Important news!! WFFS is finally recognized

[halt]

@Denali6298

I understand genetics on a basic level and I am new compared to the likes of JB and others to breeding. My question is, if people kept breeding to a carrier, wouldn’t the pool of non-carriers begin to shrink?

it depends on how big the gene pool is. to answer your question, yes, it will likely gradually shrink.

since horses take about 11 months to conceive, you can imagine that it’s quite costly from a genetics/reproduction standpoint, to breed carrier horses. the smaller the gene pool, the more costly this decision (which is why you see in connemaras, HFD carriers might still be bred as it is a very limited gene pool) is as a mare can only have so many offspring before she is too old to breed safely. not like dogs, who can have upwards of 20-40 offspring in a few short years.

the long and short of is, is that yes, if you aren’t careful, the pool of non-carrier individuals will gradually shrink in a larger pool like WB.

there are only so many mares in the WB genepool - it would be better, IMHO, to pair them with non-carrier individuals for the sake of the registry going forward. looking at it long term – sterlicht is by no means a horse of rare bloodlines – so in my opinion if you like him, you ought to either go with his sire (if he is non-carrier) or a non-carrier son/relative.

[Denali6298]

After reading this thread and the one linked on the first page, why is culling in the form of not breeding met with such aggression (maybe passion is the better word)? It’s understandable if the bloodlines are rare I suppose.

[trubandloki]

@Denali6298

After reading this thread and the one linked on the first page, why is culling in the form of not breeding met with such aggression (maybe passion is the better word)? It’s understandable if the bloodlines are rare I suppose.

This is a good question. I was surprised by how stressed certain posters got at the idea of not breeding a carrier.

[vineyridge]

There is a report in the old thread about a couple who had one child that was okay, but their second child was homozygous for some deadly and painful genetic disease and died from it in very early childhood. Instead of being happy that they had produced one unaffected child, they rolled the dice again and that baby also died of the genetic disease. If humans are willing to knowingly take such dangerous risks with themselves, can’t we pretty much guarantee that humans who are passionate about the quality of their horses will take similar risks?

Registries are the only WB entities that can take effective action to prevent the spread of the disease. One breeder is like expecting one rain drop to end a drought.

[Manni01]

@trubandloki

This is a good question. I was surprised by how stressed certain posters got at the idea of not breeding a carrier.

It would be great if people could at least stay to the facts. Its not about not breeding a carrier its about culling carriers from breeding because that will limit breeding possiblitlies… And there are some interesting examples in dog breeding about it. In one breed they did cull carriers for some disease from breeding. Then they found out that these carriers had some very positive things as well which were gone now… So whenever you cull something for bad things you also loose something positive as well. Breeding is always balancing things and its important to have all the informations to make educated decisions.

[Laurierace]

There is exactly zero difference between not breeding a carrier and culling a carrier from breeding. You just said the same thing two different ways.

[Pennywell_Bay]

Genetics is a funny thing. “I” would not breed to a carrier of X, Y or Z even if my mare was not a carrier. I would certainly not breed my mare if she was a carrier. We want the best of the best. Perpetuating a known disease is not responsible and borders on being nonethical. Unfortunately there are so many uneducated breeders, breeders who are breeding for color only, the latest fad stallion etc that eradicating some of these diseases is next to impossible. So we should be able to look to responsible, well know breeding establishments that have their horses registered to help reduce the potential.

[trubandloki]

@Manni01

I think I will leave this discussion…

[JB]

@Manni01

Its not about not breeding a carrier its about culling carriers from breeding

If carriers are not bred, that IS culling them from breeding.

because that will limit breeding possiblitlies…

Guesstimates right now are 10% of WBs carry WFFS. Let’s say that’s low and it’s more like 15%. Of that 15%, how many do you think are breeding stock? More mares than stallions for sure. Of those mares, how many do you really think will be bred?

In other words, what % of the WB and WBx population who are carriers do you honestly think are breeding stock and would be bred?

I don’t think a blanket cull would have a significant impact.

And there are some interesting examples in dog breeding about it. In one breed they did cull carriers for some disease from breeding.

