people who register their litters with the KC but do not line breed.
A lot of fresh genes there if only we could identify those relatively unaffected with SM & MVD.

Faith's eye test results did not show up on Mate Select, although they are on the KC website and in the BRS. This has apparently happened to others and is something they will have to sort out before it goes live ( The KC is saying this will be in few weeks but Mr Blayney felt it would be a good few months )

Nick Blayney mentioned bringing new genetic material into the Cavalier gene pool by outcrossing to another breed.
I said I thought it may be a good idea if it gave us a healthier dog, but I was sure most breeders would be very opposed and there was no way the KC would agree. To my surprise he said it was already being discussed within the KC.

As I have already said on another post we visited the health scheme stall & were told that the BVA was in favour of publication of the MRI scheme results and they were still accepting views sent in by breeders and pet people up until May.
 
Actually, having looked again at Bet's list, I'm not sure I got the percentage right! I think it is probably the percentage of all Cavaliers who have these dogs in their pedigree - in other words, 20% means that one-fifth of all Cavaliers have this dog in their pedigree, so there is a good chance that a great number of matings will double up on this dog (and its genes and problems). Whichever way you interpret the percentages (and someone will no doubt correct me!), they are a useful guide for breeders who want to keep the gene pool as wide as possible, which is so important with both MVD and SM being genetic in origin.

Hope you are not now hopelessly confused! I'm not a breeder either, just someone who has always been interested in dogs in general and Cavaliers in particular.

Kate, Oliver and Aled
 
Nick Blayney mentioned bringing new genetic material into the Cavalier gene pool by outcrossing to another breed.
I said I thought it may be a good idea if it gave us a healthier dog, but I was sure most breeders would be very opposed and there was no way the KC would agree. To my surprise he said it was already being discussed within the KC..

As I have already said on another post we visited the health scheme stall & were told that the BVA was in favour of publication of the MRI scheme results and they were still accepting views sent in by breeders and pet people up until May

Margaret
I find it quite interesting that the KC are now discussing outcrossing, because at a recent seminar Jeff Samson was saying that although CKCS could be the first breed to have to outcross, we hadn't reached that point yet, I wonder if some more information has come to light, or whether there is just despair that the breed can sort it's own problems out ?

Good news that the BVA are in favour of publication of the BVA/KC CM/SM scheme. Lets hope many breeders and pet owners continue to send their views in to the KC and the BVA.
It doesn't look as though most of the Clubs are going to use the period of consultation given by the KC and BVA to consult with their members, either to explain the BVA/KC CM/SM scheme or give each member an opportunity to give their views. Pity, as many of the Clubs' members are pet owners and would surely vote for publication of results.

Maggie Ford
 
Someone help me remember, please - it seems to me that there was a pedigree website that showed COI figures on the pedigrees. I remember looking at the pedigree for a litter sister of my Capers and Caprice and I seem to recall a pretty low figure. (They were an outcross from the Kilspindie kennel outcrossed to a Homerbrent bitch.) But now I can't find any COI info on any pedigree website.

Pat
 
Last edited:
Perhaps it was the A.E.N.A. database?
Not sure how accurate or precise the COIs are though.
Sins
 
Pat, on the AENA pedigree database is a Kilspindie female that I believe is littermate to your Caprice. The COI is 3.22% - and that database does COI to 8 generations if the pedigree is complete to that.

In regards to the original post, there is a very informative link that describes inbreeding coefficients and what they are about, along with ancestor loss coefficients and relationship (of sire to dam) coefficients, at the following link: - http://www.czerwonytrop.com/inb/index.php?full=ok&lng=en

I believe the EBV program ties these up, along with other considerations, in a neat package.

Oreo
 
Thanks - can someone give a link to the AENA database? Must one be a member to view pedigrees? (Some of the sites require a password.)

I know that one of the seven littermates of my Capers and Caprice is on most of the pedigree databases - date of birth of this litter is April 2, 1990 and litter registration number is L-2820. Liz did heavy line-breeding, but this litter was an outcross - dam was Homerbrent Lace Cap and sire was Kilspindie Morocco. And Rocco was also an outcross - sire was Kilspindie Mockingbird and dam was Sukev Casablanca of Saintbrides & Kilspindie.

Although Tracy and Rocco were not what I consider long-living - there were some long-lived dogs in the pedigree. Cassie lived to 15, Songbird to 15, etc.

Capers lived to 16 1/2 and Caprice to 16. I've always believed that those two out-crosses were a favorable factor.

