Breeding with a Monorchid?

All topics pertaining to health and diseases that may affect your Tamaskan Dog, as well as treatment.
Rahne

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Rahne » Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:02 pm

I had merged this topic with the old one but didn't realize it was locked.. so sorry everyone that you couldn't respond anymore :oops:

MelB
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by MelB » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:01 pm

Nino wrote:Third, considering that Mas'kann is from an inbreeding litter having Jackal as a grandfather on both sides, he more than likely carries at least 50% of genes from Jackal (even more likely when considering how they look a lot alike IMHO) and Jackal having had around 10 litters - his genes is already spread quite a lot over the breed and the genes that he will bring into the breed isn't really that unique but rather very common..
Just to add that I also believe it wouldn't be a good idea to breed from Mas'Khann because Jackal has produced at least one pup with severe bilateral hip dysplasia & arthritis (diagnosed at 9 months but also spotted by a highly trained research vet at 8 weeks old).

User avatar
Taz
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by Taz » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:06 pm

Nino wrote:The problem I see here is not only using a dog with a known genetic defect, that will give the genes for this defect to all of his ofspring (if i am right heritability of monarchism isn't entirely known - but I will work from the assumption that it need to come from both parents) when looking at the Tamaskan there are SO few dogs and most if not all are closely related, which means that finding a ONE bitch from clear lines will be hard, but when the owners of the pups from that litter is want to breed their dogs, it is even harder to find.
Using healthy dogs that might produce pups that can have a defect versus using dogs that have a defect and is certain to give its genes to their pups - I clearly will say the first is best.
HAD it been possible to test for this defect it would have been totally different since it could be bred out within 2 generations again.

Second to this debate, I don't really feel that any of the dogs in that litter should have been used in breeding, as far as I have been told Mas'kann isn't the only dog with testicular problems (not 100% sure, but I believe that one of two other males had their testicles going back up) - which for me would confirm that this litter shouldn't be used at all (I know that Vega will be used, but as she is a female there is at least some chance that she isn't a sufferer - though I don't think she should have been used with this big of a risk).
Using the father is ruled out as he have been castrated (and he was monorchid too) using the mother with the right male isn't in my opinion as bad.

Third, considering that Mas'kann is from an inbreeding litter having Jackal as a grandfather on both sides, he more than likely carries at least 50% of genes from Jackal (even more likely when considering how they look a lot alike IMHO) and Jackal having had around 10 litters - his genes is already spread quite a lot over the breed and the genes that he will bring into the breed isn't really that unique but rather very common..

Taking all of this into account I don't see a good reason to use Mas'kann who have a defect like this, even though he is beautiful and have a good temper - so do a lot of dogs which does not have defects and have more to bring into the breed gene wise..

but this is just my oppinion..
Had he had something really special to bring into the breed gene-wise (from a rarely used line) then yeah, it could be considered for one single litter..
Good post.
"Don't underestimate me.
I know more than I say.
Think more than I speak.
And notice more than you realize".
"you are free to choose
But you are not free
From the consequence of
Your choice "

wen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1430
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 10:48 pm
Location: France

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by wen » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:58 pm

So the common denominator for monorchidies or dysplasia genes (and maybe even DM ?) stays Jackal. So I'm wondering why this dog is still used as breeding dog ? :?
I mean, if it's a safety precaution to select good and healthy dogs for breeding : Which is a good precaution, don't misunderstood me. Then why is it working on a way and not on the other ?
I mean : Put aside the un-breeding descendents but not their producer and it will be a circle without end.
I'm not a breeder, but it seems logical to me :?
"Mieux vivre avec votre chien"
Aide à l'éducation canine et réflexion sur les chiens dits "dangereux"

Rahne

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by Rahne » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:20 pm

wen wrote:So the common denominator for monorchidies or dysplasia genes (and maybe even DM ?) stays Jackal. So I'm wondering why this dog is still used as breeding dog ? :?
You need to ask that question to Lynn. I've opted once for a max. amount of litters rule for both females and males but they don't want that. Lynn wants to use her males for as long as they are producing healthy sperm. She is also worried her males might become infertile if she doesn't use them regularly.

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5209
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by Sylvaen » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:29 pm

It's an interesting discussion but after reading what Rahne wrote, I pretty much agree with her. IF his hips are good and IF a 100% clear (cryptorchid-free bloodline) female can be found, then I think ONE litter would be OK... with breeding restrictions on all the puppies, except for male pups with 2 normal testicles, which could then also be outcrossed to 100% clear (cryptorchid-free bloodline) females, therefore breeding-out the cryptorchidism within a couple of generations (hopefully). Cryptorchid males will still be produced but as long as the new owners are aware and only want a dog for a pet then it shouldn't be a problem, although the surgery is a bit more expensive than a regular castration. At this point, it would be a bit hasty to rule out such a fantastic dog with such a wonderful temperament (provided his hips are very good... if the x-rays score borderline then I'd say it isn't worth it to risk pups with bad hips AND cryptorchidism). I guess it's similar to breeding from a DM-sufferer, as long as only carrier puppies are produced and it is well documented, then it would probably be better for the breed in the long-term (as opposed to not breeding from affected dogs and further limiting the genepool, yet still breeding from carriers...)
wen wrote:So the common denominator for monorchidies or dysplasia genes (and maybe even DM ?) stays Jackal. So I'm wondering why this dog is still used as breeding dog ? :?
I mean, if it's a safety precaution to select good and healthy dogs for breeding : Which is a good precaution, don't misunderstood me. Then why is it working on a way and not on the other ?
I mean : Put aside the un-breeding descendents but not their producer and it will be a circle without end.
I'm not a breeder, but it seems logical to me :?
good point...
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