It sounds like someone/some org allowed a known disease to get out of control because they didn’t feel it was necessary to stop breeding carriers for a bit in order to gather more information on the situation.

Then they found out that these carriers had some very positive things as well which were gone now… So whenever you cull something for bad things you also loose something positive as well.

Not always, and not unless you let that gene get into a large enough of the breeding population where you have created individuals homozygous for those positive traits, but also carrying the mutation

Breeding is always balancing things and its important to have all the informations to make educated decisions.

:lol: :lol: Isn’t that exactly what most of us have been saying on this thread, that you have been arguing against?

[Manni01]

@Laurierace

There is exactly zero difference between not breeding a carrier and culling a carrier from breeding. You just said the same thing two different ways.

not at all… If the stallion owner or the mare owner culls a horse from breeding thats it. If the stallion owner makes the carrier status public, I as the mare owner still have the choice what to do if I have a clear mare. I can make a personal choice if I want to breed to the carrier or not.
And I think I said before I am totally against breeding carrier to carrier and I would support rules to prevent that…

[Denali6298]

@Manni01

not at all… If the stallion owner or the mare owner culls a horse from breeding thats it. If the stallion owner makes the carrier status public, I as the mare owner still have the choice what to do if I have a clear mare. I can make a personal choice if I want to breed to the carrier or not.
And I think I said before I am totally against breeding carrier to carrier and I would support rules to prevent that…

To me it sounds irresponsible to roll the dice with a carrier. In theory, wouldn’t you ultimately get all carriers in the end? I don’t think there would ever be positives that would out weight some genetic mutations that could result in pain and/or death of the resulting offspring.

[Manni01]

@JB

If carriers are not bred, that IS culling them from breeding.

Guesstimates right now are 10% of WBs carry WFFS. Let’s say that’s low and it’s more like 15%. Of that 15%, how many do you think are breeding stock? More mares than stallions for sure. Of those mares, how many do you really think will be bred?

In other words, what % of the WB and WBx population who are carriers do you honestly think are breeding stock and would be bred?

I don’t think a blanket cull would have a significant impact.

I would say it depends… Right now I do suspect that some pretty influential lines might be carrier. I hope I am wrong, but these lines produced some of the most successful sport horses in the past decades… So I don’t think it would make sense to cull all of them… Its easy for you to say this, but honestly I think it does not make sense at all. With the test you can avoid dead foals and why culling a stallion or mare which produces amazing offspring… As a stalllionowner it might even cost you hundred of thousands… So why should I cull a stallion who does not produce anything harmful if you control it??? Great that you can throw away all this money, but not everybody is willing to do this and I think thats one big reason why nobody talked about it till now… And by the way I did not read the old COTH thread but I know exactly that I had the same opinion then as I have now. and I know I participated… And I don’t think anybody participating in that thread tested their mares or breeding stock afterwards… Obviously they did not take it serious enough to test…

It sounds like someone/some org allowed a known disease to get out of control because they didn’t feel it was necessary to stop breeding carriers for a bit in order to gather more information on the situation.

Thats an interesting statement… Don’t forget that Genetic testing for Dogs is something new. And usually tests are developed because breeders know there is a problem. Also usually breeders support development of genetic testing because they give the blood samples needed to develope the test (I know because I contributed blood of my dogs for the development of tests ) So your statement is probably very far from the truth… if it got out of control that probably happened before the test was developed. In my breed we found a carrier status of more then 50% when the test was developed. Before we had no idea what it even was… And I think now because of the test the %of carriers is shrinking although thank god we certainly did not stop breeding carriers.

:lol: :lol: Isn’t that exactly what most of us have been saying on this thread, that you have been arguing against?

Unfortunately thats not what many of you are saying. You say don’t breed carriers and IMO that is limiting breeding in a way which might not be smart, because that uses new technology (Genetic testing) not in a useful way which means use the max information and to avoid to breed affected animals , but simply in a limiting way…

Also don’t forget this is the beginning of genetic testing in horses… In a couple of years there will be much more tests available, and some horses might be carriers for this and some for other diseases.

