@tuts - Hello tuts, note that the test recommend by OFA comes from the Basenji Club of America as recommended tests and for OFA this will determine if done that Basenji will get a CHIC rating. Note however this does not mean that they were clear, just means that they were tested. Some are test that need to be done yearly. Breed parent clubs for all breeds determine what tests need to be done
Fanconi re-testing (Linkage test, now Direct Gene Test)
-
This was posted to the membership by BCOA today. Not sure if the BCOA website has been updated with this information yet or not.
From the Basenji Club of America
Direct Fanconi Test:Effective Tuesday, November 1, 2011, the Basenji Health Endowment will offer a $15.00 subsidy for all direct Fanconi tests on Basenjis previously tested with the marker link test (re-tests). This discounted price of $50.00 for re-tests, paid by the Basenji Health Endowment will be available for all re-tests through December 31, 2013. At the time this program begins, the OFA website will provide instructions on how to purchase the re-test as well as how you'll be notified if sufficient DNA is on file or if another FTA card is needed.
Between now and October 31, 2011, if you wish to have a dog re-tested, you may do so, but will voluntarily opt out of the $15.00 subsidy for that dog's re-test with the new direct Fanconi test. There will be no retroactive reimbursement. If you choose to re-test now, visit the OFA website at www.offa.org and purchase the test for $65.00 and an FTA card will be mailed to you and the procedure is the same as if this was the first time you've tested this dog for Fanconi.
-
I don't really trust 'the grapevine', but I have been hearing from people on Facebook that their basenjis previously tested with the marker link test with results shown as carrier or affected are coming back clear after the new DNA test. As someone relatively new to the basenji world, I am a little confused, though I think this new test is great! It's also wonderful that the Basenji Health Endowment is offering a discount to those who re-test between Nov. 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013.
But if someone has their basenji on the protocol because their basenji originally tested affected, will they be weaning their basenji off the protocol if the new DNA test says either 'carrier' or 'clear'? Obviously if your dog was physically showing itself with fanconi symptoms, I think you would be likely to stay on the protocol, but what about those dogs who tested 'affected' and were put on the protocol early, before any fanconi signs showed up? Was it expected that dogs who previously tested carrier or affected would now test as clear? Was much analysis done on that before the test went public?
I hope I am making sense.
-
Dogs are ONLY PUT on the protocol when they start to spill sugar not before and not because of the DNA test, be it linkage or now the direct test.
And since this was a linkage test, I would think, yes it was expected that there would be previously tested with the linkage test coming back clear, carrier or affected. And not sure what you mean about much analysis being done? It was a linkage test, not a direct test. In its development, I am fairly certain that as much analysis that was possible was done. Knowing Dr. Johnson, I would be confident that he did as much testing as possible.
-
There were a few very old lines of dogs who were always thought to be 'free' of Fanconi prior to the linked test, because they had never had a dog spill sugar in decades of breeding. Surpisingly, with the linkage test, some of those dogs came back as affected and carriers, and everyone was stunned. Those dogs were watched very closely, and none of them started spilling sugar…and now with the direct test, the ones that have been tested so far have come back as clear. We always knew that there could be some mutation in the genes that were being used as markers in the linkage test that would give inaccurate results...these 'false positives' are an example of that.
-
Dogs are ONLY PUT on the protocol when they start to spill sugar not before and not because of the DNA test, be it linkage or now the direct test.
And since this was a linkage test, I would think, yes it was expected that there would be previously tested with the linkage test coming back clear, carrier or affected. And not sure what you mean about much analysis being done? It was a linkage test, not a direct test. In its development, I am fairly certain that as much analysis that was possible was done. Knowing Dr. Johnson, I would be confident that he did as much testing as possible.
Thanks Pat, you've answered my questions, one being if 'affected' dogs were on the protocol BEFORE spilling sugar as a preventative measure. Forgive my memory, which is muddled on the best of days. I'm sure this was mentioned on a previous thread. Regarding the analysis, I was wondering what was analyzed when previously affected dogs came back clear. I think my lack of knowledge on DNA testing is minimal, and that was where my question was coming from.
-
There were a few very old lines of dogs who were always thought to be 'free' of Fanconi prior to the linked test, because they had never had a dog spill sugar in decades of breeding. Surpisingly, with the linkage test, some of those dogs came back as affected and carriers, and everyone was stunned. Those dogs were watched very closely, and none of them started spilling sugar…and now with the direct test, the ones that have been tested so far have come back as clear. We always knew that there could be some mutation in the genes that were being used as markers in the linkage test that would give inaccurate results...these 'false positives' are an example of that.
Andrea, thanks so much for your info. I find all of the fanconi info very interesting. I have ordered the DNA test for Kipawa (s/b Clear or Carrier), but still haven't received it. They did in fact send it, but it has gone astray somehow. I was told to call back and they would send another out. Very nice people to work with.
Tomorrow Kipawa is getting his eyes CERFed.
-
If my B tested affected via the DNA test, I would not wait until it starts spilling sugar. I would have the blood gas test done every 6 months starting at 3 years old to see if the ph level was off. If the ph level is off according to the protocol then I would start the dog on it. This is just my opinion!
