OFA Fanconi Results

[tanza]

@navyman:

Tanza,

I now understand why you asked me in another thread how & why I thought Buddy's Dam was likely to be clear. Before my analysis of the OFA data, I had no idea how prevalent the gene was in the breed.

Your intuition and experience about stating that it is remarkable that there aren't more AFS based on these stats makes perfect sense based on some further simple statistical analysis (i.e., Punnet Squares) below. I computed the simple probability of each type of result assuming the use of OFA data only, doing pairings on a strictly random basis, and for the sake of simplicity, assuming that the 3.3% of indeterminates are clear. The results imply that responsible breeders have done the basenji community a great service in reducing the actual probabilities by removing the "random" factor with responsible (as far as could be done) pairings.

(Disclaimer: stats below should not be construed as reflecting probability for the overall basenji population at large. Please feel free to correct me on any noted errors):

• Probability of pairing a AFS to an AFS: Less than 1% (.06) (All offspring would be AFS).

• Probability of pairing a carrier to an AFS: 2.9% (probability of 50% of offspring would be carriers and 50% AFS)

• Probability of pairing a carrier to a carrier: 14.5% (probability of offspring being 25% clear, 50% carrier, 25% AFS)

• Probability of pairing a carrier to a clear: 20.7% (probability of offspring being 50% carrier, 50% clear)

• Probability of pairing a clear to AFS: 4.1% (probability of 100% offspring being carriers)

• Probability of pairing a clear to a clear: 29.6% (probability of offspring being 100% clear)

Those are correct and also if you go to the health endowment site they are posted there also… but thanks for posting that here also. It is good for all B owners to see and learn about Fanconi.... Right now the Indetermine as to be consider as carriers until we have a direct test. I do know of one Indetermine that has sired an affected.

[tanza]

@Quercus:

I think this part needs to be repeated, because I didn't realize that until Dr. Johnson's talk. The MORE Fanconi affected samples they have, the easier and quicker it will be to isolate the actual gene that causes Fanconi..and that will result in a less expensive, more accurate, easier to execute test for all of us.

Yes, Lisa, thanks for post this again… it is very important that affected dogs be sent in to help develop the direct test....

[navyman]

@tanza:

Those are correct and also if you go to the health endowment site they are posted there also… but thanks for posting that here also. It is good for all B owners to see and learn about Fanconi.... Right now the Indetermine as to be consider as carriers until we have a direct test. I do know of one Indetermine that has sired an affected.

You mean to tell me I wasted my time punching a calculator this morning??? Oh well, at least I gave myself a basic stats refresher course :D. So far, my Hofer tri male, Buddy, is passing his monthly strip testing.

[khanis]

@tanza:

• Probability of pairing a AFS to an AFS: Less than 1% (.06) (All offspring would be AFS).

• Probability of pairing a carrier to an AFS: 2.9% (probability of 50% of offspring would be carriers and 50% AFS)

• Probability of pairing a carrier to a carrier: 14.5% (probability of offspring being 25% clear, 50% carrier, 25% AFS)

• Probability of pairing a carrier to a clear: 20.7% (probability of offspring being 50% carrier, 50% clear)

• Probability of pairing a clear to AFS: 4.1% (probability of 100% offspring being carriers)

• Probability of pairing a clear to a clear: 29.6% (probability of offspring being 100% clear)

Actually, if you want to get technical, these are not really accurate.
For example, when you breed a carrier to a carrier, you do not get the above percentages….
what should be known is that EACH pup has 25% chance of being clear, 25% chance of being affected, and a 50% chance of being a carrier.
That is quite different than how it is stated above.

These percentages can be figured by using a Punnett Square... or reading the Fanconi FAQ.

In regard to the % of Affecteds on the database, it is WAY OFF compared to the number of affecteds out there. I know of at least a dozen affecteds, if not close to two dozen, that are NOT on the database. Many have samples in the CPP, but just not on the database. Having them in the database does not assist in the researchers finding the gene. It just tells everyone who the affecteds are, or are not.

Many folks know of a few of my dogs that are affected. I had probably the largest sample of dogs in the final testing phase for the linkage test. Are any of those on the database? Some of them. For those that are affected, I know they are affected, and seeing them on the database will not change their life in any way. It basically gives others a reason to point fingers. Been there, done that.

