Just wondering why shouldn't people breed yorkies with floppy ears?

Floppy ears are not to standard. They are a recessive trait so if your bitch has floppy ears it is heterozygous for that trait. Unless the dog that you breed her to is homozygous for erect ears than 2 out of 4 pups would end up with flop ears and the other 2 will carry that recessive gene. Keep it up and yorkies won't look like yorkies at all.

breeding
 

LadyHawk has hit the nail on the head...people go to the breeder expecting to get a Yorkie. When the pup does not turn out to have the traits of a Yorkie then they have been cheated IMO...

Time to repeat the the bakers story for the new members don't you think? I go to the bakery and ask for an angel food cake, but the baker puts a chocolate cake in the box. I go home and I call the baker to complain I did not get what I paid for..the baker says.."So what, chocolate cake is also a cake and good to eat"..BUT I wanted angel food... It is the bakers responsiblity to go by the "recipe" and produce what I paid for...the same as the Yorkie breeder is suppose to follow the "recipe" which is the standard and produce a pup with as many of the Yorkie traits as humanly possible...you see, when a breeder overlooks major faults (flop ears are major) then what else will they accept fault-wise...bad bites, poor top lines, incorrect coats, aggression, shyness...on and on...soon the Yorkie looks like a mutt...and I love mutts, but people should not paid $1500 for one...they can be rescued from the pound.

don't jump on me but...
 

I"m just wondering, if you breed to the "standard" (AKC standard) and AKC states what color they should be, how come you can find silver and tan champion yorkies all over the web??? NOW DON'T jump on me please, just wanted to know how they can win in an AKC show if the color is soooo far off from what AKC states is "THE STANDARD" ??? just wondering.

:thumbup: Very good advice

This is what is stated in the standard

That of a long-haired toy terrier whose blue and tan coat is parted on the face and from the base of the skull to the end of the tail and hangs evenly and quite straight down each side of body. The body is neat, compact and well proportioned. The dog's high head carriage and confident manner should give the appearance of vigor and self importance.

Blue is subject to interpretation.....Now females while showing may have a darker blue coat, however, with each season they get lighter.

I think the silver and tan is a version of the blue & tan but a much lighter version...:confused:

...Yep, what Mardelin said :p

Bravo!!!!!!! Yorkierose. Tell it like it is. There are a lot of people out there that just want a yorkie to love. They don't care about standard or show quality. I have a little silver, slightly ridgeback yt & also a steel blue, great conformation yt. I can't tell you how many times people have preferred the so called flawed baby as their favorite. It's all a matter of personal taste. She gets just as many compliments as my " meets standard" baby. And of course they are both loved equally by me.

true
 

Color is not a serious fault (silvery blue)..so most judges will put up a lighter one over a structure fault like top line, bad bite etc...it is hard to get deep steel blue and keep it forever...dogs lighten by the time they make champion sometimes, especially the silk ones..in the days of old and Yorkies were very dark, most were very soft, cottony...C.D. Higgins won the Garden, but I doubt the judge would give it to him today..he was very different then what we see now..
I recently saw a web site with some of the older Yorks...all looked soft..

Does anyone know the point system a judge uses to judge the dog?

Pat,

The All Breed Club I belong to just had their Cluster Show in January. While lunching with some of the judges, they brought up the judging of the Yorkshire Terrier, all of them brought up the fact that it was one, if not the most difficult breeds to judge. Their reason was that the standard was open to interpretation. What I gathered from this conversation is that each of these judges, judged the breed by their own preference. I'm not really sure if they do have a point system when judging the YT. However, I will ask one of the members in the club, who is a judge, just to make sure.

On another note, a few months ago I asked a breeder who occassionaly judges sweepstakes, if she had a soft coated dog with excellent structure and a so, so structured dog with the very correct coat, what would she put up? What do you think she said.

judging
 

SO true...blue is in the eye of the beholder...
I recall seeing a list of "points" a judge wrote down for each dog he judged..but it was so long ago..who knows..maybe his sytem to remember the dogs..
When I had a litter of black and tan Doxies, I knew they would be that color until the day they died..not so with a Yorkie..remind me why we picked such a difficult dog to breed correctly???? LOL

Because of the challenge, otherwise you would have just stuck with the Doxies. Or maybe because we're nuts.

judge
 

The judge said she would put up a soft coat on good structure...

I would, because coat color and texture is the easiest trait to change..a structure fault can haunt you forever and it effects the total dog, its gait, topline etc...you might as well stop and get new blood...or try to breed out huge ears, it can take generations...you can breed color back into a line in one generation...texture follows color..

Nothing worse the a goegeous silk hung on a falling apart frame...it is like Marie Antonette covering dung heaps with tapestry carpets...

Do I have it right that you would try to find the compliment to whatever feature you would like to change and go ahead and breed as long as neither are too far from the standard?


