Line breeding / Inbreeding discussion

I think some very good info was being discussed on the old deer forum about breeding. So I thought I would take it upon myself to transfer some of the posts to here so the discussion can be continued.

Brianjames

Member

Username: Brianjames



Post Number: 42

Registered: 07-2008

Posted From: 69.27.203.97





Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 02:23 pm:

Mitochondrial DNA is found in the mitochondria of the cell. It Is the chief mechanism for energy production in the cell. Mitochondrial DNA can only be inherited from the mother. How many people believe this DNA has something to do with antler growth? Maybe some forms of mitochondrial DNA in the cell are responsible for turning over more enery providing for more efficent antler growth.



The only way to introduce new forms of mitochindrial DNA into your herd is to purchase outside does. It is not passed on through semen.



When looking at a pedigree of a big buck an "anchor doe" is pointed out. the anchor doe is ONLY on the very bottom of the pedigree. the "anchor doe" and the big buck share the exact same mitochondrial DNA. But, the motochrial line stops at a buck because the buck cannot pass on his mitochondrial DNA.



If you were to clone a deer, the clone would have the same DNA except for in the mitochondria, unless the donner egg was from the same materal line. With the same environment would the deer grow up the same?



So, how many people think Mitochondrial DNA has alot to do with antler growth? What are your thoughts on this?



Alot of farmers make vast improvements in thier herd though AI alone, so I don't think its a very big factor. But, at the same time I've seen mother's and womb sisters produce big bucks, while the orginal buck seems to have little passdown characteristics of his own rack.



what is your opinion?

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 924

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240

Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 04:25 pm:

Brian,

Very good points regarding mitochondria. I would like to add that it is not 100% proven that "all" mitochondria comes from the female. From my understanding it is the vast majority, but not a complete 100% every single time.



Unfortunately, doe do not grow antlers so selection by pedigree alone for what we think may be a "super doe" may very well be a "super dud", where selecting for antler growth is concerned. Yea, we can look at a postions held on a pedigree, but all a pedigree really is is a record of ancestors and nothing more. A pedigree is a lot like a magic "8" ball, where you can ask it a question, shake it up and it will give you random answer. Breeding selection should be done based on the animals characteristics or traits rather than creating "fancy candy" on paper.



I am convinced a "super doe" is something that is not produced, but rather lucked into when she is around 5 or 6 years old. Everybody seems to pay the greatest attention to what the buck produces but little regard is given to what the doe produces. Honestly, I would much sooner buy a doe fawn from a proven doe rather than semen from a buck. Why? Because I feel that I will have better odds of creating offspring that will also provide better odds of producing, inheritably speaking.



Over the last several years I have been watching this industry blossom into what it is today. Back 9-10 years ago a 200" buck was raved like a 400" buck is today. Even the big framed 180-190" buck would prompt a drive across country to see them first hand. One thing that never changed is the persistence of the deer farmer to breed the biggest buck to the "mother" of another big buck, resulting in some awesome antler growth improvements over the last 10 years.



In all honestly, I wish I had the answers or even guidelines for each step that needs to be taken to produce bigger buck. The truth is I don't, but I love to research and formulate theories just like the next guy. I do know of a particular doe that it doesn't matter what you put in her, as far as semen, she will produce 140-180" yearlings and 180-240" 2-year-olds that look nothing like the father. The doe really doesn't have a pedigree of big names behind her, but she has been making several different "unproven" buck look really good over the last 3-4 years.



How many of today's great buck still have their mother? If you don't think a doe is the most important part, just try to buy the mother of a big buck and the answer almost every time is - aww, I can't sell her.... LOL



To get back to the mitochondria, I like to think it has a LOT to do with the antler growth. After all, it takes a lot of energy to grow antlers and the more energy the cells produce, it's that much more energy that goes towards producing "HORNS"...

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 925

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240

Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 02:31 pm:

This is getting interesting but we are over-looking one important aspect and that is dominant and recessive genes. Let us also not confuse mitochondria with chromosomes/genes. Yes, I agree that mitochondria contains a small amount of DNA, which are essential for the functions of mitochondria, but the majority of inheritance comes from genes. If I'm not mistaken, these genes are what accounts for a 50/50 contribution from both male and female. It is the function of the mitochondria to use and select from those genes to form cells...



