Important news!! WFFS is finally recognized

[Manni01]

@SonnysMom

If you know that that the mutation occurred with a particular stallion then the mutation is only carried by his decendents. If a breeder is 100% sure that their horse does not have that stallion as an ancestor then there is no reason for them to test for that condition. Right now since nobody knows where the mutation originated all breeders should test their breeding stock to determine if their horse is a carrier. Since this is a recessive trait they could breed to a horse that has been tested as a non-carrier but that may limit them to a smaller pool of stallions. As it stands a higher percentage of horses should be tested prior to breeding to determine non-carrier status. If you can determine the source then you should be able to limit testing those horses decended from that horse.

I know you hate this analogy but …if a QH does not have Impressive anywhere in its pedigree then there is no reason to test for HYPP. Only horses that have Impressive as an ancestor can have HYPP. If 20% of the QH population has Impressive breeding then why does 100% of those that want to breed their QH need to pay for the test when it only applies to 20% of the population?

But you can do this because Impressive was not living too many years ago…

Do we know yet when WFFS started?? We know the first reported case, assuming most affected foals don’t even get born, was that actually the first case of it??

I agree with you on the advantage though. So lets see whether they find the origin.

But I am doubtful. Everdales grandmother who supposedly gave the carrier gene to him according to the owner goes back to very old unknown lines… So obviously it did existi back then already… Ok maybe the mutation occurred in Everdales Grandmother but I am not sure about that…

[Edre]

As far as I can tell, as I look at the pedigrees of horses that people have so honestly come forward and listed as being N/FFS/positive for the gene, I can’t identify any smoking gun of a pedigree or common ancestor. Someone with more resources than me might be able to take it back but right now I’m almost wondering if my hypothesis is that this is a historic mutation that might pre-date modern breeding (**I have an issue with this thought which I’ll note below). It could have happened before the advent of modern breeding practice/registries/record keeping and diversified enough that the common ancestor may never be able to be named because it predates our record keeping.

**My issue with this is that to the best of my knowledge, nothing like this exists in the TB (or arab?) populations. If we assert that the modern warmblood has TB/Arab ancestry, and that this mutation is ancient enough to date back to that era (or predate it) then it would make sense that it would show up in both of those breeding populations as well, which it doesn’t seem to. This suggests that it might be a more modern occurrence (and suggest that it is possible to find the progenitor of the mutation).

I’m also willing to speculate that maybe the mutation happened multiple times but the probability of that is very low from my understanding, and still wouldn’t explain why this would be a warmblood-population only event.

I would be curious to hear if anyone has thoughts, information, or experience that might recommend one of these ideas over the other!

[Marydell]

My impression of this is that it is quite a bit further back than most people will have thought. Don Principe is 19. His sire Donnerhall was born in 1981. His dam, born in 1991. So that means one of them was a carrier. Donnerhall’s parents were born in 1977 and 1976. Don Principe’s maternal grandparents in 1982 and 1986… So this trait has been around at least as far back as the 70s if the speculation is accurate. If the Donnerhall line, how many thousands are affected? The point is we don’t know. Speculating on the past gets us nowhere today.

There are similar skin issues with both the TB and Arab. The gene is different though. My theory is that the start of this trait came from those populations and mutated with the addition of “cold” blood. There is no way to prove/disprove this though.

The important thing to remember is that the industry as a whole- breeding and gene research is in it’s infancy. We are on the edge of discovering more information as time goes by. For example, with this type of research, will we know if there is a gene mutation for excessive OCD similar to the gene for human breast cancer?

Since the WFFS carrier status is showing up in older and valued bloodlines, there is no valid reason to pull horses from the gene pool if we all follow informed and responsible breeding pairings. TEST,TEST!!! It is affordable and cheap insurance against losing a foal. Do not put your head in the sand and say it is so rare, I will take my chances. Ask the European frozen stallion owners to also test and don’t take the risk unless you have tested your mares and they are N/N negative for WFFS.