When breeding, you don't find a dog w/ huge ears and then breed that dog to a dog w/ tiny ears hoping to get something in the middle. Genetics simply don't work that way.
You need to always looks for a phenotype that closely represents what you're striving for and breed to a similar phenotype.

Exactly what she said.

The problem is that we have so few breeder/judges left and the judges we have to day all focus way too much on the coat....never realizing that the coat can hide a multitude of faults.

faults
 

I would buy the best bitch I could get...and breed to a good champion to start...and that is what I did a number of times to improve. Some faults I will not give on..flop ears, coarse terrier, very oversized, poor structure, bad top line, poor temperament..but color, texture, slight over bite or under on a (bitch only) a bit too short on leg or neck is something I can work with...

Totally agree, health, structure, temperament is something that shouldn't be sacrificed. But, then there is no perfect dog, so we breed in the quest of hopefully getting one.....ha, ha,

We as breeders when judging a dog tend to look at the faults, where judges look at each individual dog/s good qualities.

I have read several different places that say just the opposite. Every reference I find suggests breeding to compliment. In fact, there are breeders' sites that suggest the very example you give -- that of breeding a dog with large ears (don't think anyone said huge) to one with small ears. Example: http://members.cox.net/jrogan/puppybirth.html "For instance if I'm breeding a
bitch with a weaker front and I want to strengthen the fronts
of the puppies, I'll breed her to a male with a strong front.
.
Or suppose her ears are large and I want smaller ears,
then I'll breed to a dog with small ears."

I think the idea is that neither be to far from ideal, but when trying to perfect, go for a compliment of what you need to correct.

Since I have not bread a large and small ear dog together -- I can't say from experience. My male no longer seems to have big ears so I may never know for sure.

Uh....okay....
 

I don't know what to tell you. Other than, perhaps you should keep doing your homework and visit sites that are more geared towards genetics rather than just breeders experiences.
If these breeders were all doing fabulous things for our breed, that you are siting or holding on high, then perhaps they would be recognized within the parent club at least for being breeder of the year...or something.

ANY breed, if you're wanting to achieve a certain feature, one should look at the lineage. Does that sire/dam have a strong production within it's offspring when bred to certain mates of certain lines to produce the desired trait?
In either case, when coupling, a good breeder will not take an Akita w/ tall ears and breed it to an Akita w/ small ears. Quite the contrary. What will be done is they will have the Akita w/ tall ears and breed it to a dog that is WITHIN STANDARD and has a history of having produced offspring of correct ear size and carriage.

If you breed a Yorkie that is 14 pounds to a Yorkie that is 5 pounds, what you're going to get in one generation is something in the middle, PERHAPS, (this doesn't occur often) but then what you've created, when that flood gate opens and those progeny are then bred are Yorkies that are 14 pounds and Yorkies that are 5 pounds. Unfortunantely ANY quality breeder is looking for what is going to happen down the line genetically and not litter to litter.

Best perfection might be imperfection. I said that they didnt. Gess I got alot to learn.

Mardelin and Yorkierose.


I do not follow exactly what you say and do, but I do listen and watch.

I just love your wisdom. Thank you. It is such an inspiration always.

You all are very much appreciated.

For me , off standard is not acceptable .

standard
 

Yes, but the standard leaves so much to interprepation, opinion of the reader and theres the problem...small vee shaped ears, well, to one breeder that may be 50% bigger then what I consider small..some look at a rounded ear tip and see vee shaped..I do not...some look at black and see deep steel blue, others see solid black. I have seen potetials with overbites, but the breeder said it was a perfectly acceptable scissor bite to their eyes...if judges who are suppose to be the final word on what is correct can not agree, then we will forever see opinions walking around the ring...but I do understand your desire to breed as coorect as possible and that is the point. Theorically, I could take a 10 pound, flop earred bitch and breed to a top of the line champion and defend my decision by saying my goal was to IMPROVE....whatelse can you do with a bitch of poor quality, but it does not mean she should be bred?

I am doing LOTS of homework and said I was only giving one example of what some breeders write -- and I never said I was "siting (sic) or holding on high" anyone. I have read this numerous times in many different resources (books and web) and just did a search to cite one quick example of what I was talking about. The site I listed is a show breeder -- she is listed on the parent club site (ytca.org) as a recommended breeder. I did not see any of them being touted as "breeder of the year" (have you received that honor?). But I did not pick a fly-by-night site -- did you look at her dogs and philosophy? Superb!

I don't profess to KNOW IT ALL -- I am asking questions to learn well in advance of thinking more seriously about breeding. I think it only natural to mention that I have read exactly opposite of what I saw posted in your reply. I did not do it to be adversarial -- just suggesting there seem to be other opinions on this.

I actually did take some genetics classes and physical traits are different in the way we inherit them. It is not just recessive and dominant, but also specific gene linked (like some kinds of deafness being linked to a pigmentation gene), some are X-linked or Y-linked, sex-limited, single loci, multi-loci, and a dozens of modifiers, etc. Since I can't know all the genes and linkage prior to breeding -- looking at the phenotypes (or the physical characteristics not the genetics) as yo suggested is exactly what I was talking about.