Mitochondria is, in most cases, contributed largely by the female. Again, mitochondria function is the cells main energy source. Mitochondria is also the blue print for creating functioning proteins and to control cell development, IE; embryo.



Chromosomes are made up of DNA and protein that is found in cells. Gene sections make up a chromosome. Of those many genes, you will have dominant and recessive genes. Look at a chromosome as if were a train made up of box cars. Each one of those box cars would either be red or blue, with red being dominant and blue be recessive.



Now picture two trains having the exact amount of cars running parallel to one another. The red and blue cars are not in the same exact order of each other. As the train tracks come together, the two trains pair up and when two red cars are paired a dominant trait will be expressed in the "new" train/chromosome. When two blue cars pair up, a recessive trait will be expressed. When a red car and a blue car come together, the red being the dominant will usually over power the recessive.



This is why line breeding is favorable because you can, to a degree, control how the train cars on both track are lined up and/or paired.



Now getting back to mitochondria, I feel that it plays a huge role in how the initial cells start to divide in a developing embryo. After all, it is the job of mitochondria to provide the blue print and feed the cells of that embryo...



Also, if we can't get through a conversation without "pimping" names, then I am out. I enjoy talking about deer and sharing information, but I don't feel "plugs" needs to be a part of it to get our points/opinions across...

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 930

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240





Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 02:50 pm:

Brian,

Line breeding and inbreeding are two different beasts, and evident by the long history of nay-sayers, it is usually the ignorant of the topic that criticize line-breeding.... No insult intended.



Inbreeding is when an offspring bears a relationship greater than 50% to one of its parents. A father-daughter cross would result in offspring with 75% relation to the fathers blood. This could indeed lead to inbreeding depression if the breeding pattern is carried out 2 or more successive generations.



Line breeding, just as an open outcross -- let me say that again -- Line Breeding, just the same as an open outcross results in 50% or less relationship to one of its ancestors. When two unrelated animals breed, both of those animals contribute 50% of their genetic code. When you cross half siblings, you still are only contributing 50% of any one animals genetic code, and not a spec more. When an uncle-niece cross is made, it is only contributing 37.5% of relation to one particular animal.



Anybody that has studied or breeds pure bred animals understands that a single 50% contribution of one particular ancestors blood can still be obtained and used to influence offspring hundreds of years later, without the use of semen.



Another key benefit of line breeding is that a breeder doesn't have to buy the bull directly, when they can cross half sibling's and still have offspring resulting in a 50% contribution from the grandfather.... For example, a son who's grandfather on the top side as well as on the bottom side is highroller, resulting from a half sib mating, will contain 50% of high rollers blood, just as if high roller were his direct father. But the real beauty of line-breeding is, you are still picking up a 50% outcross through the unrelated grandmothers on the top and bottom. The doe are used to feed the line its genetic improvements in this example, as well as hybrid vigor.



On the flip side of this, if line-breeding were used on "super doe" it could be even more powerful as you now are including the mtDNA as well as feeding the line its genetic improvements through the buck, which is the one that grows the antlers that expresses the traits we all are trying to improve upon. Follow what I am saying here?



That my friends is line-breeding. It has nothing to do with inbreeding or inbreeding depression.

Bjs

Member

Username: Bjs



Post Number: 45

Registered: 08-2008

Posted From: 76.2.221.218





Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 03:20 pm:

Yes, That is true... but you make both the good traits stronger and the bad.

With dogs you can see the results easier...If you breed back to the same genetics to get a block head look... You will increase that if that line has that look...

But you also increase the bad traits such as over bite or bad tempers.

You need to watch what you are line breeding... You need to match correctly good and bad traits and breed the bad out.

Line breeding works great when done correctly.



I am sure you knew that,but I just wanted to let anyone who is unsure about line breeding.

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 931

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240





Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 04:08 pm:



In comparison to and to add an example to the post antler just made, let's look at something as simple as breeding dogs.



When you breed a pure bred labrador to another pure bred labrador, what will the puppies be? You can be pretty much assured that they will be labradors as well, right? This is what is called breeding for predictability. You don't get predictability by breeding a poodle to a labrador and "hoping" for a litter of labradors....



