# Where do I find the Wycliffe Influence?



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Was talking with a friend a couple of days ago when I suddenly realized that.. there are folks looking on the Poodle Pedigree Database to find out what the Wycliffe Influence is for their poodles or for tentative litters. It's not on there. Really. 

The Poodle Pedigree Database is a wonderful tool and I love it. I've spent a whole lot of time putting pedigrees on it. But... it does not calculate Wycliffe percentages. 

The Standard Poodle Database is a pedigree program available through Poodle Club of America for a donation which will calculate the Wycliffe Influence.

Ok, so what in the heck is a "Wycliffe Influence" or a "Wycliffe Percentage" anyway? Well those two terms mean the same thing. From the Standard Poodle Database " This is a relationship coefficient showing the expected contribution of the main Wycliffe line. The main line of Wycliffe dogs is based on 5 founding ancestors. So the % Wycliffe ancestry of a dog is the sum of the contributions of these 5 dogs. If you wish to calculate the % Wycliffe of a dog make sure you go back enough generations to capture all the occurances of these 5 dogs, (they were born in the 1950's)".

For those who don't know, the Wycliffe Founders are:

Annsown Gay Knight of Arhill
Carillon Dilemma
Carillon Michelle
Petitcote Domino
Sedbergh Mitzi

As mentioned, the standard poodle as a breed, went through a genetic bottle neck due to the popularity of Wycliffe poodles. Breeder's chose to breed to the Wycliffe dogs, while not breeding to other lines. As a result, the breed lost the majority of the foundation lines for standard poodles..not only did we lose the lines, but we also lost the genetic diversity those lines contained. In effect, it was similar to starting the breed all over, but instead of with a whole bunch of founders, it limited us to a handful.. I think most of us can imagine what happens to health when you base a breed on only a handful of dogs.

Back to where to find the Wycliffe Influence... the Poodle Health Registry is now posting Wycliffe Influences on each pedigree as they are calculated.

With both the Standard Poodle Database and with Poodle Health Registry, if there are any unknown dogs in the pedigree (an incomplete pedigree, having missing ancestry) it may skew the Wycliffe Influence if the missing dogs also had Wycliffe dogs in their pedigree. So if.. a pedigree has missing dogs, that Wycliffe Influence or percent Wycliffe may change a bit at a later date as those missing dogs are identified, or new dogs identified. It is an estimate, a fairly reliable estimate, but is not set in stone.

Here is a link from the PHR:

PHR Pedigree Database

On the upper left hand side of the pedigree are four lines of information:

CallName = Valentine
Tested_Clear = DM[OFA], NE[OFA], VWD[OFA]
Hips = Good[OFA]
COI = 6.2%[10G,10F,583U,75C] : %Wycliffe= 51.34%

The last line is the critical line as far as %Wycliffe. What it tells us is that her inbreeding COI is 6.2% calculated on a 10 generation pedigree, with 10 full generations found. There are 583 unique ancestors and 75 in common (in 10 generations). The % Wycliffe is 51.34%. 

The Wycliffe % on Poodle Health Registry is calculated on as many generations as Wycliffe founders are found in each pedigree.

When looking at the % Wycliffe it's really important to keep in mind that a poodle "generation" is usually about two years. As the era of the Wycliffe bottleneck was in the late 50's, 60's, 70's, and early 80's.. and we are now in 2012, if we only look at a 10 generation pedigree, it takes us back to 1992.. Guess what? No Wycliffe.. well that's what it looks like. The Wycliffe is there.. just back a few more generations.

When calculating pedigree information, a 10 generation pedigree takes into consideration 2044 ancestors. I use 15 generations.. only 5 generations more... however... in a 15 generation pedigree there are 62,746 ancestors. Gives a lot more perspective to the potential genetic load in a pedigree!

In theory, A parent contributes 50% of an individual dogs genetics, a grandparent 25% percent, and great grandparents each contribute 12.5%. However, if a particular dog appears multiple times, the values for the different generations in which the name appears are added to reach the final result. If, for example, a dog is both a grandparent and a great grandparent, that dog's influence is 37.5%. The Wycliffe dogs were used so many times that they often appear over and over again, in several generations of each dog. 

While most of our standard poodles today at first glance, may have different pedigrees, they are in reality as closely related in most cases as first cousins and sometimes as closely related as brothers or sisters (even though they may not share any common ancestors in 10 generations!)

