This link will take you to an article regarding the current efforts to clone Eclipse, the late, great forefather of most of the thoroughbreds on the tracks today. Should the efforts succeed, this genetic duplicate of Eclipse will be ineligible for registry and therefore cannot be raced not could his foals be registered.
Normally I’m not a big proponent of breeding clones but I think bringing back Eclipse would be something extraordinary and worthy of an exception to the rules.
I would like to know what you think.
The offspring of an unregistered horse would be unregistrable. He is already in most pedigrees, I see no reason why he should be in there again.
It was my understanding that the hair alone would not contain enough genetic material for this. That is why labs doing DNA analysis require samples to include roots.
They got the DNA from the hair roots according to the article.
I think one of the things we would learn from such an effort is that he probably was quite different from modern horses. Question is, would that be a good thing or a bad thing? Would we diminish his legend or would we think back to some of the qualities he had and wonder if we need to go back? Would we decide that today’s Thoroughbred is better from all the generations of careful breeding?
I think one of the things we would learn from such an effort is that he probably was quite different from modern horses.
I was looking at some 18th Century race cards recently and most of the runners were 14.1 - 14.2 which is a whole lot smaller than modern TBs.
I don’t know what exactly they could “do” with an Eclipse clone, but admit to being very, very curious and interested in seeing how he was actually built and what he would be like compared to modern thoroughbreds.
I think it would be truly fascinating to put a clone of a legendary thoroughbred in a modern race training regimen and see how he holds up and performs.
It has always been my theory that the problems of the TB of today are a combination of both nature and nurture, but more heavily favored towards nurture. Meaning I think the issues we see today are maybe ~30% genetic and ~70% environmental. If that’s true, one could hypothesize that clones of great TBs from the past would only be at a slight advantage and ultimately succumb to the same common issues that plague TBs today. It would be an interesting study nonetheless.
Would the diet offered modern race horses allow a clone to grow taller than it’s original? How would the clone do on modern track surfaces? By breeding back to a time when horses were not as pampered and some of the ‘heritable’ problems like bad feet and tendencies to breakdown young allow us to ‘up grade’ modern TB’s? Don’t know that we’d benefit from a current boost of greats like Secretariat, but some of the very old bloodlines that are now so diluted might add some physical advantages. What do y’all think?
[QUOTE=littlebaypony;7553713]
Would the diet offered modern race horses allow a clone to grow taller than it’s original? How would the clone do on modern track surfaces? By breeding back to a time when horses were not as pampered and some of the ‘heritable’ problems like bad feet and tendencies to breakdown young allow us to ‘up grade’ modern TB’s? Don’t know that we’d benefit from a current boost of greats like Secretariat, but some of the very old bloodlines that are now so diluted might add some physical advantages. What do y’all think?[/QUOTE]
I find it hard to believe Eclipse would be competitive in modern racing given that his forté was running in 4 mile heats (multiple 4 mile races run on the same day). If he could jump, then maybe he could might make a go of it as a staying (3m+) chaser.
As to how he would handle dirt, God only knows, as he would have raced exclusively on grass back in the 1700s.
Racing today, especially American racing, is a completely different sport from the one that Eclipse knew, and on top of that one would have to think that the TB as a breed has evolved considerably in the last 250 odd years.
[QUOTE=littlebaypony;7553713]
Would the diet offered modern race horses allow a clone to grow taller than it’s original? How would the clone do on modern track surfaces? By breeding back to a time when horses were not as pampered and some of the ‘heritable’ problems like bad feet and tendencies to breakdown young allow us to ‘up grade’ modern TB’s? Don’t know that we’d benefit from a current boost of greats like Secretariat, but some of the very old bloodlines that are now so diluted might add some physical advantages. What do y’all think?[/QUOTE]
I think these are all very interesting questions.
[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;7553758]I find it hard to believe Eclipse would be competitive in modern racing given that his forté was running in 4 mile heats (multiple 4 mile races run on the same day). If he could jump, then maybe he could might make a go of it as a staying (3m+) chaser.