Unfortunately, in my opinion, this is what is happening in the deer breeding world. We are breeding labradors to poodles and hoping for a full litter of labradors, so to speak. Yea, we can get the occasional champion labrador, the occasional poodle and there will be the inferior ones in the middle that resemble both and wont breed true.



By mixing and matching we add more variables to the predictability and make it harder to predict what the offspring will be. Follow what I am saying here?



Yes, I agree we can get a few real toppers or two but it will be hard to get them consistently with a fewer number of breedings. It seems as though everyone is working to produce the next "biggest buck", but little attention is being paid to producing the next biggest buck that can produce consistently with a fewer number of breedings.



I would much sooner feed 20 deer that produce 250" buck consistently, rather than feed 300 deer in order to produce just one or two 300" buck with most of his siblings ranging from 150" to 200", which is where most of the foundation stock originated from.



In most breed registry's data is supplied for number the breedings and the number of offspring for each animal and is recorded. It is easy to search "how many" matings a particular animal has done and also how many of those offspring went on to be great and produce great. Then it is just a simple mathematical equation that determines what a great sire or dam is. As far as I know, this industry has a "pedigree directory", which is nothing close to a true breed registry.



As was pointed out earlier, in this industry great deer are mostly determined by the hype that gets created around them. Unfortunately, if each and every buck were gauged on their true performance, a lot of them would fall short of their insinuated greatness...



Brian,

Line breeding creates consistency, just as a labrador breeding another labrador will create labradors. Out-crossing is breeding a labrador to a poodle and "hoping" for a labrador. Yea, you will get something that may look and act like a champion labrador, but as soon as you get your first stud service client, and most of the puppies end up looking like poodles, you will have some explaining to do as to why the great champion can't produce labradors "consistently"...

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 932

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240





Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 04:17 pm:

bjs,

You are exactly right and unlike breeding dogs, we have an outlet for our culls --- hunting ranches. Selection is the number one rule for anyone attempting line breeding....



Inbreeding should only be attempted by someone who dedicates their life, not checkbook, to breeding animals...

Beavercreek

Member

Username: Beavercreek



Post Number: 119

Registered: 01-2006

Posted From: 98.22.51.251

Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 06:12 pm:

Brian, in my opinion i think the best crosses is when a line is linebred pretty tight and then outcrossed. There is some sort of genetic vigor there. I then would probally go back into the line. Thats why i think rolex is doing so well. Highroller,BW Sunny and alot of deans blood is bred really really tight and it don't seem to do as well when it is line bred but when outcrossed it seems to explode. All the huge BW Sunny sons were outcrossed.. Timberjack,rolex, is highroller outcrossed.

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 933

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240





Posted on Thursday, April 02, 2009 - 10:16 pm:

Here is an example pedigree. If you seen a pedigree with Rolex in each one of these spots;



Question #1

Is this in-breeding or line-breeding?



Question #2

Please explain your answer to question #1.

Spring_valley

Member

Username: Spring_valley



Post Number: 19

Registered: 09-2008

Posted From: 74.47.9.194

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 01:38 am:

line breeding. You said earlyer 50% of one deer is line breeding. this example is only 50% Rolex.



------------------------------------------

Bjs

Member

Username: Bjs



Post Number: 48

Registered: 08-2008

Posted From: 76.2.221.218





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 01:42 am:

It's more than that...First off I look at every avenue of Rolex.

Look at every bad thing first.

Is he a hard keeper(does he lose alot of weight) is he a doe killer and the list goes on. Put him down does his teeth match up...ect. every little thing because you will make that stronger every time you breed back to him.

Now look at your doe EVERYTHING on her as well, look at the bad... does she have a bad over bite ect. Do not pick a doe that has the same problems...You may be able to correct problem he has, if you cross him with genes from a doe that has whatever he is lacking as a strong attribute on her side.

Identify breeding populations that have no genetic flaws, or identify existing flaws so they can be eliminated.

You want to stay away from close line breeding, more so if there are alot of flaws.And you really want to watch how many times you do it.

There is no definite number of time or how close, it all depends on the flaws.

That is how I do mine.



-------------------------------------------

Mike_heiter

Member

Username: Mike_heiter



Post Number: 174

Registered: 10-2006

Posted From: 67.235.4.125





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 01:51 am:

I agree with Spring Valley that the offspring will still only be 50% Rolex... from what I can tell it would actually be like breeding with Rolex himself even though he goes all the way back to the GG Grandsires.