For those affecteds that I know of that don't have samples in...
you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
I am tired of trying to advocate to these people for health research...
I've even given their names and contact info to Jon Curby in hopes he could twist their arm. I doubt it. Those kind of folks find it easier to hide their head in the sand and deal with it themselves.

Best of luck on your Hofer boy's linkage test results.

[khanis]

I meant to add, that my Benny (the handsome boy up in the corner) strip-tested clear until 3 weeks before his 9th birthday (I tested him at the request of Jon Curby, as they were ready to run assays and he wanted verification that my non-affecteds were still non-affecteds).

[lvoss]

I believe that spreading the word in as many basenji venues as possible can only help. Even if it only informs 1 person who sends in a sample that means we are 1 sample closer to finding the gene for the disease.

If anyone has a clinically affected Fanconi dog, please consider submitting a sample of blood to the Canine Phenome Project, http://www.caninephenome.org. It is by participating in research like this that every basenji owner can help to ensure that the basenji breed will survive for many generations to come. I very much like the old BHE fundraising campain, The Reason Why, which showed a basenji puppy. That is the reason for participating and helping in any way we can, for the health of our next basenji.

[WBL]

I sent Tiggy's sample in on Thursday so just now the sit around and wait game

[myran]

Myrans mum´s results came back as clear and his dad is also clear :)Now to a stupid question wouldn´t it be on the safe side to test Myran just incase as the marker test isn´t 100%.

[tanza]

@myran:

Myrans mum´s results came back as clear and his dad is also clear :)Now to a stupid question wouldn´t it be on the safe side to test Myran just incase as the marker test isn´t 100%.

With two clear parents, I would not spend the money to test until there is the direct test, which we hope will be by this time next year. From what I have seen of the results to date, they have been right on what I would expect to see. Any of mine that have clear/clear parents, I have not tested the kids…..

[tanza]

@tanza:

With two clear parents, I would not spend the money to test until there is the direct test, which we hope will be by this time next year. From what I have seen of the results to date, they have been right on what I would expect to see. Any of mine that have clear/clear parents, I have not tested the kids…..

That said, I will qualify that if you are going to use Myran for breeding, then I would test… but if not, again I would wait for the direct test.

[myran]

Thanks Pat Myran will be used for breeding but not before he´s 2 yrs old atleast and has passed his thyroid,eye´s and hip´s etc….And proven himself worthy to be a stud dog.

[tanza]

@myran:

Thanks Pat Myran will be used for breeding but not before he´s 2 yrs old atleast and has passed his thyroid,eye´s and hip´s etc….And proven himself worthy to be a stud dog.

In that case I would not be very concerned about doing it…. I would wait for the direct test....

[navyman]

@khanis:

Actually, if you want to get technical, these are not really accurate.
For example, when you breed a carrier to a carrier, you do not get the above percentages….
what should be known is that EACH pup has 25% chance of being clear, 25% chance of being affected, and a 50% chance of being a carrier.
That is quite different than how it is stated above.

I'd be the first to admit that stats isn't my forte, but I wanted to be sure I understood what you were referring to, whether it was the lexicon (i.e., "EACH pup") or the punnet square percentages (i.e., 25%/50%/25%) or the odds of pairing a carrier to a carrier?

In regard to the % of Affecteds on the database, it is WAY OFF compared to the number of affecteds out there. I know of at least a dozen affecteds, if not close to two dozen, that are NOT on the database. Many have samples in the CPP, but just not on the database. Having them in the database does not assist in the researchers finding the gene. It just tells everyone who the affecteds are, or are not.

What can people do beyond submitting samples in the CPP to assist researchers?

It basically gives others a reason to point fingers. Been there, done that.

It's unfortunate when people feel the need to point fingers, especially for a situation where, up until the recent past, it has not been possible for anyone to determine with absolute certainty the presence of the gene in any of their dogs. All of our energies should be focused on the future for a solution to the greatest threat to our beloved breed.

For those affecteds that I know of that don't have samples in…
you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
I am tired of trying to advocate to these people for health research...
I've even given their names and contact info to Jon Curby in hopes he could twist their arm. I doubt it. Those kind of folks find it easier to hide their head in the sand and deal with it themselves.

I certainly hope none of these people you are referring to are breeders. I can somewhat sympathize with that feeling as my wife and I have found it frustrating at times as a foster family to try to advise a couple of adopting families to get their B tested for a medical condition (ex: hypo after dog showed extreme weight gain).

