Breeding on Lex Luthor

[Minaz Cassum]

Herewith is an excerpt of an email received recently. My question is that here in India breeders have gone ballistic on Inaqui & more so Lex Luthor. Several times you will see Lex featuring 3 or 4 times in a pedigree.

i am sending u photos & pedigree of sire & dam of dobermann litter. This is an exceptional litter, totally linebread on NELLO’S LEX LUTHOR, one of the great ch. & prouducer dobermann. The puppies will have NELLO’S LEX LUTHOR in the 3 quarters of their expected pedigree as u can see.
Can some one explain the concept of line & in-breeding. Is breeding so closely to any dog (especially Lex) good or bad? Of what cause/s did Lex Luthor die of and can tight line/in-breeding to Lex impact the proposed progeny.

Another example - Dam of sire is a daughter of Lex and her dam is again a daughter of Lex. Now this dog has been mated to a grand daughter of Lex from the paternal side......Comments please. Is this correct breeding or simply too much Lex?

One more example - dog abc has on both sides Lex as the grandsire and is to be mated to bitch xyz who also has Lex as her grandsire. Is this correct breeding protocol? Furthermore, both the sire and dam have identical pedigree, the sire on the paternal side and dam on the maternal side i.e. they are half brother an sister.

Firstly, being half brother and sister and secondly have such a heavy influx of Lex.

I hope I have not confused you folks as I simply could not articulate this better.

Thanks/Regards,

[Elaine]

Inbreeding is breeding brother to sister. Back-crossing is also a form of inbreeding that involves mother-to-son or father-to-daughter.

Some breeders will tell you that inbreeding is a short cut to set type. I think that is the lazy man's approach to breeding. You can achieve any breeding goal by breeding type to type, without the risk of having doubled up on otherwise latent faults. (And think about it, when your inbreed litter is a disaster, it’s the dog that ultimately pay the price.)

If you are going to inbreed, you have to ask yourself, are the individuals so flawlessly perfect that you want 100 of their type? Without exception (most especially in Dobermans), I think the answer is a HUGE, “Oh Hell no!!!” I can not think of a single credible breeder who has intentionally done a brother to sister breeding in Dobermans and I can not think of a single dog that we’d want to see in a Doberman pedigree that is the result of inbreeding.

The pedigree you mention above is a line breeding, a close line breeding.

As for what Lex died of, I would contact Michelle Lewis... she knew the situation and she has used the bloodline. In my experience, she is by far the most accurate source of info on Lex. The worst sources of information on Lex are breeders who hate him and/or who never used him. They are happy to tell you all sorts of things about how Lex died, and about liver disease and Copper Storage Disease... heck, they also claim he shot Kennedy and is responsible for War in the Middle East.

There is always gossip about high profile sires. It’s like those who say that Kafka died of DCM and produced it in huge numbers. It’s gossip. You will hear people criticize high volume sires, while touting the records of dogs that had fewer than a dozen litters. When a stud dog is used as often as dogs like Lex, Kafka, Eddie etc., were, they are no doubt going to produce problems simply because they produced so many offspring, and problems are in the breed itself. All these allegedly perfect dogs would probably also produce the same sampling of problems if they had as many offspring on the ground.

In general, when you double up as with this pedigree, you run the risk of doubling up on faults that can be lethal. When a responsible breeder does this kind of close breeding they truly must be prepared to cull puppies and adults, and that is simply not palatable to many people.

As for doubling up that much on Lex (or any dog), regardless of how perfect the dog is, he is a living creature and will have some flaws. In my opinion Lex’s phenotype blends best with a short-backed more moderate bitch with a really strong loin connection, croup and tail set. But that is just my opinion.

[pretty dobe]

Elaine you are so right on your information, Michelle knows Lex inside and out. She loved him and judged him. As a young dog and later on. She is a wealth of knowledge on a lot of the dogs. We who are fairly new in the conformation ring are lucky to have her in our club and as a mentor. Too bad she isn't on this list, she would be a welcomed addition.

[Elaine]

I believe that she is working for The Doberman Pinscher Magazine http://www.dobermanpinschermagazine.com/ And this is her LeMils website http://lemils.com/home2.htm

Michelle is usually accessible by phone and willing to talk about the Dobermans. I agree, she is a wealth of information (much as Ann Lanier was a great source of information), and it would be great to have Michelle as a member of DSNN, but I am guessing that her time is taken up with the Magazine, and I can see how some might view contributions here on DSNN as being in conflict with her duties with the publication she works for.

