Animal Genetics’ current revised WFFS+ population is 6.4% in warmbloods, although UCDavis’ page still reads with a 9-11% estimation. That hasn’t changed from when the page originally went up if I recall correctly, but the AG percentage has been updating relatively routinely.
I’m not sure how either are getting their numbers though: if it’s based off an extrapolation of animals their lab has tested (which may artificially inflate numbers at first…?) or some other method.
It is very likely that a heterozygous horse for this gene could receive a benefit in elasticity. The “speed gene” in TBs has proved to determine “best distance” for a racer; homozygous for one allele means either a sprinter or a stayer; heterozygous means that the horse can go either way with training–it’s probably the genetic situation for “classic races” which are over a mile but less than two miles.
This is going to sound so far left field, but after reviewing the sheet of positive stallions on FB, some of these stallions also have (tested) offspring with EPSA/DSLD… Unrelated or no, just something I noticed.
Is the the elasticity we see in WBs related to WFFS / is WFFS a byproduct of breeding for elasticity? Is WFFS related to DSLD/EPSA? Completely different? Derivative of DSLD which is in pretty much all breeds?
@vineyridge, what is your basis for saying it is “very likely” vs just “it is possible that” one copy of the gene impacts elasticity? To my awareness there have been no findings one way or the other, though I do hope they take this and study it going forward. (Same with the DSLD link that Beowulf mentions - I hope there is rigorous study because it would be amazing if we could do more to unpack the awful condition that is DSLD, although I would be cautious about conjecturing either way without scientific study done to have proof one way or the other…)
No basis other than that stallions who are heterozygous for this gene seem to be far more prominent in dressage than in the other disciplines. Dressage relies on elasticity far more than the other disciplines. If the homogygous/heterozygous status can make such a difference in one aspect of the TB, that means that it could well affect other aspects in horses in the same way. Since the effect of homozygosity is a defect in the elastic properties of connective tissue, it seems possible (but I think very likely) that heterozygosity might confer a benefit in increasing the elasticity of those fibers within the range of normality.
and with TB breeding, one can be talking very big bucks compared with WBs
I am impressed with those that pressed the issue for answers. At this point it would seem like mare owners need to test their mares and act accordingly…
Regarding PS stallions I assume the most concern is that these stallions have a large book of mares and lots of foals in proportion to the general stallion population?
Most mare owners I know are testing mares.
Definitely not conjecturing one way or another! Though I would argue that when working with limited data, the first thing to do is to hammer down a starting point for further investigation – AKA testing a hypothesis.
I don’t know if there is or isn’t a link. Would be nice to find out for certain one way or another, though.
@ladyj79 is correct. Most mare owners I know are testing. The issue arises when a mare is a carrier and the stallion a mare owner is interested in is status: unknown. Breeding two carriers together is an avoidable risk (avoid both the financial and emotional costs), so long as all parties are transparent about the horse status.
PS stallions are well advertised and is generally considered one of the biggest names in the business. To have him denigrate those concerned about WFFS (as he originally did), and then take such a lax stance on testing/disclosing statuses was a frustrating precedent for a big name in the industry to take - as well as making life difficult for mare owners. (And it’s easy to say “well don’t buy semen from untested stallions” but many mare owners have thousands of dollars worth of frozen purchased and in storage well ahead of time, so an owner of a WFFS carrier mare may have semen from a PS stallion purchased five years ago they would like to use, but couldn’t due to unknown status.)
That makes sense why both mare and stallion status needs to be known…again I really admired those that pushed to get this out there and addressed by the stud books (and to educate folks like me).
I have only seen the UCD numbers. And in a relatively small population (I realize he is a huge stud farm, but statistically speaking, 52is not a large population), 11% versus 14% is not a huge deviation.
Btw, I am in no way defending PS’s apparent lack of concern over WFFS, just pointing out that statistically, his stallion lineup isn’t that far off the norm. Of course we don’t really know what the norm is this early in the game.
And the thought that that there may be a connection between highly elastic horses and other long term issues is an interesting concept that deserves more attention. I have heard several vets make similar observations, related to both soft tissue and neurological issues. So I suspect there is research going on in this area.
Anytime we breed with too much emphasis on the importance of one (or a few) traits, we seem to weaken the overall structure as seen in dogs, cats, horses, almost every heavily domesticated species.
Just playing the devil’s advocate here…
Disclaimer: I own 2 geldings, Arab and Arab x. So I have no dog in this fight except that I have a biology degree, am interested in genetics, and was a participant in a very lengthy discussion we had in 2013 about WFFS here on COTH. I have no connection (obviously!) to PS. I didn’t like his attitude once the manure hit the fan. BUT I feel pretty confident that if the poor foal hadn’t died last year that this issue would still be flying under the radar. So seems like there were lots of breeders, US and in Europe, who were ignoring a problem that’s been known since at least 2011, if not much earlier.
So I think he shouldn’t be the only person singled out for criticism. Has he evolved on the issue? I guess not, but seems to me he had lots of company until the publicity hit critical mass, including the registries. It’s only when that very brave person (whose name I cannot remember) raised holy h*ll when her foal died that things started to finally pierce some folks’ consciousness. And good for her, it needed to happen.
End of devilment…
PS certainly wasn’t alone, many of the Germans were not forthcoming, and the country was behind the dutch in mandating disclosure, which really drew attention to the many German breeders PS a looming giant as saying yeah, don’t care, not doing it until forced.
I actually had that same thought while reading the WFFS thread in the fall (?). So if you’re in left field, I’m out there with you!
My DSLD guy’s sire, Bugatti, is listed as N/WFFS on the pedigree database (https://www.allbreedpedigree.com/bugatti7), though I don’t know where exactly that comes from or whether it’s accurate. My horse’s breeder had another Bugatti baby, out of a different dam, who also had DSLD. Obviously not enough to draw any conclusions whatsoever, but it does intrigue me!
To answer my question above, I guess he’s evolved, but in an unexpected direction. Still in denial somewhat?
Re disclosure and the dragging of feet of some breeders… just reminds me of the AQHA “behavior” when HYPP was first uncovered. AQHA (I know, registry not a breeder) dragged their feet at mandating testing of QHs until finally it happened.
I wouldn’t say it’s exaggerated, and it is good for breeders to know carrier status if only to avoid throwing their money away on breeding that are most likely to absorb or abort. Not everyone breeds a thousand+ foals a year, Paul. I can see why he doesn’t gaf, but for small breeders or those breeding for personal horses, they probably would like to limit their risk --including financial-- as much as possible in an already risky game.
Paul has put the results of who is positive and negative on his website. http://schockemoehle.com/eng/service-station-stud/breeding-stallions/artikelliste.html
The difference in the two conditions is that contrary to Vineyridge’s unfounded assertion, there is absolutely no evidence that a WFFS heterozygote has any different phenotypic expression than a wildtype horse. With HYPP N/H horses have a different phenotype and can have clinical signs.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