This is, IMHO, an ethical responsibility on the part of every single one of the breeders, not just one or the other -stallion owners or even the owners of mares. If we can prevent even one death, then it is our responsibility and obligation to do so

[xQHDQ]

@Manni01

I know that there are foals born with only one eye… I am sure thats genetic… What about roaring or club feet… Its all genetic… .

There is a difference between a phenotype that has a “genetic” origin versus a “congenital” origin. These issues may or may not be genetic.

[DownYonder]

Can someone provide a link where the owner of Everdale stated that he is a carrier and got the gene from his grandmother?

And can someone advise the name of the stallion whose owner refuses to release test results for WFFS?

[JB]

https://www.horses.nl/fokkerij/everd…-van-wffs-gen/

It states that Everdale is a carrier, and this his sire Lord Leatherdale is negative, and his damsire Negro is negative.

That leaves the dam as the carrier who gave it to Everdale, and it leaves the dam’s dam as the carrier who gave it to her.

It also states that Everdale is the only foal from his dam.

At 906 registered foals by Everdale, we can assume roughly 400+ carriers resulted.

[neversaynever]

@Marydell

There are similar skin issues with both the TB and Arab. The gene is different though. My theory is that the start of this trait came from those populations and mutated with the addition of “cold” blood. There is no way to prove/disprove this though.

What is the genetic skin issue in Arabs that is similar to WFFS? If you are referring to LFS, foals may have an unusual color at birth but it is a neurological problem. It was recognized as a problem in the 1950s, primarily in Egyptian Arabs. A genetic test has been available for about 10 yrs. The AHA has been very proactive in support of genetic research and testing.

[DMK]

@Manni01

Maybe QH people are different. But I cannot imagine warmblood breeders to search for the horse in which the mutation possibly occurred…

You are totally naive about the human race, I give you that.

Besides, what if one of those QH breeders switches to breeding WBs. IT COULD HAPPEN PEOPLE. Or what if some totally unrelated busybody who heard about WFFS endows a research grant? What, KWPN is gonna shut them down?

[Kareen]

Well for what it’s worth: The prevalence within the (small) group of horses that has been admitted to the data-collection thus far is a lot higher than the quoted 7-11% from existing research and so is the prevalence I’ve seen in my practice thus far. While the numbers are far (very far) from being critical mass I daresay breeders would be wise to test asap in order to gather more information and be able to make educated mating decisions. While WFFS still is nothing to panic over it won’t do any good to try and just outwait the issue because it won’t disappear by itself and the impact via EED or abortion might be a lot more significant than the few (albeit tragic) reported cases of WFFS-foals carried to term and born alive.

[vineyridge]

After looking at some pedigrees, I would not at all be surprised if the mutation hadn’t started in a TB.

[Manni01]

@vineyridge

After looking at some pedigrees, I would not at all be surprised if the mutation hadn’t started in a TB.

I don’t understand. Do you think it started in TB or do you think it did not??

And BTW right now its total guessing. Still not sure why some people are so obsessed to find the guilty horse… IMO a lot of lines are carrying it by now anyhow, so in the moment its testing…

[Manni01]

BTW I wanted to thank so many people for all this great input into this thread. And @Marydell Kudos to you for testing your stallions and publishing your results!!! Thank you!!!

[Manni01]

@DMK

You are totally naive about the human race, I give you that.

Besides, what if one of those QH breeders switches to breeding WBs. IT COULD HAPPEN PEOPLE. Or what if some totally unrelated busybody who heard about WFFS endows a research grant? What, KWPN is gonna shut them down?

I don’t think I am naive about the human race… I just don’t have your phantasies I guess…

[vineyridge]

I think it could well have started in a TB. Until we get a lot more pedigrees to review, a mutation in a TB used in WB breeding is just as likely as not. And it would seem to have been around a lot longer than originally suspected if it has infiltrated as much as Kareen indicates that it may have.

