Breeding for Improvement?
 

Hi guys, I'm no breeder and I think it will take me a score to even start breeding. It's just that, I love the breed and the ring (which I can't wait to join in).
Anyway, in my quest to learn more about the breed I came across breeders of all types. Forums such as YT also helped me alot from learning with actual experiences from you guys.
From those who really love the breed, there's no other acceptable answer when it comes to the reason for responsible breeding. It must always be, to improve the breed.

What does it truly mean to improve the breed? Let's say all specimens are healthy (assumption) for breeding.
I often see pet-quality yorkies (with a pet pedigree) being bred to a champion. Does it improve the breed?
Or both the dam and the sire should have desirable qualities to contribute to the breed?

It's just that I feel saddened seeing champion sired dogs/bitches used in a puppy mill's breeding program (both the small-scale and large scale) and the lines of the ancestors that took years and hard work to improve only go to waste and only used for marketing purposes.

Share your thoughts and opinions.

Saying that all the dogs are healthy and have been tested, improving the breed means that you are breeding and striving to consistantly produce puppies/dogs that meet the YTCA standred for the breed. Lets say I have a bitch and I want to improve on the top-line or quality of silk, then I would breed to a stud that has these qualities in hopes for improvement in these areas. Any puppies that do not meet YTCA standards are then spay/neutered and placed in loving pet homes and not bred.
I feel that a responsible breeder will not stud their champion/show quality dog to a very pet quality bitch. To me that is "breeding down". You may see some improvements in the puppies produced but the quality will more than likely not be present in that litter. Spay/neuter/place. The owner of the show dog should tell the owner of the bitch that she is not breeding quality and if they are really interested in breeding/showing to go to shows and learn as much as possible in order to make a wiser choice to start a breeding program. As a breeder, I would want the best quality I could buy to start with.
Most responsible breeders have "wised up" over the years to unethical breeders getting ahold of champion stock. Years ago, there was more trust in what people said and did in reguards to their breeding practices and there was no AKC limited on the paperwork. This is how most mills and byb'rs got ahold of champions stock, most of which should have been neutered and spayed. But since the word CHAMPION was in the pedigree, some even 5 generations back, the dogs were used for breeding and the pedigree was used as bragging rights in order to sell more puppies. There was also alot of registration switch-a- roos back then and this is where most of your off colored yorkies came from. Back in the day, there were almost no AKC kennel inspections and zero DNA testing. It was pretty darned easy to claim that any mix was an AKC Yorkie.
Hope I explained that ok!

As always, great answer Lynn! :thumbup:

To me, "improving the breed" in a breeding program, simply put, means taking to quality specimens of the breed, pairing them to one another based on their physical attributes and how they compliment one another, and breeding them with the goal of producing off-spring that more closely match the "ideal Yorkie" as per breed standard than the parents do.
Judging in a ring consists of a judge determining which dog mirrors the breed standard most closely. Ideally, the off-spring should match it more closely than the parents do. So the question is, when you have to fabulous dogs to start out with, how could you possibly create something even better? Not so easily done--but THAT is the overall goal and the challenge in the grand scheme of things.
At least that's my take on it. :)

Just a thought, since I'm dreaming of someday showing a home-bred dog > champion..

If you could choose a foundation bitch; would you choose a line-bred bitch whose background you know well (seen many of the dogs in her pedigree), with good health, topline, coat etc but with some minor faults or a totally cross bred geourgious bitch whose ancestors are total :confused: to you..

I think I would choose the known over the un-known.. Just to be pretty sure of my starting point.

Great responses everyone... I couldn't agree more. I really think it's best to keep the thoughts flowing to also remind others the essence of breeding and to also make people become aware if the breeder they get their puppy from really breeds to improve.

I've read most articles about responsible breeding which talks about the future of the puppies brought into this world. I agree with yorkiekist that another responsibility to be noted is to be able to evaluate the bitch and the breeder who owns the bitch who needs the stud service...making sure the line to improvement won't be cut short by falling into the wrong hands. :thumbup:

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


Great post Yorkiekist.