And if you cull them all that might become interesting… I think breeders have to learn to live with the knowledge of genetic disorders and have to use the tests to their advantage… But i know I can preach all day long, it won’t change anything in this thread…

[Manni01]

@Denali6298

To me it sounds irresponsible to roll the dice with a carrier. In theory, wouldn’t you ultimately get all carriers in the end? I don’t think there would ever be positives that would out weight some genetic mutations that could result in pain and/or death of the resulting offspring.

I am sorry I don’t understand??? you don’t roll the dice with a carrier. If you breed a carrier to a clear you have a 50%chance of getting a clear foal. With the clear foal thats a no brainer anyhow and in the US if you breed a colt most people geld them anyhow so another no brainer… So IMO the percentage of carriers will get smaller over time anyhow thanks to the new tool of genetic testing.

WFFS probably did increase until now because if you breed a carrier to a carrier you only have a 25% chance to get a clear. So if you don’t know what you are doing of course there is a risk of spreading the disease… And unfortunately in recent years line breeding in horses became more popular as well and line breeding does have increased risk for exactly this.

[Laurierace]

@Manni01

not at all… If the stallion owner or the mare owner culls a horse from breeding thats it. If the stallion owner makes the carrier status public, I as the mare owner still have the choice what to do if I have a clear mare. I can make a personal choice if I want to breed to the carrier or not.
And I think I said before I am totally against breeding carrier to carrier and I would support rules to prevent that…

You can rationalize it all you want, it makes no difference what you call not breeding an animal, it is still not breeding it. You can’t be ok with one and not the other because they are literally the exact same thing.

[Manni01]

@Laurierace

You can rationalize it all you want, it makes no difference what you call not breeding an animal, it is still not breeding it. You can’t be ok with one and not the other because they are literally the exact same thing.

No, it’s not the same because if I choose I can use a carrier

[JB]

@Manni01

I would say it depends… Right now I do suspect that some pretty influential lines might be carrier. I hope I am wrong, but these lines produced some of the most successful sport horses in the past decades…

That could very well be, but do you truly feel that the majority of those lines are not just carriers, not just also breeding stock, but also rare enough they can’t afford to be lost?

So I don’t think it would make sense to cull all of them… Its easy for you to say this, but honestly I think it does not make sense at all. With the test you can avoid dead foals and why culling a stallion or mare which produces amazing offspring…

I want to make it clear - I am not at all saying cull carriers. And yes, you can avoid WWFS with proper testing. Are you willing to continue breeding carriers to clears, for now, without any regard to what we don’t yet know about carriers, knowing that if we DO find out that carriers do have some issues down the road, that barn door has been left open too long?

As a stalllionowner it might even cost you hundred of thousands… So why should I cull a stallion who does not produce anything harmful if you control it???

Because we don’t know nothing harmful lives in those carriers. That is the whole point of all this, and that seems to be the mentality that Hilltop is taking.

Thats an interesting statement… Don’t forget that Genetic testing for Dogs is something new. And usually tests are developed because breeders know there is a problem. Also usually breeders support development of genetic testing because they give the blood samples needed to develope the test (I know because I contributed blood of my dogs for the development of tests ) So your statement is probably very far from the truth… if it got out of control that probably happened before the test was developed.

You inferred something I did not imply, which was that “allowed” was a conscious decision. How many breeders immediately stopped breeding any animal whom they suspected was a carrier for that disease, once there was any whispering under the table that there might be an issue, even without a test? Should all breeding learn from mistakes like that? The same thing happened with HYPP, and it was and is even worse since registries did not immediately ban H/H horses, and still allow n/H horses.

In my breed we found a carrier status of more then 50% when the test was developed. Before we had no idea what it even was… And I think now because of the test the %of carriers is shrinking although thank god we certainly did not stop breeding carriers.

Wouldn’t you like to not get to 50% of the WB population being carriers?

Unfortunately thats not what many of you are saying. You say don’t breed carriers and IMO that is limiting breeding in a way which might not be smart, because that uses new technology (Genetic testing) not in a useful way which means use the max information and to avoid to breed affected animals , but simply in a limiting way…

One more time in the hopes that it sinks in - many of us are saying don’t breed carriers for now. You seem to be stuck on the notion, stating it as fact even, that it’s only the homozygous horses who are affected.