I’m wondering if it is found in Holsteiners who are a much more limited book than most WB registries.

[beowulf]

@vineyridge

I think it could well have started in a TB. Until we get a lot more pedigrees to review, a mutation in a TB used in WB breeding is just as likely as not. And it would seem to have been around a lot longer than originally suspected if it has infiltrated as much as Kareen indicates that it may have.

I’m wondering if it is found in Holsteiners who are a much more limited book than most WB registries.

With the amount of linebreeding we see in TB pedigrees today, I think if it started in a TB, we would have seen it crop up in TBs by now. TBs are a relatively new breed by historical standards, yet the only “breed” WFSS is evident in is WBs.

Considering it seems more common in dressage lines, I don’t think it came from a TB.

[Manni01]

@vineyridge

I think it could well have started in a TB. Until we get a lot more pedigrees to review, a mutation in a TB used in WB breeding is just as likely as not. And it would seem to have been around a lot longer than originally suspected if it has infiltrated as much as Kareen indicates that it may have.

I’m wondering if it is found in Holsteiners who are a much more limited book than most WB registries.

Everdales mother goes back to Holsteiner lines…

[Manni01]

@beowulf

With the amount of linebreeding we see in TB pedigrees today, I think if it started in a TB, we would have seen it crop up in TBs by now. TBs are a relatively new breed by historical standards, yet the only “breed” WFSS is evident in is WBs.

Considering it seems more common in dressage lines, I don’t think it came from a TB.

Interested??? Why do you assume its more common in dressage lines??? One case of a foal born with the disease in Switzerland was sired by a well known Jumper stallion with a lot of offspring… To me it seems Jumperbreeder did not test yet…

[Laurierace]

@Manni01

Interested??? Why do you assume its more common in dressage lines??? One case of a foal born with the disease in Switzerland was sired by a well known Jumper stallion with a lot of offspring… To me it seems Jumperbreeder did not test yet…

How do you test for something you don’t know exists? Good Lord.

[Manni01]

@Laurierace

How do you test for something you don’t know exists? Good Lord.

are you serious??? the test is available since 2013, there have been discussions about it here on COTH and also in Germany on a similar board, the foal in Switzerland died 3 years ago and was published and the stallion owner refused to test. But I am still curious why Beowulf thinks that its more common in Dressage lines…

[keysfins]

@Kareen

Well for what it’s worth: The prevalence within the (small) group of horses that has been admitted to the data-collection thus far is a lot higher than the quoted 7-11% from existing research and so is the prevalence I’ve seen in my practice thus far. While the numbers are far (very far) from being critical mass I daresay breeders would be wise to test asap in order to gather more information and be able to make educated mating decisions. While WFFS still is nothing to panic over it won’t do any good to try and just outwait the issue because it won’t disappear by itself and the impact via EED or abortion might be a lot more significant than the few (albeit tragic) reported cases of WFFS-foals carried to term and born alive.

@Kareen, thank you for your post.

In North America, breeding warmbloods for sport is not a very large industry. However, I believe it IS a big industry in Europe, with a longer history of breeding than in the US and Canada. The countries may be smaller, but state studs and registries play a significant role in supporting and promoting the breeding and sport industries.

In your view, do breeders and horse people learn about these type of issues (WFFS) by whispered word of mouth? Or do the breed organizations, state studs or stallion owners put out announcements?

That is a question for anyone to answer, who cares to.

We have two examples of breeders in N. America posting publicly on this thread, being very open with information. I have also received emails concerning WFFS from KWPN-NA and the NA Hanoverian Breed organizations in the last month. Have the European breed orgs had similar announcements?

For the population geneticists, would testing more animals give a better picture of the prevalence of WFFS? I’m thinking along the lines of testing geldings, and mares not in a breeding program. I know there is a cost, which may deter those who are not breeding. But I would think more animals tested = more information available?