I just want to add that improving the breed NEVER means bringing in greater variation, or lots more to choose from. Some people are under the impression that creating a pink yorkie would be improving the breed.

Ok, I have to put my two cents in here. There are a whole lot of people who may not agree with me here but this is my interpretation. Improving the breed to me means breeding for dogs that closely match the breed confirmation standards without regard to colors that are part of the genitic make up of the dog.

The number one priority to me in improving the breed is elimination of genetic defects that cause unhealty dogs. If a genetic defect is found to be in your dog, that dog should never be used to breed. If I ever produce a puppy with a defect that puppy will be fixed and then placed in a loving caring home and the parent dog causing the defect will also be fixed. I believe no dog with a defect should ever be sold for profit.

If your goal is to produce and show dogs then you should start with parents with the proper YTCA colors for showing Blue and Tan.

You cannot "improve a breed" if you are not breeding to the standards that define the breed itself. :rolleyes: It's an oxymoron by definition. Although I think everyone can agree that health and producing lines should be a top priority of any program.

At least we can agree on one thing Health is a priority:thumbup:

Sure we can. We can improve on the color selection. All new standards for any breed of dog had to start with a few stubborn rebels, that refused to be shot down, even if that makes us oxymorons. :D

I believe YTCA base the breed standard to what is really healthy. About colors, it really would be great if yorkies can have a variety of colors like pomeranians, chihuahuas and shih tzu. However, studies prove that off-colored yorkies have health issues which hinder the health improvement aspect of the breed. Partis and biewers often have shorter life spans. Blue born yorkies are prone to alopecia. Chocolates have pigmentation issues. It's really inevitable that some would claim that some breeders (those who really stick with the stardards) would just want to keep the off-colored yorkies away. But it's really for the benefit of the breed and protection of the breed that the standard has been established.
Here are the articles to explain the genetics... Top Parti Yorkies Genetics Parti Yorkie Parti Color Yorkshire Terrier and Biewer Yorkies
Top Yorkie Genetics Chocolate Yorkies Chocolate Yorkie Red Golden Blue Born Yorkshire Terrier



All pure-breds are man made and developed through thorough in-breeding already and the gene pool is already limited. The standard Yorkshire Terrier needs further improvement to minimize the genetic health concerns that manifest in the breed. It is really playing with fire if breeders would already jump into bringing out the recessive genes and mutated coloring genes just to bring out other colors when the standard yorkie with the dominant and accepted coloring of blue/tan (golden tan) already encounters genetic problems.

Let's just hope more advancements in genetics to the point that all the genetic markers of diseases in the dna have been found and hereditary diseases can be identified. Then maybe, in the future, breeders can zero out on true healthy specimens and colors won't be an issue if a dog is proven free of genetic problems. :)

Please provide links to these studies. The links you have provided show no scientific evidence and No studies to back their statements. I have been looking for a year now and Have not been able to find one single bit of proof to these statements. In fact all the evidence I can find points out that these colored dogs are just as healthy and possibly more healthy than the standard colored dogs. So, I ask again to please provide me the link to back up your statements and to show the scientific studies that show colored dogs to be less healthy.

Since we are posting links, I thought I would post a couple more for everyone to read.

All about the Red


Parti Yorkie History


Biewer Terrier Club

Despite the fact that I do not support indiscriminate breeding of off-colored Yorkies, I have to agree...to an extent. In regards to blue born Yorkies, the presence of increased health issues HAS been proven. In regards to the other off-colored specimens, I have not seen any scientific studies supporting the claim either. (Doesn't mean it doesn't exists, I just mean that I have not seen it.) I have to wonder if it's because the introduction of the color variation is new and there has not been enough time for long term test to provide such results, or if it really is the case that there are no increased issues. Only time will tell, I suppose. :)

