Re: Inbreeding

["Claudia Provin" <provincmk@fanninelectric.com>]

Ah, Kat, you are such an intelligent, articulate lady that I feel intimated
in disagreeing with you---it's kind of like taking on a brain like Tom Ivers
(SAID WITH A SMILE!!)    To keep this endurance-related---I am concerned
because I am breeding future endurance horses, and using in/linebreeding in
my program.

. But, no matter how you slice it, breeding a  daughter to a grand son is
breeding closely related individuals.
            Quite true.

With the  understanding that not only to the poor quality foals have to be
culled,  but the parents who threw them need to be culled to, and any other
offspring of either of those parents need to be "tested" to see if they  are
also "carriers" of these negative traits.
            This is all working with the assumption that said program is
rife with negative traits, whether dominant or recessive.   While I suppose
this COULD be the case---it certainly should not be--especially when
choosing lines who are already inbred to a certain degree, but more
especially when starting out with good stock, and paying attention to the
pedigree.   And perhaps the "efficiency" of in/linebreeding is more
noticeable in Arabians (with what I deal) because they have obviously been
in/linebred for centuries, hence their "purity".

, you don't  understand the underlying philosophy of breeding closely
related  individuals.
            I'll only ask:   Does your understanding come from first-hand
experience, or at least you personally know the people with the first-hand
experience?   And you have personally seen a number of bad horses resulting
from in/linebreeding?    If so, were these resulting offspring worse than
the original parents?   This is not intended to be "sassy", I just tend to
put more faith in experience.
>
But it  has to be done by people who know what the hell they are doing (i.e.
understand the underlying philosophy) and know what traits they are  trying
to set and which ones they might be trying to remove from their  breeding
herd.
        I was not suggesting that every Tom, Dick and Jane use
in/linebreeding (or even breeding)--but that we should not condemn it out of
hand as being the horror you described.   For it is not.

 The more closely related the individuals in your herd, the less genetic
diversity there  is in your herd, and THERFORE the less opportunity there is
for  improvement.
            I know of a number of programs who have used extensive
in/linebreeding, and have maintained diversity at the same time, along with
improvement.    You DO select for the desirable attributes---just like you
would (should) in a "regular" breeding program.
>
And if you are going to do it, you need to find out as much  as you can
about the horse that you are breeding most closely.
            True, as with any breeding program.  You also need to know
things about the ancestors. as in any breeding program----I never said it
should be done without thinking-----
>
> are selecting for what I consider to be the "wrong"  traits,
            What would these "wrong traits" be????  Just curious.

And they love all their horses and think that they  are all perfect so they
aren't going to admit that they may be  something less than "breeding
quality."  Not all, but many.
        Doesn't that "shoe" fit many feet?   I don't think it should be
relegated to in/linebreeders.

), and, I contend, very few people do.
            Once again---I would like to expand that to include ALL
breeding---not just in/linebreeding----there are breeders by the hundreds
who do not pay attention to what they are breeding, whether in/line- or
out-breeding.

that it does have a tendency to lead to neuroses (I might  be able hunt down
the specific studies, but if I have to hunt too hard,  I won't bother).
            No, don't look---I'd rather see the real horse.   I can go to to
a dozen herd of inbred horses to see the results---not one has produced a
"neurotic" horse.   My own included.

 So, unless you specifically select against neurotic,  you are more likely
to end up with it in your inbred herd.
        I can't imagine breeders selecting "for" a neurotic horse and using
it for breeding.   I am sure it could happen---I've just never seen it nor
heard of it.  That would be rather dumb, as you would agree.

            Specific instances I can think of using in/linebreeding very
successfully are the Doyle horses (starting with a nucleus of 3), the
Davenport Conservacy (Craver Farms)(I think it was 19 they started with),
Phara Farms, Al-Marah, and Gainey (among readily recognizable names).
Individuals include Ferzon, Lewisfield Sun God, *Raffles, Dreamazon (and
MANY of *Raffles get).   Again, these are just names that "everybody" knows.
I know individuals who are currently using in/linebreeding (myself included)
very successfully - and I have never seen a neurotic horse in any of these
programs.    I have a fine mare (my only *Raffles bred horse) who has so
many crosses to *Raffles (including *Raffles inbred get) that she is 50%
*Raffles.    She is not neurotic, or "inferior"---she is also not an
exception.
     Regarding the TBs---it seems your experience is in this area (?)--the
only thing I recall having read is that TB breeders feel a good formula for
breeding is to "Give the stallion back all the best blood of his own dam".

Respectfully
Claudia
Texas