Pat
 
Margaret
I find it quite interesting that the KC are now discussing outcrossing, because at a recent seminar Jeff Samson was saying that although CKCS could be the first breed to have to outcross, we hadn't reached that point yet, I wonder if some more information has come to light, or whether there is just despair that the breed can sort it's own problems out ?

Good news that the BVA are in favour of publication of the BVA/KC CM/SM scheme. Lets hope many breeders and pet owners continue to send their views in to the KC and the BVA.
It doesn't look as though most of the Clubs are going to use the period of consultation given by the KC and BVA to consult with their members, either to explain the BVA/KC CM/SM scheme or give each member an opportunity to give their views. Pity, as many of the Clubs' members are pet owners and would surely vote for publication of results.

Maggie Ford


Could I thank both Maggie and Margaret for their Posts, what I wonder is when the CM/SM Scheme Results are Published, what will the Results be for those Cavaliers Bred in Puppy Farms be.

I hate the idea of Puppy Farms ,but.........if it's the Show Bred Cavaliers who have the mostly High IN-Bred COI's then has the Bullet to be Biten and some Cavaliers from Puppy Farms be being introduced to widen the Cavalier Gene Pool.

If the Cavalier Breed has to be Salvaged ,this could be Food for Thought.

It has been quoted that the average COI's for Cavaliers Registered with Kennel Club is 5.4 %, but remember, as the Cavalier Breeders have insisted ,only 20% of those Cavaliers Registered are from CKCS CLUB MEMBERS, so is it the 80% of Cavaliers from Puppy Farms and BYB'S that may have lower COI's that have made the 5.4 % COI's possible as the average for COI's in the Cavalier Breed

Bet
 
I hate the idea of Puppy Farms ,but.........if it's the Show Bred Cavaliers who have the mostly High IN-Bred COI's then has the Bullet to be Biten and some Cavaliers from Puppy Farms be being introduced to widen the Cavalier Gene Pool.

If the Cavalier Breed has to be Salvaged ,this could be Food for Thought.

It has been quoted that the average COI's for Cavaliers Registered with Kennel Club is 5.4 %, but remember, as the Cavalier Breeders have insisted ,only 20% of those Cavaliers Registered are from CKCS CLUB MEMBERS, so is it the 80% of Cavaliers from Puppy Farms and BYB'S that may have lower COI's that have made the 5.4 % COI's possible as the average for COI's in the Cavalier Breed

Bet

Bet
When the figures of 20% club members versus 80% puppy farmers are quoted we might be doing some people who choose not to belong to Cavalier Clubs a big disservice. They might be very caring owners, very health conscious and very much wanting to do what is best for the breed. When I was health rep. I had many enquiries asking how people could do their best to breed healthy puppies. Many people have left the Clubs because of the politics, many never were interested in showing and never joined, some just want to breed the odd litter because they love having puppies around. It doesn't necessarily mean they don't care and we musn't lump them all together with "puppy farmers" who really don't care.

But some do want to do their best for the breed, but unless they were in the system to get Club heart forms, know where the health clinics were, etc. know how to get their eyes tested etc.they could not easily health test their dog, or even know what should be done.

The introduction of KC Accredited Breeder, the BVA CMSM and Heart schemes, Mate Select and the EBV will also help all those breeders. Then potential buyers will be able to identify testing breeders whether they be in or out of the Clubs.

And most interestingly, when the results are published from the health schemes, we should be able to identify many unknown dogs with good scans and good hearts that we can use to prevent us potentially having to outcross to another breed.

Maggie
 
Bet wrote: could some Cavaliers from Puppy Farms be being introduced to widen the Cavalier Gene Pool.

But Cavaliers from puppy farms still come from the same gene pool. There isn't some parallel gene pool being used by puppy farmers, they all go back to the original small number of dogs. And most puppy farms use the same stud dogs (their own) over and over again, so reducing the gene pool further. And if they don't have genuine pedigrees, no-one will know if the dogs they produce would widen the gene pool or not.

And if my very pretty ex-puppy farm Aled is anything to go by, somewhere along the line some well-bred Cavaliers have got into the wrong hands. Not everyone breeding what you might call 'mainstream' Cavaliers is as stringent as they should be at vetting homes, and dogs can get sold to the first comer if an owner dies or has to go into care. One of the reasons Many Tears neuters all its rescues is to prevent them getting back into puppy farmers' hands in spite of the care MT take over home checks. So you will still come back to the same gene pool.

It's the way the Cavalier breed developed that makes the gene pool question so difficult.