Interesting links...but they are no more 'concrete, scientific proof' than the other links listed. They are just another person's or group of person's opinions and theories based on their own research.:)

I never said you couldn't "improve the line"--which at this point would be to one's own individual preferences, not to a "standard." But you would not be "inproving the breed" as the color variation does not meet the definition of the breed...at least not yet. :)

I think the first line of your statement about sums it up. You have not seen any scientific studies!!! Neither has anybody else. I have not seen the studies on the blues either. In fact the only source I can find is this same website that is stating oppinions as facts. You say these studies on blues do exist so can you please provide a link. I am always interested in learning more and since my primary goal is to eliminate genetic defects it is very important to know where these studies are so I can read them.
I have a friend who breeds blue shar pei and the same thing was said about them. 15 years of breeding them shows that they do not have any problems.


I have one other question for the OP. You started this post saying you wanted to learn and you now state your last posts as fact. Why did you make this post if you had already decided you knew all the facts? I was under the understanding that this was to learn more about breeding and improving the breed?

What about the part after the first line? Again...how's anyone to know it is just because there has not been ample time to conduct long term studies on the theory? Time will tell. IF there is an underlying problem, it will show itself at some point. I think it's safe to say that it has yet to be proven one way or the other.

Sure thing. Give me time to find it. I know there was an article about it in a magazine I have somewhere too...I'll have to dig through a closet to try to find it. It never hurts to get all the information possibly available. I remember a while back there was a member here that had a blue born that had lots of info, but I can't remember who it was. :(


She also said that she was interested for purposes of wanting to SHOW Yorkie in conformation events--so I was under the impression that was the kind of information she was looking for, which does not pertain to non-standard colored dogs. (Since they can't be shown at this time.) So I guess really the same question could be asked of you...info on Partis really seems kind of irrelevant to the info she was looking for. At least until they can be shown too. :)

Here ya go...I believe that I only provided those written by vets and from the Journal of Veterinary Science, so hopefully these will serve their purpose as the "facts" that you are looking for. (You probably won't find much unless you are searching by the scientific name of the condition, 'blue born' is more of a slang term.) Let me know if you need more...:) I will *try* to find the magazine article this weekend.

Journal of Veterinary Science

IGCA : CDA

Color Dilution Alopecia

http://homepage.usask.ca/~schmutz/do...tions.html#CDA

- DPCA Breeders Education

Excellent post :thumbup::thumbup:. I do want to know after reading this has anybody had problems with hair loss on their standard blue and tan colored yorkies? I did not know this was a problem before but the articles do state that the darker steel blues do not seem to have the problem. Let me also post a quote from one of the excellent articles you provided.

" Deeply pigmented or white areas of coat are unaffected. In blue dogs with tan points (Yorkies and Dobermans) the tan areas retain a normal appearance. In piebald (white spotted) individuals, the white areas are unaffected by the hair loss."

Of course those areas are not affected...the condition is one that is unique to the "blue born" dogs. :confused: The darker steel blues to not have the problem because they are not "blue born" dogs...I think maybe you are confusing "blue borns" and the steel blue standard coat--they are not one and the same. Clearly the white and tan points would not be an "affected" area. In the quote you provided, the "pie-bald" dogs they are referring to are not even Yorkies...they are OTHER breeds.

Some defects with colors:

http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/VetJDeaf2004.pdf
http://www.ivis.org/advances/Vite/braund20b/ivis.pdf

Color dilution alopecia... for odd colored
Canine non-inflammatory alopecia: What's new and what's old - - DVM

McGreevy also highlights one example of the effect breed standards can have on the physical form of a dog.
“In some cases, traits that are better regarded as defects have actually been included in breed standards,” he said. “For example, brachiocephaly (a skull abnormality which can lead to respiratory problems) is prompted by the standard for the Boston Terrier (American Kennel Club 1990: FCI Standard No140) that requires an animal to be ‘short headed’ and possess a ‘square head and jaw’ with a muzzle that ‘is short, square, wide and deep … shorter in length than in depth; not exceeding in length approximately one-third of the length of the skull'.”