Lex is an important sire in our breed. If you have him in your pedigree or if you are thinking of using one of his descendants, it’s good to have as many facts as possible. Again, without meaning to be repetitive, Michelle is a great source of accurate information on Lex and a zillion and one other dogs.

[RaindanceIGs]

There's a time and a place for linebreeding. Some people get caught up with the resume of a particular dog that they don't pay much attention to anything else, and IMO this is not a justifiable reason to do a linebreeding. I sure as heck wouldn't do a tight linebreeding on any dog I've never met/seen in the flesh and be 110% confident in what their cause of death was. Not saying that linebreeding on Lex Luthor is good or bad, I have no personal opinion on it other than I don't care for the style of dog that Lex (and many of his kids) fall into, but that's just me and what other people do or like isn't really my concern. But, if I were looking for a dog to purchase and I saw such a dog linebred on to such an extreme, I better be pretty darn thrilled with that idea before considering purchasing.

I currently have a litter planned in my other breed, a fairly tight linebreeding - on a dog that I have met in person numerous times, seen offspring out of each of the bitch's 3 litters, was a Top 10 dog owner-handled, AND only recently died at age 17. For a breeding that is that tight, I wouldn't do it any other way personally. Too risky - and breeding is risky enough on its own.

[Elaine]

Originally Posted by RaindanceIGs

I sure as heck wouldn't do a tight linebreeding on any dog I've never met/seen in the flesh and be 110% confident in what their cause of death was.

Just curious …

About the emphasis you are placing on knowing the cause of death, in the contect of what a dog will develop or transmit, if you know for a fact that the dog died of, say, cancer, how do you know he would not have died of DCM if he has just lived longer? What test are you doing to determine that the dog would not develop or transmit DCM?

[RaindanceIGs]

Originally Posted by Elaine

Just curious …

About the emphasis you are placing on knowing the cause of death, in the contect of what a dog will develop or transmit, if you know for a fact that the dog died of, say, cancer, how do you know he would not have died of DCM if he has just lived longer? What test are you doing to determine that the dog would not develop or transmit DCM?

I wasn't really referring to DCM in general or anything specific to Lex Luthor's death. But, you are correct that if a dog dies of one thing you will simply never know if another thing would have killed them instead if the other didn't kill them first. But, the point I was trying to make was being very familiar with the dog's family history - so knowing the sire/dam, grandparents, siblings as well as health history of any offspring will hopefully provide clues as to what such a dog might be carrying. So if someone was linebreeding very tightly on Lex Luthor, or any very popular stud dog that they probably know nothing more about them than their impressive history of show wins and offspring - I don't really think that's a valid enough reason to do a linebreeding that tight - again, talking in general here, not necc about even Dobermans or Lex Luthor in particular. In the opinion of the late Dr George Padgett (author of Control of Canine Genetic Diseases) it was his belief that EVERY dog carried recessives for at minimum of 6-7 different hereditary problems. It's also far more likely that related dogs are more likely to carry similar recessives. I'm not anti-linebreeding, just trying to say that people should know what they are dealing with (as much as one can - of course with dead dogs there's only so much you can find out).

Alight off topic - I'm not sure what an average 10-generation Inbreeding Coefficient is in Dobermans, but I know in my other breed anything over 10% would be considered a linebreeding, and anything over 20% would be considered probably closer to an inbreeding.

[Elaine]

Originally Posted by RaindanceIGs

In the opinion of the late Dr George Padgett (author of Control of Canine Genetic Diseases) it was his belief that EVERY dog carried recessives for at minimum of 6-7 different hereditary problems. It's also far more likely that related dogs are more likely to carry similar recessives.

I agree with what you are saying. Honestly, I wish this was more than theory (i.e., I wish breeders had more than just theory to guide them)… but based simply on what I’ve seen in my life, I tend to agree with Dr. Padgett. Problem is that outcross breedings can give you too much of a range (no pre-potency for type) and no predictably. There is a balance that a breeder needs to maintain. We did outcross breedings with our line bred Kafka daughter. If you lined up the Trotyl - Ahb puppies produced, no two look alike (though there are some consistencies). The consistency in the line-bred Warkant - Claire litter is markedly different.