wen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1430
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 10:48 pm
Location: France

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by wen » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:30 pm

Rahne wrote:
wen wrote:So the common denominator for monorchidies or dysplasia genes (and maybe even DM ?) stays Jackal. So I'm wondering why this dog is still used as breeding dog ? :?
You need to ask that question to Lynn. I've opted once for a max. amount of litters rule for both females and males but they don't want that. Lynn wants to use her males for as long as they are producing healthy sperm. She is also worried her males might become infertile if she doesn't use them regularly.
Oh man, that's not what I call ethical breeding....Moreover than, in the case of Jackal, it's not really healthy sperm is it ?
"Mieux vivre avec votre chien"
Aide à l'éducation canine et réflexion sur les chiens dits "dangereux"

User avatar
frogline
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1117
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 11:08 am
Location: Alsace

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by frogline » Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:51 pm

I'm maybe in a badly comprehension, but I don't understand why it's so many litters with few males..... The race is at the start, I mean that new blood is better for the next generations!
Consanginity is also disruptive in genetic!
What would happened in the future?
Maskhann's an incredible dog when we stay strictly on the esthetic and the thymique balance!
He's awesome and seriously look like a Wolf!!!
His contribution could be a jump in the front for the race, and I say that without any doubt!

I hope that a day he could doing with a wonderful girl!
Perhaps..... Perhaps not, I don't have any choice that speak about and waiting!

User avatar
Nino
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3105
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Aalborg - Denmark

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Nino » Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:09 pm

Just for the record Jackal is DM free..
>> Nino <<
Image

User avatar
AZDehlin
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3032
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 4:52 am
Location: Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA (for now)
Contact:

Re: The Maskhann's case

Post by AZDehlin » Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:40 pm

Nino wrote:The problem I see here is not only using a dog with a known genetic defect, that will give the genes for this defect to all of his ofspring (if i am right heritability of monarchism isn't entirely known - but I will work from the assumption that it need to come from both parents) when looking at the Tamaskan there are SO few dogs and most if not all are closely related, which means that finding a ONE bitch from clear lines will be hard, but when the owners of the pups from that litter is want to breed their dogs, it is even harder to find.
Using healthy dogs that might produce pups that can have a defect versus using dogs that have a defect and is certain to give its genes to their pups - I clearly will say the first is best.
HAD it been possible to test for this defect it would have been totally different since it could be bred out within 2 generations again.

Second to this debate, I don't really feel that any of the dogs in that litter should have been used in breeding, as far as I have been told Mas'kann isn't the only dog with testicular problems (not 100% sure, but I believe that one of two other males had their testicles going back up) - which for me would confirm that this litter shouldn't be used at all (I know that Vega will be used, but as she is a female there is at least some chance that she isn't a sufferer - though I don't think she should have been used with this big of a risk).
Using the father is ruled out as he have been castrated (and he was monorchid too) using the mother with the right male isn't in my opinion as bad.

Third, considering that Mas'kann is from an inbreeding litter having Jackal as a grandfather on both sides, he more than likely carries at least 50% of genes from Jackal (even more likely when considering how they look a lot alike IMHO) and Jackal having had around 10 litters - his genes is already spread quite a lot over the breed and the genes that he will bring into the breed isn't really that unique but rather very common..

Taking all of this into account I don't see a good reason to use Mas'kann who have a defect like this, even though he is beautiful and have a good temper - so do a lot of dogs which does not have defects and have more to bring into the breed gene wise..

but this is just my oppinion..
Had he had something really special to bring into the breed gene-wise (from a rarely used line) then yeah, it could be considered for one single litter..
well put, I completely agree. His cons out weigh the benefit he would provide the breed.

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5209
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Sylvaen » Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:17 am

The only problem is... since Jasper (was) a cryptorchid, and his son Mas'Khann is too... what happens if one of the new owners (of a cryptorchid male puppy from Mas'Khann's litter) decides they reaaaally want to breed? Where do we draw the line? would it be fair to say no (?) despite the fact that Jasper had an (accidental) litter and Mas'Khann, his son, had an allowed litter... it's difficult to be subjective in such a situation and the same cycle could go on for several more generations...
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

User avatar
Nino
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3105
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Aalborg - Denmark

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Nino » Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:27 am

This is why I think the line should be drawn already now Debby - since he does not (despite being well tempered and very handsome) have enough to give to the breed that he should be allowed..
Nothing can be done with the fact of Jasper having an accidental litter, this is the past, but I don't think it's a good idea to start slacking on the rules unless it was an exceptionally good and unique animal - and I just don't think Mas'kann is that extraordinary important to the gene pool..