There have also been findings into coat colour and the possibility that some pigments are linked with aggression and other problems.

“There is definitely an association between pigmentation and neurological defects, such as deafness and eye disorders in merle dogs, in which both homozygotes and heterozygotes are affected (Klinckmann et al 1986). Breeding for hypo-pigmentation is a questionable strategy,” he said.

Sadly, it seems the more we continue to breed for aesthetic and superficial qualities, the greater the risk our canine companions face of suffering from health and behavioural problems.

The problems with limited gene pools have also been well documented and studies have shown that even the best-bred dogs still carry at least one deleterious recessive gene.
from The Great Debate - Designer Dogs Dog Breeding - Dogs Life Articles - Dog Information - Dog Breeders - Dog Training



I know they aren't enough and it's way past my bed time :) I think vets in universities are more knowledgeable about up to date journals and studies.

You may also read the books mentioned in the Goldenray site.

First I want to thank you again for finally providing some scientific evidence on here. I especially like that you provided scientific evidence that Piebald or white Yorkies do not share this problem. I went to my myspace page and looked and I actually do know someone with a standard blue and tan yorkie that lost all it's coat. I just thought her dog had something happen to it. How big of a problem is this? Has anybody on here had this happen to their yorkie?

I also reread the original post and I can not find anything about her wanting to breed for the show ring. It says something about loving the show ring and not being able to join.

Of course they don't "share this problem." How on Earth could they? The "problem" is blue born dogs--of course a piebald Yorkie wouldn't share it--otherwise it would BE blue/gray! The piebald dogs mentioned and tested were NOT Yorkies. I'm not sure how or where you are drawing that conclusion from. It's not something that just 'happens' to Yorkies as older adults, it's a condition they are born with. I'm sorry, not trying to argue, but your statment does not make sense. :confused: Again, I think maybe there is some confusion between a "blue born" dog and a dog with a steel blue coat... I thing maybe I am misunderstanding what you are trying to say.

It's EXACTLY what her post said...she loves the show ring and can't wait to join. Clearly that is what her goal is.

Thank you for posting this. It looks like they were mostly focusing on other breeds. It does seem blue is something to avoid. I have never seen blue eyes in a yorkie before.

They do not mention blue born yorkies in this artical. They mention yorkies and state that the tan area is not affected. I have actually seen this on a standard color yorkie before but did not know that it was a genetic problem.

Thanks BamaFan for answering in my behalf. My world is kinda slowing down at this moment. I am now prepping my puppy, which I am hoping to turn out worthy to be shown. :)

Golden Parti
I'm quite sleepy and still tried to find some. :) I just hope one day that there are more means in health screening of breeds. Then color won't be an issue especially when it's already easy to prove that they are Yorkies and very healthy and free of genetic problems. I did dream of Biewers way back.

As of the moment, I think the recessive genes poppin out might bring out something more serious. Being yorkies, off colored ones are already carrying the problems of the standard yorkies and striving to breed for colors is a bigger gamble.

There are also various types of alopecia. Some hereditary, some not.

It's time for me to sleep.

Let's keep the thread cool :)

What article are you referring to? I thought you were claiming that an article stated that Piebald/White Yorkies are not affected by this disorder--are you referring to a different article/point now?

The tan area is not affected because it is TAN. It is not possible to see THIS condition on a standard colored Yorkie--if the Yorkie has this condition, then it is not standard colored--one of the characteristics of the condition is the discoloration of the 'blue' color--a Yorkie would not be standard colored if it's pigmentation was discolored.

There are other disorders though (such as Demodex) that are different altogether than could cause similar results. Maybe that is what you saw?

Joining the show ring is not breeding for the show ring. If she has a really nice standard yorkie she can join and never breed her dog.

Opps, I missed this the first time.