-------------------------------------------

Liveoak

Member

Username: Liveoak



Post Number: 42

Registered: 08-2007

Posted From: 148.78.26.190

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 02:31 am:

I would say line breeding, its still half-brother to half-sister everytime.



--------------------------------------------

Brianjames

Member

Username: Brianjames



Post Number: 50

Registered: 07-2008

Posted From: 69.27.203.97





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 07:05 am:

So does that pedigree make a big buck, or a big flop?



Besides High Roller, I would like to see some more examples of pedigrees where two or more of the grandparents are the same. We have RolexX10. He is High Roller on the Dam and sire side. But, Im still not convinced that it was the line breeding that made that deer a success. Just asuperior sire and a suoerior dam, If maxbo were on top I think the cross would have still been a success. We'll see. We AIed her to Maxbo 727 this year. That cross contains several outcrosses on both the dam and sire side. So we will see.

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 934

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 96.247.144.240





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 09:09 am:

Patients Brian.... We'll get there...



Yes, this is linebreeding and as Mike said, it is still contributing 50% of Rolex even 4 generations later.



This line bred pedigree is only as good as the "doe" that are used to feed the genetics. Perferably, these doe would have been based on like-to-like selection, as far as their sire.



Also, Rolex may have been used to breed 20 doe, but only 4 of those doe who proved themselves got to move forward, in the pedigree above.



Here is the next step. Look at this pedigree and determine if we are line-breeding or inbreeding in this example. Please look at the unrelated great grand-dam's as we've selected the doe based on what they produced as far as the best sons of Rolex... from the initial group of 20 doe.

Beavercreek

Member

Username: Beavercreek



Post Number: 120

Registered: 01-2006

Posted From: 98.22.51.251

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 09:54 am:

john, is it rolex 50% Unrelated doe 1 25% and Unrelated doe 2 25% ???? still line breeding but now you have the superior does of the 20 contributing to the equation.. With them on top and bottom predictability should be getting better ...



------------------------------------

Droptine

Member

Username: Droptine



Post Number: 48

Registered: 02-2009

Posted From: 99.53.137.147





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 12:42 pm:

This is good stuff, although a little confusing I have a question, if you were to breed a Rolex son to the Daughter of a Rolex son, what kind percentage of Rolex would you get in the off-spring? My math's not so good



-----------------------------------------

Wmwhitetails

Member

Username: Wmwhitetails



Post Number: 91

Registered: 02-2005

Posted From: 67.208.236.164





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 01:59 pm:

This would still be Line breeding,

I do have a question John,

Why do you have the Unrelated Doe 4 at the bottom of the page?



--------------------------------------------------------

Spring_valley

Member

Username: Spring_valley



Post Number: 20

Registered: 09-2008

Posted From: 74.47.9.194

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 02:11 pm:

Droptine That would be 37.5%

This is a grreat thread, but for a new farmer like me I have to read a few times.

John_swank

Member

Username: John_swank



Post Number: 935

Registered: 11-2002

Posted From: 70.16.82.203





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 03:27 pm:

You guys are really getting into this stuff, that's good.



That last example pedigree was line-breeding as well. I have to add just one more pedigree, a little more information and then see if we can determine if it is a line-bred or in-bred animal. Please supply the percetage of Rolex blood in the resulting animal.



Also, I will add a second pedigree with the percentages of each generation. In order to figure out Wright's coefficients, you would add the percentages of each generation where the same name appears more than once.









Dan,

I tucked that down there so I could move it around the page, rather than retyping. Forgot to delete it... LOL

Wmwhitetails

Member

Username: Wmwhitetails



Post Number: 92

Registered: 02-2005

Posted From: 67.208.236.164





Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 03:47 pm:

It's to late to think this hard,

Would you end up with 62.5% Rolex on that one?