As to how he would handle dirt, God only knows, as he would have raced exclusively on grass back in the 1700s.
Racing today, especially American racing, is a completely different sport from the one that Eclipse knew, and on top of that one would have to think that the TB as a breed has evolved considerably in the last 250 odd years.[/QUOTE]
This is why I did not specifically say Eclipse’s name in my post, as I knew you would come back with this. 
I think Eclipse may be a bit far back for a true comparison, although I still do think it would be fascinating to see how he would perform against horses today-- whether it’s running the clone at 6F on the dirt in the US or in a place like Europe or Australia where you could more closely recreate his ideal racing conditions.
I would love to see a study using clones of racing greats. It would be extremely difficult to get enough people on board and find funding, and the pari-mutual nature of racing would make it practically impossible. But just imagine if someone could perform a double blind study with clones of great American dirt horses from the past 100 years placed in various training situations at tracks around the country. Would they perform at top level? Would they end up in the claiming ranks? Would they wind up injured and broke down quickly? There could potentially be a lot to learn from it-- both about clones and about racing today.
[QUOTE=Texarkana;7553774]
I think these are all very interesting questions.
This is why I did not specifically say Eclipse’s name in my post, as I knew you would come back with this.
I think Eclipse may be a bit far back for a true comparison, although I still do think it would be fascinating to see how he would perform against horses today-- whether it’s running the clone at 6F on the dirt in the US or in a place like Europe or Australia where you could more closely recreate his ideal racing conditions.
I would love to see a study using clones of racing greats. It would be extremely difficult to get enough people on board and find funding, and the pari-mutual nature of racing would make it practically impossible. But just imagine if someone could perform a double blind study with clones of great American dirt horses from the past 100 years placed in various training situations at tracks around the country. Would they perform at top level? Would they end up in the claiming ranks? Would they wind up injured and broke down quickly? There could potentially be a lot to learn from it-- both about clones and about racing today.[/QUOTE]
Clones of horses from the last 40, 70, even 100 years makes a lot more sense than horses like Eclipse, as they raced over the same distances, and often the same tracks, as modern horses do. We also have a metric by which we can can compare… the clock.
We can state, with a good deal of certainty, that Secretariat would hold his own, if not destroy, modern horses, given he still holds the stakes records for all three Triple Crown races (ok, technically he doesn’t hold the Preakness record because of a clock malfunction, but any reasonable person will agree he owns that one too).
Eclipse on the other hand, is a world apart in both the type of racing he did, and also the type of animal he was… the TB as bred was still very much in the development stage in the mid 1700s. We have to believe that 250 years of selective breeding has given us a completely different animal to what Eclipse was, and one that has been fine tuned for today’s racing. I seriously think that an Eclipse clone would have a hard time winning a class 5 handicap over 12f at Ripon on the grass, never mind a $4k claimer over 6f at Blue Ribbon Downs on the dirt.
Many variables go into the modern TB’s level of performance. Man O’ War raced many times at Saratoga (and suffered his only loss there) but he wasn’t running on the “same” footing. Modern tracks are very different and IMO, a big factor in the appalling number of injuries we see. (Horses come off of Gulfstream every spring much worse for wear, for example.)
The idea of “time travelling champions” has been fodder for conversation in pubs from Saratoga to Epsom to Mornington for years. What fan hasn’t pondered the idea of pitting Man O’ War, Citation, Kelso and Secretariat against 19th century stars and those of today?
As great an idea as it is, IF it could happen it would ask more than answer. Even if conditions were set (say 10f on dirt at 2 turns) what about other variables? Man O’ War was rumored to have run on an assortment of potions, how would he handle Lasix? Training methods are very different today, would Citation be as tough if he were managed like a modern TB? In the old days, horses raced into shape, with a major race as a goal would our heroes of old shine of fizzle under those conditions? Let’s not forget the other human element, the rider. Since the use of cameras, riding has become a bit more (shall we say…) civilized. A lot of what went on in the “good ol’ days” wasn’t so good. How about the fact than many stars of old were managed with an eye toward cashing a bet (in the days of the bookmakers) rather than winning a purse, even at the highest levels.