Yorkshire Terriers.((2),(3),(4),(5)) Dilute individuals carry a recessive genotype of dd and are characterized by blue, bluish-grey, lavender or flesh-colored noses, lips and eye rims. The coat colors may include blue, fawn, blue-fawn, bronze, taupe or some variation of these. These dogs are usually easily distinguished from their deeply (non-dilute) pigmented counterparts. Deeply pigmented individuals carry a dominant genotype of Dd or DD and have black or liver noses, lips and eye rims. Coat colors may include black, red, red-fawn, liver or variations thereof.

I definately don't want one of those. Somebody is trying to sell a litter of them on puppyfind.

This is what I was referring to.

CDA is characterized by loss of hair from dilutely pigmented areas. Coats are normal at birth, and onset of hair loss usually begins between six months and three years of age. Hair loss usually begins along the dorsal midline (middle of the back) and often spares the head, tail and limbs. The pattern seems to vary from breed to breed. It has been suggested(6) that darker colored (steel blue) individuals are less likely to be affected, may be less severely affected or may start to lose hair later in life than lighter colored dogs. This suggests that the severity of the disease may be related to the amount of dilution present. Deeply pigmented or white areas of coat are unaffected. In blue dogs with tan points (Yorkies and Dobermans) the tan areas retain a normal appearance. In piebald (white spotted) individuals, the white areas are unaffected by the hair loss. The hair loss may be total or partial and any remaining hairs are usually sparse, rough and easily broken or removed. The skin in the affected areas is usually scaly and may occasionally develop bacterial infections. Pruritus (itching) is usually absent, unless a bacterial infection has set in.

Why in some dilute dogs the macromelanosomes are clumped and in others they are not, is an interesting question at this time. The relationship between dilute pigment and hair loss is clear, but why are some dilute individuals unaffected? Weimeraners as a breed are dd, all individuals are dilute, yet the disease is unreported in this breed. In Dobermans, the dilute individuals comprise only 8-9% of the breed, yet 50-80%6 of the dilute dogs have CDA. In Italian Greyhounds, many individuals are dilutes, yet the IGCA health survey reported only 71 affected individuals among the approximately 2200 dogs included in the survey.(7) If half the dogs included in the survey were dilutes, the incidence of CDA in IG's would be around 7% of the dilute population, as opposed to the 50-80% affected dilute Dobermans.

A third allele (dl) which is associated with CDA has been proposed.6 While this is a long way from being proven, it could help explain why some dilute animals are unaffected. Dogs with a genotype dd would be normal coated dilutes, ddl would be intermediates (mildly affected?) and dldl would be CDA affected. A genotype of Ddl should represent deeply pigmented dogs which were carriers of CDA.

Italian Greyhounds would be an interesting breed to study regarding the heredity of this condition. IG's have a relatively high incidence of dilutes, and a relatively low incidence of CDA affected dogs.

I think it was pretty obvious to most by her post that 1) she is planning on breeding in the future and 2) she is wanting to show. And as she has already stated in several other post, she is interested and supportive of standard colored dogs as defined by the YTCA. Really, what is the point of this misunderstanding?

In blue dogs with tan points (Yorkies and Dobermans) the tan areas retain a normal appearance. In piebald (white spotted) individuals, the white areas are unaffected by the hair loss. [/QUOTE]

Ok, I thought that this was the portion you were referring to.:thumbup:
-Yes, the tan area is not affected--the disorder, by definition does not affect tan.
-The dogs that were tested were NOT Parti Yorkies. They were more than likely other breeds with a standard that calls for a tri-colored coat. Meaning that there were generations and generation of dogs that probably NEVER possess the genetics for a blue/tan coat. However, Parti Yorkies do. So testing a breed that is piebald by standard/history is not going to draw results that can neccessarily be applied to Parti Yorkies.
-Parti Yorkies are not going to be affected by this because again, it affects blue coat and they don't have a blue coat.
-There is no evidence in THIS article that Parti Yorkies cannot pass on the disorder to offspring IF they are still carrying the genes for the standard colored coat.