--------------------------

Liveoak

Member

Username: Liveoak



Post Number: 43

Registered: 08-2007

Posted From: 148.78.26.190

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 04:27 pm:

Its late and Ive got to take turkey hunters out in the morning but I would say to me that would be borderline inbreeding for two reasons. I was always taught father to daughter is too tight, especially if you want to bring the sire back in again. 2nd you've got a buck thats 75% rolex breeding a doe thats 50% rolex(a result of the father/daughter breeding). I personaly wouldnt go that far, anything over 112.5% to me would be inbreeding. Just my thoughts and I'm willing to be wrong, maybe I've never been willing to push it far enough? But I'll say again by far the best topic Ive read in a while!!





Liveoak

Member

Username: Liveoak



Post Number: 44

Registered: 08-2007

Posted From: 148.78.26.190

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 04:32 pm:

Also meant to ask about the unrelated doe 2 John. That would make her a 25% contributer, that kinda throws a kink in there for me if its the same deer in both places...would that be harm or good in a breeding that tight? I would think a different doe would be better but I'm willing to be wrong?



-----------------------------------

Beavercreek

Member

Username: Beavercreek



Post Number: 121

Registered: 01-2006

Posted From: 98.22.51.251

Posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 - 06:19 pm:

It would be inbreeding.. 62.5% rolex in that one..

steve, if unrelated doe #2 is our power doe out of the 20 that we picked from above then we want her on the pedigree on top and bottom with 25% contribution..



------------------------------------------

Liveoak

Member

Username: Liveoak



Post Number: 45

Registered: 08-2007

Posted From: 148.78.26.190

Posted on Saturday, April 04, 2009 - 09:40 am:

In a normal line breeding situation, I've been understanding to bring the power doe to the GD on the dam side bred to the 2nd best son and have her twice as GGGD on the dam side of the top bred to half brothers to bring out the traits in her to the best extent. You have to be linebreeding atleast 4 unrelated bloodlines in that scenario to make it work to have something to cross out to but would that water down or improve upon the main bloodline you're trying to breed? Thats why I find this conversation so interesting, when someone brings up linebreeding in conversations(especially after a few drinks)wether its dogs, deer or cows you seem to get 5 or 6 scenarios that are all slightly different but each says is the "ONLY" way to line breed....

Iadeer

Member

Username: Iadeer



Post Number: 10

Registered: 05-2008

Posted From: 67.55.233.81

Posted on Sunday, April 05, 2009 - 04:49 am:

Hi guys.



Nice to see information on here that people can use.



I got a "C" in genetics in college, i hated counting fruit flys.

Mitocondrial dna was not even a theroy at that time.

Mitocondria are the engines or powerhouses inside the cell.



The earlier numbers of mitocondria inside the male and female cells must refer to the *** cell I guess. The mother does pass on her mtdna to her sons. The only way to take advantage of this phenominon is to line or in-breed, maternially.



When you do this the mtdna doesn't have to be rewriten, it already matches both parents and so the offspring from this type of mating have an even stronger powerhouse, ready to take the nutrients given and use them to produce new cells. Weather it be antler cell or skin cells.



Yes, in-breeding and line-breeding intenceify both desirable and undesirable traits.



You have to truly be a breeder to use these practices. You have to have patience and a plan or a goal to acheive.



Many people can enjoy raising deer without using these types of intensive breeding scemes.



If you want a pen of deer all looking similar line-breed or in-breed. If you want each deer born to be diffenent than the last one just breed any old buck to your does.



Always remember the importance of dominant and recessive genes. If you want long tines and this trait is recessive then this trait must be homozygous for long tines to be expressed.



There is so much unknown about antler characteristic and how these traits are inherited.



With much more time the way we are going today, maybe we will actually know something about whitetail breeding and antler traits in general. There is much understood about coat color because both sexes express this trait.



good luck everybody



fred

What happend to Swank, did we loose him somewhere in cyber space?

West Michigan Whitetails said:

What happend to Swank, did we loose him somewhere in cyber space?

Click to expand...

Still here....

nice avatar!! ;-)

John or Kurt, what are your thoughts on the does positioning in the pedigree and if she should be bred to two half brothers of a totally different line? And to each of you, what is your "prefered" positioning of a power doe and how deep do you think the line breeding should be taken before its crossed out?



What are your thoughts on line breeding a doe? Having the same doe as the ggd in all four spots? would the percentages be better to cross the resulting deer out to a line bred animal or non line bred animal? I know this seems to be off the original subject of the mtdna but its all tied in together I believe and has led to some very useful info.