Kate, Oliver and Aled
 
The other thing with puppy farms is it's so easy to make up pedigrees in this day and age from the internet, especially if the pups being sold aren't KC registered. I, or you, or anyone could go onto a website and devise a pedigree for your puppies as a puppy farmer or a byb. The people who buy those pups will be impressed!:yikes The ones that give a wide berth are the ones that have done their homework. and how many are they? sad but true :bang:
 
Some cavalier in-bred co-efficients.

The other thing with puppy farms is it's so easy to make up pedigrees in this day and age from the internet, especially if the pups being sold aren't KC registered. I, or you, or anyone could go onto a website and devise a pedigree for your puppies as a puppy farmer or a byb. The people who buy those pups will be impressed!:yikes The ones that give a wide berth are the ones that have done their homework. and how many are they? sad but true :bang:


SOME CAVALIER IN-BRED CO-EFFICIENTS

Let me put another thought to my Post , OK , the COI's from Puppy farms wont work, but what if ,say about 30 Cavaliers were bought from Puppy Farms and BYB's , Health Tested for SM and MVD, and had no problems from those Conditions , then let them be being used to try and get the Cavalier Breed out of the Mess it's in at the moment because of those Two Conditions.

The Researchers have given the Figure of around 90% of Cavaliers have CM , this is Chacterised by the Brain being too Big for the Skull ,the Cerebro Spinal Fluid I believe can't get round the Brain properly, this can involve Syrinxes being formed.

We also have been told by the Researchers ,that 50% of Cavaliers have Heart Murmurs at 5-6 years of age, and that there are many Cavaliers to-day who can be Carriers of the MVD Genes.

So would the idea of using some Cavaliers from Puppy Farms and BYB's who had no sign of MVD and SM not work, why would'nt it .surely it's worth a try to give our Cavaliers a Future.

Let the CKCS CLUB who have a lot of Funds , buy those Cavaliers to give this a try .

Bet
 
But Cavaliers from puppy farms still come from the same gene pool. There isn't some parallel gene pool being used by puppy farmers, they all go back to the original small number of dogs. And most puppy farms use the same stud dogs (their own) over and
Kate, Oliver and Aled


There has to be an explanation why the cavalier COI mean value is only 5.4
There has to be a lot of genetic diversity somewhere other than in show bred dogs if my bitch, with no ancestor doubled up in three generations, mated to a dog with the same lack of doubling in his three generations, would have puppies with a greater COI than the mean average.

If it is because of the shared ancestors way back in the pedigree, then there must be a lot of cavaliers that don't share that same show dog ancestory to any great extent.

Cavaliers go back to the same few dogs but from the figures that can be seen in the Breed Record Supplement the very linebred ( inbred ) show dogs are a small subsection.
There will be other subsections within the other 80% and their collection of genes will been bred into them for a different reason than just to be pretty enough to win at shows.
It may have been they were keen stud dogs or fertile bitches that whelped well and had big litters, or just that they were hardy enough to survive puppy farm conditions into adulthood

My frustration, and I should imagine that Maggie as another ex-Cavalier Club Representative may feel the same, is that there is so much that could be set in motion now to limit the damage being done to the breed.

Because so many cannot look outside the box and consider using unknown cavalier lines or outcrossing to another breed I would think as a priority there should be:-

Scanning and identification of older Grade A stud dogs and a project to store their semen for future use.
Cooperation with overseas owners to identify and import semen from significant Grade A dogs for storage and future use.

If there was a real will to save the breed, without the usual proviso that the look and the temperament must not be changed in any way, then serious thought could be given to identifying 'puppy farm' dogs and bitches that could be bought into breeding programmes, or the Club could ask the advice of the geneticists, who really know just what needs to be done, to consider a project of carefully controlled outcrossing to another breed.

A couple of my own thoughts here...... When people say that they don't agree with outcrossing to another breed, or looking at using dogs with unknown pedigree lines because they don't want to lose the look and the temperament of cavaliers, are they actually saying they would prefer SM to continue to affect the breed than for those two characteristics to change?

It is the dogs that suffer. If they could have a voice would they agree with these lovers of the breed?

Re looks: We all adored our cavaliers in the 60s, 70s , 80s, 90s and 2000s even if they were not as big eyed, short nosed, cushioned faced, perfectly marked, long backed and short legged etc. as the fashionable cavalier in the show ring today.

Re: Temperament. It is being recognised that SM dogs can often have uncertain temperaments because they fear being touched. They have been known to attack other dogs and sometimes even family members. If SM affected cavaliers continue to be added to the gene pool because Club breeders cannot self-regulate, then we may be on our way to losing the sweet cavalier temperament anyway?
 
Back
Top