Jennifer
-
If my B tested affected via the DNA test, I would not wait until it starts spilling sugar. I would have the blood gas test done every 6 months starting at 3 years old to see if the ph level was off. If the ph level is off according to the protocol then I would start the dog on it. This is just my opinion!
Jennifer
I would agree, but having blood gases (blood test) done is not the same as treating them using the Protocol. Certainly the earlier that you can start the protocol when showing symptoms, the better chance they have.
-
Glad to hear this as it saves me $30. I was just telling my vet was going to redo them so now i know to wait a couple of weeks. Thanks for the heads up.
-
Something occurred to me.. is this only registered basenjis or all of our guys?
-
Something occurred to me.. is this only registered basenjis or all of our guys?
Not sure what you mean? Anyone with a Basenji can get the test, all you have to do is order it from OFA. Because they ask for a registration number you would have to make up one. I would like to see any Basenji that comes from rescue with some kind of notation to ID them as rescue so that people would know that pedigree would be unknown. You know, something like RESCUExxxx….
And I believe that any dog (Basenji) that has has a DNA Linkage test is qualified for the re-test.
Did that answer the question? -
No, you don't have to make up a registration number if you are testing an unregistered dog. You can leave that blank. They are trying to get an identification number for tracking. So, you can use the microchip or tattoo number or litter number or whatever permanent ID you have. Otherwise, the dog will be recorded as having no permanent identification.
-
Yeah I had them already tested, Pat. They didn't ask for a number. However, I did put Wimauma as part of Cara's name and suggested the other Wimauma owners do the same to help track the group. I'll mention again but so far only a few of us had done the linkage test. Thanks.
-
Debra that is a good idea about the Wimauma Bs! I always thought those dogs should be kept track of when it comes to health testing.
Jennifer
-
Well a very good chunk of us are on a private group, so that helps.
-
Okay just got this in mail, pretty much what was said but glad to hear they may have enough not to need me to resend:
New DNA test for Fanconi syndrome in Basenjis. Dr. Gary Johnson at the University of Missouri has identified the mutation responsible for recessive basenji Fanconi Syndrome. This test is the result of eighteen years researching many pedigrees, candidate genes and the collection of thousands of blood samples. A new test, a direct Fanconi gene test is now available through the OFA https://secure.offa.org/cart.html .
The procedure for ordering the test and collecting saliva for application to the FTA card has not changed from that of the linkage test.
PLEASE NOTE that there are two order carts on the OFA website for Fanconi testing, one for new, or first, tests labeled "Fanconi DNA" at $65 and the second, labeled "Facnoni retest", only for use with dogs previously tested with the linkage test, at $50. Be sure the registration number, name and birth date on the retest order matches that on the original linkage test certificate. The cost of retesting is being subsidized by the Basenji Health Endowment.
Upon completion of the online order for the Fanconi Retest of a dog that was previously tested with the linkage marker test, the lab will check the storage facility for existing DNA. If enough DNA remains a new FTA card will not be required. The test will be performed from the existing sample, whether from blood or FTA card. A new kit will be mailed where DNA quantities are insufficient.
Certificates will be sent to the owner, and results displayed on the OFA website. Test result descriptions for the new direct test will not contain the word "Probably" and there will be no "indeterminate" results.
Jon Curby
OFA
-
Hello everyone. I havn't been on this forum in a few years but I got this letter in my inbox a few days ago. Kiora tested Clear in the original test. She is 6 and hasn't shown any signs of fanconi, although I'll admit I have not been testing her urine due to the original diagnosis of "Clear". Is there reason for me to get her retested? I have seen talk in this thread of dogs that tested as affected later testing clear, have dogs that tested clear later been tested as affected? Thanks.
-
Hello everyone. I havn't been on this forum in a few years but I got this letter in my inbox a few days ago. Kiora tested Clear in the original test. She is 6 and hasn't shown any signs of fanconi, although I'll admit I have not been testing her urine due to the original diagnosis of "Clear". Is there reason for me to get her retested? I have seen talk in this thread of dogs that tested as affected later testing clear, have dogs that tested clear later been tested as affected? Thanks.
If it were me, I would. Since the first test was a linkage test there is/was always the possibility that the test could have been wrong. And it is recommended that all breeders re-test ALL breeding stock with the direct test. If you want to read more about the direct test and what Dr. Johnson has to say, go to www.basenji.org and click on the link "Click here to see Dr. Johnson's 2011 presentation"
And a personal note, I would not consider someone to be a responsible breeder if they are not re-testing with the direct test.
-
Thanks for the advice! I am not a breeder, I just have one companion Basenji, she is spayed. I am concerned about the possibility of her being "Affected" for Fanconi's, I have been living in a bubble of happiness thinking that she was safe from this particular affliction.
-
Thanks for the advice! I am not a breeder, I just have one companion Basenji, she is spayed. I am concerned about the possibility of her being "Affected" for Fanconi's, I have been living in a bubble of happiness thinking that she was safe from this particular affliction.
It becomes a personal decision with pets, I think. Like I said, I would do it, just because I would want to know. I think it is well worth the 50.00 to have them retested.
