One other note about chest 'dropping' (and why did dog people start using that term - it sort of conjurs up visions of dog parts falling off in the yard) One the the biggest problems in basenjis fronts right now is those that are too narrow and have a concave area between the front legs. I'm NOT advocating a front like a bull terrier but there needs to be some 'fill' there to have a good front but it's not the fill it is the actual structure of the bones in the shoulder and upper arm that - if not correct- actally pull the 'front' too far forward. A quick visual scan from the side - if the deepest part of the brisket is well behind the legs - the front is too far forward. We need to pay attention to the actual shoulder structure to make sure we are not continuing to double up on dogs with a short upper arm. That limits front reach, and creates a not efficient side gait. So go catch your dogs and do a quick check - measure from the top of the wither to the point of shoulder (the most prominant bone in the chest.) then from that point to the point of the elbow. They should be the same. if they are not - stand up your dog and put your hand between the front legs - if you hand is IN FRONT OF THE FRONT LEGS - great - if your hand is between the front legs the front on your dog is too far foward.
More than you ever wanted to know probably - LOL
Offspring's Fanconi Results Question
-
There are some that have been brought back that IMO are truly only nice mixed village dogs and do not have Basenji type.
I agree 100% percent…but none of the Dr. Jo & Jon Curby dogs fall into that category because those regions that they travel are really remote...the ones that look like mixes came from more civilized regions, like the Cameroon & Benin.
-
I agree 100% percent…but none of the Dr. Jo & Jon Curby dogs fall into that category because those regions that they travel are really remote...the ones that look like mixes came from more civilized regions, like the Cameroon & Benin.
I agree…
-
I believe there was one that as IND (between a Clear and Carrier). There is also some thyroid and hip issues with the Avongara's. Which is why testing is so important before breeding so that we know and understand possible health concerns
I knew you'd help with the answers! ;):D
Right…I forgot about the hip stuff I've heard about...hadn't heard about the thyroid issues - only the hips and the PRA. -
Thanks guys I think I get the picture…better at least. I do realize the difficulty with going to africa and getting dogs..and they might not even be pure B's and of course also the fact that it is costly and it doesn't guarantee the health aspect of an import either.
Tanza when you wrote that you don't agree with the breeding of clears to affecteds, do you mean that you endorse it? I understand the point of hoping to make carriers but won't some of those puppies be affecteds?Ivoss, thanks for the website recommendation, I will read up on it..that doesn't mean this blondie over here gets it still, but I will try.
-
There are two new imports that have tested IND. Avongara Kitoko and Lukuru Amisi.
There are no recorded cases of PRA in the Avongaras from 87/88 and no PRA affected offspring of an Avongara parent.
There are cases verifiable in the OFA database of HD and hypothyroidism.
-
Tanza when you wrote that you don't agree with the breeding of clears to affecteds, do you mean that you endorse it? I understand the point of hoping to make carriers but won't some of those puppies be affecteds?
No, there will be no Affected puppies in a Clear to Affected breeding. 100% of the puppies will be Carriers. Affected puppies cannot be produced from a Clear parent.
-
Thanks guys I think I get the picture…better at least. I do realize the difficulty with going to africa and getting dogs..and they might not even be pure B's and of course also the fact that it is costly and it doesn't guarantee the health aspect of an import either.
Tanza when you wrote that you don't agree with the breeding of clears to affecteds, do you mean that you endorse it? I understand the point of hoping to make carriers but won't some of those puppies be affecteds?Ivoss, thanks for the website recommendation, I will read up on it..that doesn't mean this blondie over here gets it still, but I will try.
What I was saying was that I do NOT agree with NOT using Affected dogs on a Clear Bitch
I do "endorse" it (however I would never use an affected bitch only a dog and in this case it is with frozen semen collected before he was known to have Fanconi)… and in fact I am doing an affected to clear this fall.. and all will be carriers, none will be affected.
-
There are two new imports that have tested IND. Avongara Kitoko and Lukuru Amisi.
There are no recorded cases of PRA in the Avongaras from 87/88 and no PRA affected offspring of an Avongara parent.
Interesting that 2 of the new imports are the ones that are IND…and both from somewhat different areas. It will be interesting if we get a direct test to see what they really test as...Clear or Carrier. I know in the meantime, they are considered carriers.
Good info about PRA...I remember why I thought that there was a case...I had heard about an eye test with an unexpected result (test was re-done with a more knowledgeable ophthalmologist and came back negative).
-
Ok, I got it. So basically the only way (as far as we know with the test available today) to get affecteds is if the "breeder" either don't test prior to breeding or breed affecteds and carriers together, and not using a clear in the mix.
-
Ok, I got it. So basically the only way (as far as we know with the test available today) to get affecteds is if the "breeder" either don't test prior to breeding or breed affecteds and carriers together, and not using a clear in the mix.
That's part of it…but carrier to carrier may also produce some affecteds. That is why the carrier to carrier and/or carrier to affected breedings should NEVER be done.
-
Clear x Clear = All Clear
Clear x Carrier = Possibility of Carrier and Clear
Clear x Affected = All Carrier
Carrier x Carrier = possibility of Clear, Carrier, and Affected
Carrier x Affected = possibility of Carrier and Affected
Affected x Affected = all AffectedIND are treated as Carriers until we get a direct gene test.
Another possibility of producing affecteds is if the dog's test results were in error so the breeder did what should have been a safe breeding and later found out that the result was in error. This is one reason we keep encouraging testing even when parents have been tested. The more generational testing there is the more evidence that the results are correct.
-
Ok, I got it. So basically the only way (as far as we know with the test available today) to get affecteds is if the "breeder" either don't test prior to breeding or breed affecteds and carriers together, and not using a clear in the mix.
Right, Affecteds and Carriers and IND (between a Clear and a Carrier, so should be considered a Carrier) should only be bred to Clears, period
With the very, very few inconsistant results excluded, looking at the test results, what we are seeing is what we would expect to see, especially in looking at tested sires and dams and then their offspring.
