Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver  I could be wrong here... but I think even breeding a simple cross like a maltese/yorkie might be likelier to be healthy than its two parents. I think that because these undesirable traits are driven by recessive genes, breeding to another breed without them makes it more likely that the dominant, healthy expression will cover. I also think this would only be true in the first generation.
I don't think this is what's driving the designer dog market, but I saw on APL some crosses that seemed sensible to me. There was a ... puggle? I think, that was a pug with a less extreme face. And I do like cockapoos, though I'm not sure there's a real program behind that or just indiscriminate crossing.
Anyway, I agree with Mardelin's bottom line, and would also add anyone breeding should carefully consider if what they are offering the breed is worth it, considering the horrendous dog overpopulation problem. It's not something anyone with a dog and a dream should embark upon. |
Breeding a Maltese and Yorkie maybe not be the most desirable. Since both have a higher % change of obtaining shunt. And since shunt can produce itself at any generation, it's shooting in the dark.
And you're right breeding although an art, it is also a science. So, when embarking on such an endeavor it should be done with a great deal of study and thought. It isn't for the faint at heart. I guess that is why I breed so minimally and not without a great deal of planning, preparing and believe me a lot of second thoughts.
I love all dogs. I've had cross breeds and pure breds all my life. And I think more about the fact that they are living, breathing creatures and they depend on humans to take care of them and do the best by them. Not make money off of them.