I would guess that recreating Eclipse would have some merit. His is just about the only sireline still extant of the 3 foundation sires. (I think I read that about 98% of TB’s worldwide trace to him tail male.) Even those who don’t could be estimated to have many crosses of Eclipse. He, remains the single most influential horse on the blood of the breed. I would wonder if there was a way to determine what it was that he had to make it so in a breed spread so far and wide. Figure - a near contemporary of Eclipse - the founder of the Morgan is not even comparable. In it’s early stages the Morgan was pretty much a “local” breed or type centered in western New England and eastern NY. Within a couple of generations, the TB was worldwide, even a era of limited travel. In fact Figure was believed to have been sired by a TB. Despite the way the sport has changed (or maybe because of it) Eclipse has assumed such dominance in the breed it would be interesting to see if some reason could be found.
Horses like Eclipse or Lexington who ran in 4 miles heats wouldn’t be fast enough today to be 'chasers today. IMO, the founder of the “modern” TB is Domino, a stallion who sired 20 foals but who changed the breed in the late 1800’s. It would be fascinating to clone him.
I’d rather see Matchem cloned. He is found in the sire line of horses like Man O’War’s and is very well worth preserving. (Note: I really dislike the term “tail male” as it makes no sense - a tail is found at the end of a horse not in the front and as far as I know, TB pedigrees alway list the stallions at the top. With Arabian pedigrees, the stallion line is called the sire line and the mare line is called the tail female).
Anyway, as most are aware, this sire line is found in very few stallions today and should be preserved if possible. The only top breeding stallion still carrying it is Tiznow, that I’m aware of. This is too bad as the TB gene pool is getting smaller and smaller.
Wish Tiznow’s stud fee was lower as I’d breed my beautiful Not For Love daughter to him in a heartbeat.
Tail male and female are legal terms that go back centuries and mean exactly the same thing that they mean in horses. The term “entail” comes from the same source, which I believe may be law French.
I know a lovely legal joke where the punch line is “Fee tail female, possibility of issue extinct.”
Eclipse was rather small, IIRC, and very close to average in most of his measurements.
One thing about him that we have learned from genetic research is that his MtDNA doesn’t quite match up with his recorded pedigree. It’s in the paper “Bred in the bone”–at least I think that’s the title.
Linny, I believe that a study was done that showed Herod as the most influential genetically in the modern TB.
If Eclipse, or any of those early great sires, could be cloned today they would be fed, vetted, trained and presumably raced by current standards. With these improvements would be have grown taller? Run even faster? But most important to me, could he reintroduce into the modern TB the structure to be able to run those 4 milers? What have we lost by breeding taller, lighter boned, crappy footed horses that run shorter distances pumped full of drugs, supplements and steroids, over pampered surfaces?
If I had the chance to breed to Figure, the original Morgan, I’d breed anything and everything to him because his progeny were so versatile and prepotent. Morgans are my favorite breed but they could sure use a big dose of the original DNA. Honestly, most breeds could use a history lesson.
Question: would we even get a horse who looked like Eclipse? Gemini (Gem Twist’s clone) is not a physical duplicate. Genotype doesn’t always produce the same phenotype. The question about diet and vet care is a good one, too.
I would rather clone Domino if we’re taking suggestions. Or Citation, he’s too hard to find in pedigrees and he was clearly cast out of iron.
A cursory glance at influential horses of the early 1800’s shows Herod as by far more frequently occurring than Eclipse. He appears so often that it’s dizzying. Yet, in terms of a permanent sireline, Eclipse has effectively taken over the breed.
Camel, the sire of Touchstone has 5 Herod crosses in 5 generations and one in his 6th generation. Isonomy had 5 crosses of Sir Hercules who himself had 4 crosses of Herod. Of course in the early stages, while the breed was establishing itself and the track was a true testing ground for entry to the gene pool and with few outcross options other than unproven stock close inbreeding was common.