I have two pups from excellent background. As I watch them grow, I will continue to evaluate them. I have every reason to believe these two will be close to standard in every way. But, they are different -- for instance one is longer legged and one shorter legged. I don't think either length is extreme or enough to call a "fault" as they are still "square" but I wonder if this is one of the traits that compliment each other. Will puppies mature with more average length legs? And is this considered breeding to improve the breed? We can't all use "proven breeders" -- they all start sometime.

Height (which for a dog is mostly all about leg length) is one of those characteristics that are multi-loci or multi-factorial. Our own height depends on more than one gene with more than one allele on each -- how many "active" alleles we inherit determines the potential for height. So, if we get lots of active alleles from one tall parent and few from another shorter parent -- that does put us in the middle somewhere. (Just potential -- environment/diet can affect too).

There are many different factors to most physical characteristics -- some really are as simple as breed two extremes and get somewhere in the middle. Others are more complicated with two extremes producing offspring showing one of the two extremes and nothing a mix, or others producing every conceivable mix.

I don't know how ears work -- but from it being used as an example in several resources, I have to wonder if maybe it works more along the lines of height too. Do you have a reference that shows dogs with small and large ears will not produce medium ears? I do know genetics is not exact -- you are going for "the most potential to produce what you want" and not "exact in every case" for most characteristics.

I think breeding has to consider BOTH genetics and the phenotype (physical appearance of the ones in front of you). I want to understand which traits are more simply dominant and recessive and which might be more multi-factorial. But I don't think I want to go back to college and get a genetics degree. I also want to know breeders experiences. I just do not think I will get it all from books and technical sites.

IF I do breed my two, I want to do it with some very intentional forethought. I want to know what other breeders have seen with their own offspring and I want to be fairly sure of what I am going to get BEFORE I do it. I don't want this to be a science experiment. I don't want to nitpick myself out of breeding these two but if it happens that it is not the best match, then I will just have an excuse to begin a search for another addition.

Nowhere have I seen anyone suggest breeding a 14 pound Yorkie. No "stupid sign" hanging on me! My example post only mentioned going slightly over standard. Thanks for your input though.

From what I understand of genetics, the qualities that our breed values in ears are from recessive genes. Qualities like small, high-set, and narrow ear leathers which give the yorkie a proper ear. Because these are recessive if the dog shows these traits it is homozygous for these traits. If you breed to another dog that is homozygous for these traits all the pups should have lovely ears. If you breed a dog with bad ears to one with good ears your taking your chances. The bad eared dog may be either homo or heterozygous for the trait and you'll end up with pups that have bad ears if homozygous. If heterozygous you'll end up with 2 out of 4 pups with bad ears (theoredically). It's easier to breed a recessive trait in or out than a dominant one.

ok....now I know WHY i did not .....
 

go into genetic counseling....LOL.

You ALL are so helpful...!!!! thanks for the knowledge.....

Don't overlook the point that a dog's ears being floppy may not have anything to do with genetics at all. Genetics are not the only factors that influence if ears will or will not stand. Just remember, if you take a quick glance at a floppy ear, you may not be correct to so quickly write it off as a genetic fault.

(Just a general statement.:) )

ears
 

What factors do you find contribute to a flop ears? I have seen an infection make one tip over a bit and the owner not keeping the hair clipped when it is a heavy coat, but I have never seen an adult with flop ears due to any other reason..and once the infection or hair is taken care of, the ear pops back up.
Some Yorkies will pull their ears back against the back of the head for lots of stress/excited/pain reasons, the camera is common one..., but the ear is not flopped over.

I think the reason I am so hard on the quality of the ear is because the fault is so serious. I have seen just about every fault you can think of in the ring, but never a flop earred dog..I realize many have no desire to show, but the rules still apply IMO.

I was just reading a post on another forum by a breeder who stated she bred the type of Yorkie she liked, goes by her own standard so to speak..I do not think that is fair to the breed we love..do it right or at least try very hard to do it right or don't do it..why mess it up?

As you said Pat, the lady on the other forum breeding what she likes. And then there are those breeders that don't take the time with the ears to assist them in standing and later say "oh, I just love yorkies with floppy ears"

Well actually, not trimming the ears is EXACTLY the reason I was referring to. Thanks for confirming that. One of the owners of one of our pups never trimmed the dog's ears after it left, she wanted them floppy just like her previous pet and he's strictly that...JUST a pet and that is fine by me. I really don't see why she should be forced to have them that way just for the sake of it? But you would be wrong if you glance at it and said, oh, that's due to genetics.:)

That was the only point I was trying to make. Someone asked the question 'why do ears flop' and 'genetics' was the only reason I saw given, that's all.