About the deep knowledge breeders have of the dogs back in their pedigrees, it is problematic. So much depends upon what the observer knows about the breed (and dogs in general). For example, I am familiar with many of the dogs in the pedigrees of Faye Straus / Sherluck and Jody Podino (Huston) / Wingate. I saw them in person, knew lots of people who owned them, I owned one, am familiar with health problems and phenotypes, etc. I think that the best of these two kennels have a lot to offer the SA bloodlines that are popular today. And I can easily understand why Faye went back to Castle Rock a few years ago. I think the bone, top line, loin connections and tail sets on the best of the Sherluck / Wingate dogs were excellent (and should be valued very highly). But my memories of dogs that lived fifteen to twenty years ago is tainted by my knowledge of dogs at the time. There were dogs from back then that I absolutely adored. I remember them very very fondly. Yet, when I go back and look at photos of them, I think, “That isn’t how I memorialized them in my memory."

[RaindanceIGs]

Originally Posted by Elaine

I agree with what you are saying. Honestly, I wish this was more than theory (i.e., I wish breeders had more than just theory to guide them)… but based simply on what I’ve seen in my life, I tend to agree with Dr. Padgett. Problem is that outcross breedings can give you too much of a range (no pre-potency for type) and no predictably. There is a balance that a breeder needs to maintain. We did outcross breedings with our line bred Kafka daughter. If you lined up the Trotyl - Ahb puppies produced, no two look alike (though there are some consistencies). The consistency in the line-bred Warkant - Claire litter is markedly different.


About the deep knowledge breeders have of the dogs back in their pedigrees, it is problematic. So much depends upon what the observer knows about the breed (and dogs in general). For example, I am familiar with many of the dogs in the pedigrees of Faye Straus / Sherluck and Jody Podino (Huston) / Wingate. I saw them in person, knew lots of people who owned them, I owned one, am familiar with health problems and phenotypes, etc. I think that the best of these two kennels have a lot to offer the SA bloodlines that are popular today. And I can easily understand why Faye went back to Castle Rock a few years ago. I think the bone, top line, loin connections and tail sets on the best of the Sherluck / Wingate dogs were excellent (and should be valued very highly). But my memories of dogs that lived fifteen to twenty years ago is tainted by my knowledge of dogs at the time. There were dogs from back then that I absolutely adored. I remember them very very fondly. Yet, when I go back and look at photos of them, I think, “That isn’t how I memorialized them in my memory."

Yes there can be a great deal of inconsistency with outcrossing - but, not always. I have actually done quite a bit of outcrossing however the sires/dams came from long lines of dogs that were phenotypically similar, and while an odd-ball pup did pop up here and there (maybe one in each litter), I've had sometimes more luck with consistency when breeding similar phenotypes to each other than a very close linebreeding I did (which was extremely inconsistent in style). I'm always flattered when people (very experienced people in the breed) look at my bitch Karma and male Cassio, who have radically different pedigrees, and ask if they are littermates.

But I agree that seeing the dogs in person just can't compare to seeing photographs. One of my favorite dogs of all time (Italian greyhound, not doberman) I was fortunate enough to see wen she was 7 or 8 years old and several other times before she died, a very influential bitch. STUNNING - yet if anyone had ever seen a show photo of her being handled by her owner who had poor handling skills, no one would have thought she was much of anything at all. I think people need to remember we breed THREE DIMENSIONAL animals, not for dogs that look pretty in a show photo. Anyone who has ever taken a show photo before knows you can make a phenomenal dog look like a pet, and make a horrendous animal look like a BIS winner.

[pretty dobe]

Michelle Lewis has asked me to post this for her.

I want to the Internet site from Elaine--She was very nice to say those things about my knowledge. of the breed and the complements about me, it is nice to here something positive sometimes---,--I really would like to tell the list the reason I cannot post is just as Elaine said, some would try to say that my posting is a conflict of interest and my words are of the magazine not my words. Cheri did this to me a few years ago and it was not good. I would be happy to help the fancy with their questions they just have to contact me at lemils@aol.com or my website www.lemils.com If you would thank Elaine for me I would appreciate this very much
Michelle