Gundog Training Forum

Put simply COI is a way of judging the risk of a mating producing a pup affected by an unknown recessive inherited disorder. If the COI was 25% there would be a 1 in 4 risk for each pup, 10% is 1 in 10 and so on. Obviously with a known mutation you can test and could mate a brother and sister with a 0%chance of the pups being affected by THAT gene mutation...but there are so many other mutations. The other side to this, and the reason line breeding has been popular is that breeding closely related types tends to fix type compared to diverse breeding. A more sensible approach is to try and match type and working abilities without breeding too closely.
The KC gives a rule of thumb of breeding below the breed average, but our aim should be to try and get the breed averages below 6%. Why 6%? A study has shown over 6% reduces general health and fertility.
The KC COIs should be considered to be a minimum value as imports get a score of 0, but it is an easy tool to use.
COI should not be used in isolation, but should be used with field tests, health tests, and conformation assessment. Sometimes an above average COI mating may be a good one, but always have plans for lowering the COI in the next generation.

It's called line breeding when it works, in-breeding when it doesn't.

Judy wrote...."As for Cockers, they are getting so inbred there's going to be trouble in the future its a scary thought. Mind you, there maybe enough illicit Springer blood in there to stave off the inevitable for a while... "

Glad it's not just me that thinks that.

Plainsman wrote:Judy wrote...."As for Cockers, they are getting so inbred there's going to be trouble in the future its a scary thought. Mind you, there maybe enough illicit Springer blood in there to stave off the inevitable for a while... "

Glad it's not just me that thinks that.

Not just in the future...look at AMS, happening right now.

Having said that, and probably contradicting myself, if I wanted another cocker, to get one of what I would class as a 'proper cocker' type, and to have a reasonable idea of what I was getting in terms of type, it would probably have a high COI, and I would be fine with taking that risk whilst weighing up all the other pros and cons.

Judy wrote:Hopefully the experienced breeders have PM'd you...

AS I understand it a lower CoI is healthier in that there are fewer genes duplicated, the higher the CoI creeps the smaller the litters are and the less likely they are to be healthy, a simplistic and generalised view perhaps, there is no doubt, however, that the wider the gene pool the healthier the breed.

As for Cockers, they are getting so inbred there's going to be trouble in the future its a scary thought. Mind you, there maybe enough illicit Springer blood in there to stave off the inevitable for a while...

Very interested in the bit in bold? Where is the data that supports that? I've never noticed this phenomenon?

It has to be remembered that the COI for Labradors of about 6.5% is taken from the whole gene pool, of show, pet and working. In reality, it is highly unlikely that any of us with highly bred working Labradors are going to mate them to show Labradors, so this COI is really not realistic for the working Labrador population.

Arnt labs tested up to the eyeballs anyway, so why not go close?

You have more of chance of getting what you want.

But isn't it a bit of a blunt tool? In theory if you mate two different breeds together they would have a COI of 0% but pups could still be prone to eye and hip problems if both of the parent breeds are affected by these problems as they will both carry genes for them even though they are not related in any way or have I completely misunderstood it?

Nickheref wrote:But isn't it a bit of a blunt tool? In theory if you mate two different breeds together they would have a COI of 0% but pups could still be prone to eye and hip problems if both of the parent breeds are affected by these problems as they will both carry genes for them even though they are not related in any way or have I completely misunderstood it?

Yes thats correct, for example, Labradoodles should come from hip tested parents as both breeds get hip problems.

Kennelmaiden; http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org ... inbreeding

EssGrouse wrote:Arnt labs tested up to the eyeballs anyway, so why not go close?

You have more of chance of getting what you want.

I spose incase a problem that's its not currently possible to test for crops up (or already exists)?

Judy wrote:

Nickheref wrote:But isn't it a bit of a blunt tool? In theory if you mate two different breeds together they would have a COI of 0% but pups could still be prone to eye and hip problems if both of the parent breeds are affected by these problems as they will both carry genes for them even though they are not related in any way or have I completely misunderstood it?

Yes thats correct, for example, Labradoodles should come from hip tested parents as both breeds get hip problems.

Kennelmaiden; http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org ... inbreeding

A sentence from the above link states -
"A low COI will have low risk, but it will also only have a modest benefit. A high COI would produce more consistency and prepotency in the
offspring, but there will also be a significant loss of vigor and health."
I'm having trouble with this "loss of vigor & health" bit. How can this be correct when there are many FTCH's out there with a COI of over 10% ?