Besides that I would say should any monorchid dog in the future have an accidental mating - the pregnancy should IMHO be terminated or all potential puppies not be registered (or at least be registered on special terms not allowing them to breed in the future) - there is no reason to give an opportunity to anyone that might have an "accidental" litter - we all know that if there is a hole to slip through there are people willing to do so for their own gain, and no need to give any chance of doing so..
If you see what I mean..
>> Nino <<
Image

User avatar
Katlin
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:48 am
Location: Calgary, AB
Contact:

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Katlin » Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:18 am

Nino wrote:This is why I think the line should be drawn already now Debby - since he does not (despite being well tempered and very handsome) have enough to give to the breed that he should be allowed..
Nothing can be done with the fact of Jasper having an accidental litter, this is the past, but I don't think it's a good idea to start slacking on the rules unless it was an exceptionally good and unique animal - and I just don't think Mas'kann is that extraordinary important to the gene pool..
Agreed and well said. Although Mas'Kann is a beautiful dog I just don't think it's worth the risk. This is for the TDR to decide and since they have already said no to this case on two separate occasions I think it's time to drop it.
Polarose Tamaskan
Polardog Outfitters
Owner of Sierra Kaweah RN RI TDI TRN TTDN CRN-MCL @ Polarose

wen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1430
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 10:48 pm
Location: France

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by wen » Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:38 am

Nino wrote:Besides that I would say should any monorchid dog in the future have an accidental mating - the pregnancy should IMHO be terminated or all potential puppies not be registered (or at least be registered on special terms not allowing them to breed in the future)
the problem is that it hadn't been done... If the litter hadn't been registered or at least registered on special terms, the question wouldn't be asked, as any owner interested in breeding would have look at it.
And Maskhann's case could be transposed to Cody's (who was sent to a breeding home too, if I well remember) or other siblings.
With a father crypto and a grand-father obviously carrier of monorchidie (without speaking of the consanguin accidental mating), all the litter should have been sold with obligation to neuter them in the health precaution. But it hadn't be done. I remember that we were several to be surprised by the TDR decision at this time.
In consequence, pups were sold as any other pure Tamaskans ones (with the high prize coming with it, because, yeah Tamaskan's cost are really high for a non-recognized breed and so, excuse the term, a "cross-dog" for the FCI), when finally, in the health precaution, any of the owner of this litter should breed them.

Oh man, it was hard to translate that in a understandable english...I don't even know if I reached it :oops:
"Mieux vivre avec votre chien"
Aide à l'éducation canine et réflexion sur les chiens dits "dangereux"

User avatar
Nino
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3105
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Aalborg - Denmark

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Nino » Sat Feb 25, 2012 2:20 pm

Wen - whan have happened cannot be undone, IMHO it wasn't a good idea that any of the pups were sold on anything other than pet only terms.. but this is the past, making it "legal" to use a dog now won't make it any better..
All of us buy our dogs at great cost (and I am pretty sure that I paid more than Debby took for any of the pups - so they weren't the most expensive dogs) and all of us risk them turning out with problems, there are no guarantees that any one dog will turn out as breeding quality.

All "we" can do is to make sure that any litter/dog/owner in the future won't be going through the same situation, and then accept that what is done is done..
If I remember correctly all but one pup from Debby was sold on pet contract, with no guaranties what so ever.. and IMHO I think it is crazy to assume that only if there is a contract that a dog should not be used and should be neutralized.. Why isn't this also the new owners responsibility to decide that?
And why is it a necessarity that a dog have to be neutralized because it cannot be used in breeding?
Isn't this up to the owner to decide what is best for the dog then?

- I had to read it twice to be sure I understood correctly :oops:
>> Nino <<
Image

wen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1430
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 10:48 pm
Location: France

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by wen » Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:30 pm

Sorry for my bad english, I'm preparing a flu I think, so I'm not in a very good shape :oops:

I mentioned the sterilization as an assurance that there wouldn't be any breeding, even an hidden one. I've often seen those conditions in french breeding home, so it didn't seem strange for me. But things and rules are different in diffrents countries ;)
(hope it was better)
"Mieux vivre avec votre chien"
Aide à l'éducation canine et réflexion sur les chiens dits "dangereux"

User avatar
Nino
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3105
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Aalborg - Denmark

Re: Breeding with a Monorchid?

Post by Nino » Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:56 pm

hehe.. well English isn't my first language either so it's easier to talk past each other ;)
I have seen so too.. that's why I think that pups of such shouldn't be able to register in the future (or at least on some special terms)
>> Nino <<
Image

Post Reply