Also don’t forget this is the beginning of genetic testing in horses… In a couple of years there will be much more tests available, and some horses might be carriers for this and some for other diseases.

Well, it’s not quite the beginning, but you are right that there are probably more things out there (a muscle wasting disease in QHs was recently identified), and because it’s what nature does, there will be more mutations that are benign, beneficial, and detrimental in hetero and/or homozygous states. The only ethical solution is to pay attention to rumblings of problems cropping up and taking reasonable steps to not willfully spreading the problem.

And if you cull them all that might become interesting… I think breeders have to learn to live with the knowledge of genetic disorders and have to use the tests to their advantage… But i know I can preach all day long, it won’t change anything in this thread…

Of course, nobody is disputing the need to use testing to everyone’s advantage. There isn’t any argument there. The only argument is that you continue to think that anyone wanting to exercise caution simply wants to geld all the stallions and spay all the mares.

@Manni01

No, it’s not the same because if I choose I can use a carrier

That was not what your original statement meant at all, as seen by those who clearly took it the same way.

[halt]

@Manni01

I am sorry I don’t understand??? you don’t roll the dice with a carrier. If you breed a carrier to a clear you have a 50%chance of getting a clear foal. With the clear foal thats a no brainer anyhow and in the US if you breed a colt most people geld them anyhow so another no brainer… So IMO the percentage of carriers will get smaller over time anyhow thanks to the new tool of genetic testing.

WFFS probably did increase until now because if you breed a carrier to a carrier you only have a 25% chance to get a clear. So if you don’t know what you are doing of course there is a risk of spreading the disease… And unfortunately in recent years line breeding in horses became more popular as well and line breeding does have increased risk for exactly this.

linebreeding was more popular in the earlier part of the 1800s-1900s than it is now. partly because the lorry hadn’t been invented yet, and people were limited to using studs that they could physically ride or walk their mare to… sometimes they would have massive caravans and travel great distances, but for most people where the horse was used for work, they used something geographically available.

take a far enough look back in any pedigree and you will start to see the same ancestor three or four times over. not because they wanted to heavily dose, but because often times, they had no choice. geography & wars bottlenecked a lot of populations, and we’re seeing the results.

[Denali6298]

@Manni01

I am sorry I don’t understand??? you don’t roll the dice with a carrier. If you breed a carrier to a clear you have a 50%chance of getting a clear foal. With the clear foal thats a no brainer anyhow and in the US if you breed a colt most people geld them anyhow so another no brainer… So IMO the percentage of carriers will get smaller over time anyhow thanks to the new tool of genetic testing.

WFFS probably did increase until now because if you breed a carrier to a carrier you only have a 25% chance to get a clear. So if you don’t know what you are doing of course there is a risk of spreading the disease… And unfortunately in recent years line breeding in horses became more popular as well and line breeding does have increased risk for exactly this.

I don’t mean to sound dense but I assume you’d rather have a clear correct? Why take the 50/50 chance? That is a high percentage in my uneducated opinion. So for me, and I could be wrong that is rolling the dice to create more carriers.

Another question for you all, say in this general example it’s a 50/50 chance that the resulting offspring would be clear. Could a stallion or mare have a better or worse percentage? What I mean is, say the stallion or mare is a carrier (not both) could that individual horse have a tendency to create more clears than average or more carriers?

[Simkie]

@Denali6298

Could a stallion or mare have a better or worse percentage? What I mean is, say the stallion or mare is a carrier (not both) could that individual horse have a tendency to create more clears than average or more carriers?

Nope. Given a large enough sample size, it’ll be 50%.

But each foal is a coin toss, so a small sample size might be heavy on one side or another. But that’s no different than getting heads 5 times out of 8. If you flip 100 times, you’ll be at (or very close) to 50%.

[Denali6298]

Thank you Simkie. That makes sense. I’m still confused though as to why even 50% being carriers is okay. Maybe because if I bred my mare it would be a one time effort and breeders have a whole different perspective. When I say this I’m not necessarily talking gene mutations that are benign.