Best of luck on your Hofer boy's linkage test results.

Thanks very much. I am hoping that Buddy was lucky enough to dodge the bullet.

[tanza]

Many are breeders, some even would be considered "responsible" if you were to ask others…. There are some breeders that say the Fanconi test is a "fraud".... there are still breeders that say "not in my lines".... but do not test... there are ones that have affected that will not send in blood so that we can get the direct test...
As far as pointing fingers...yes there are some, but I have to say, a lot less then I expected.... maybe because it is an open data base, so what is the point and also that many that "used" to be the ones pointing fingers now are dealing with the reality of carriers and affected Basenjis....
I wish they would make OFA for hips open also... so that people that hide bad hips couldn't.... and I know of two such breeders....

[dmcarty]

Geez Pat - I've been trying for years to hide hips - would actually like to do something about the spare tire around my middle and then there are those wrinkles…... Oh you meant dog hips - me bad!

[myran]

I can´t see any gain in hiding results or breeding inadequate dog´s one day it will bite you in the rump ;)I´m not a breeder but my logic say´s there is no shortcut to success.

[tanza]

@myran:

I can´t see any gain in hiding results or breeding inadequate dog´s one day it will bite you in the rump ;)I´m not a breeder but my logic say´s there is no shortcut to success.

I agree, but there are people out there that don't believe that… even to the point of breeding Basenjis with bad hips... their reason/excuse??? OFA doesn't know what they are looking at... "my Vet" thinks they are fine... Sigh....

[dmcarty]

I do have an odd OFA story though - I had 2 males done at the same time. The vet and I laughed that you could put one over the other and it looked like one dog. Didn't matter whose was on top.

I got the results on one but not the other - I waited and waited and finally called and got the lecture of different people reading etc etc etc. I suggested that they might want to check in the dogs folder where I did get results and sure enought there were the films - unread. So I did get them read. Now keep in mind these films were about as exactly the same as they could be. One had one rating and one the other - to this day - I don't know which films were read or how hips that were so alike that it looked like one x-ray could have different ratings.

Any process that requires human decision making is subject to human falicies however that is not an excuse not to do whatever we can to ensure producing healthy animals.

[Quercus]

@tanza:

Many are breeders, some even would be considered "responsible" if you were to ask others…. There are some breeders that say the Fanconi test is a "fraud".... there are still breeders that say "not in my lines".... but do not test... there are ones that have affected that will not send in blood so that we can get the direct test...
As far as pointing fingers...yes there are some, but I have to say, a lot less then I expected.... maybe because it is an open data base, so what is the point and also that many that "used" to be the ones pointing fingers now are dealing with the reality of carriers and affected Basenjis....
I wish they would make OFA for hips open also... so that people that hide bad hips couldn't.... and I know of two such breeders....

I wish we had a DNA test with an open data base for hip dysplasia as well…so we wouldn't have to be guessing as to how it is inherited and have finger pointing and gossip regarding breeding decisions.

Personally, I try to stay away from finger pointing completely. Breeders all make choices...and it is easy for someone to say "well, I would never do that!" when that particular issue hasn't touched their program. Even if I intensly disagree with a particular breeding, I don't assume that I know what a breeder is thinking, and the thoughts that went into the decisions that they have made. If it is important to me, I will ask the breeder directly, instead of making assumptions based on second or third hand information.

I tend to think that bad breeding decisions tend to be self-correcting, as Myran stated. You can't hide bad genes for very long.

Regardless...innuendo and rumoring only make things more confusing for the average joe trying to find a responsible breeder. Responsible breeders make choices about risk in all facets of breeding. When we don't know how a disease is inherited, it makes the risk much greater...but most breeders don't 'throw the baby out with the bath water' to coin an oft used phrase. If breeder is doing a riskier breeding regarding a health issue, they are obligated to put the health of the brood bitch first, to diligently test and cull (thru neuter) offspring, and to let prosepctive puppy buyers know of the risks...but IMO not obligated to be skewered and slandered by their peers.

[tanza]

Well put… Andrea... especially your last note "Skewered and slandered by their peers....

And you are right, most bad decisions are self correcting, but at what price? Especially with something like Hips... this particular breeder is local to where I live, so I have intimate knowledge of this particular dog...