In the case of the gorgeous lovable girl who's pedigree link I posted.. The Wycliffe dogs have contributed more to her genetics...then her own parents! Really. That's scary...

And from the standpoint of longevity and health of the breed.. it's terrifying.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

OK.. since I'm thinking/talking to myself tonight<VBG> I'm anticipating this question:

So what the heck is it I see on Poodle Pedigree Database?

In answer, lets take a look at the Genetic Information from Poodle Pedigree Database, for the same girl:
Genetic information for Yaddas Total Eclipse Of The Heart

Hmmmm, look at that lovely COI! Even lower than on PHR... so what's with that?

Who knows. Poodle Pedigree Database and the Poodle Health Registry utilize different programs to calculate their inbreeding COI's. The good folk behind both of the databases believes their calculations to be accurate. I have utilized a third pedigree program, Compuped. The calculations from that program were very close to that of PHR, so I tend to be more comfortable with the PHR COI's than I am those on Poodle Pedigree. That's my personal opinion, other people have other opinions. I love both databases, I utilize them both, but just for different purposes.

So back to what is on the page I posted the link for:

See where the "Top 5 most influential ancestors" are listed?

That is not a Wycliffe influence, nor is it a Wycliffe percentage!!! In this case, and in many others.. it reads like it could be a Wycliffe percentage.. because those dogs have figured so promentatly in the ancestory of the dog that they show up in the top 5. In the case of the girl who is posted, Haus Brau Executive (Zek) is listed as her most influencial ancestor.. you won't see him showing up anywhere in the 5 generation pedigree on PPD. He's not there.. nor are any of the other top 5 most influencial ancestors. It's scary that these dogs contributed more to her genetics.. then her own parents did! What's even scarier is that nearly half of the black standard poodles out there have pedigrees that look similar to hers, in some cases with even more Wycliffe. So the question is.. where do you go (to look for a suitable mate) for a girl with a pedigree like this? For everyone who is opposed to linebreeding.. guess what.. the majority of the black standard poodles out there, who may not share any common ancestors in 10 generations, are so similiar genetically as to be cousins or siblings to this sweet girl. That's scary. So even though I may plan a breeding that I think is a total outcross based on 10 generations... for all practical purposes.. I may as well be breeding littermates! 

And that my friends.. is why the Wycliffe Influence (%Wycliffe) is critical for standard poodle breeders to be aware of.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

I promise to try to spell "influential" correctly in the future. Easier on my self esteem to promise.. then go back and correct them all and see how many Oops! I made.


----------



## Fond of Poodles

Thank you yadda for sharing this information. I had heard of the Wycliffe Influence and had noticed the numbers on PHR, but your explanation really helped to understand what it meant.

Interesting stuff!


----------



## 2719

Very interesting Yadda. I always enjoy your educational posts.

http://www.canine-genetics.com/Wycliffe.htm


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

*10 generations vs 15 generations*

Having problems sleeping.. so decided to add a bit more to this thread.

Using my Standard Poodle Database program, I ran "test" pedigrees for Valentine.. the same girl who I have been using as an example. I have attached a Summary of a 10 generation pedigree and a second for a 15 generation pedigree.

There are differences in the COI. Anytime you change the number of generations a pedigree is calculated for, it will change the COI simply because the COI is based on the individual dogs in each pedigree. Personally, I really prefer a 15 generation COI to a 10 generation. I feel that they are much more indicative of the potential genetics of a dog.

On the 10 generation pedigree, you can see that there are no dogs missing, no "holes" or blanks in the pedigree, every ancestor is known. There are a potential for 2046 dogs in every dogs 10 generation pedigree. In Valentines case, rather than having 2046 different ancestors, she has 583... obviously some of her ancestors appear more than once in her pedigree!

The Wycliffe Influence on Valentines 10 generation pedigree is calculated at 2.1% That's not too shabby.. infact that's really impressive! A 2.1% Wycliffe influence???! If I didn't already own her.. I'd sure be wanting to learn more about her fast!

Now if you jump down to the next section on the report, you can see why her Wycliffe percentage is so low when calculated on a 10 generation pedigree. There aren't any Wycliffe founders present until the 9th generation. (Kinda keep this particular chart of the Wycliffe founders in mind.. for when we look at the 15 generation chart).

The Standard Poodle Database does a quick search for Wycliffe founders more generations in the pedigree and based on this.. it gives an estimate of what the total Wycliffe Influence may be if more generations of the pedigree are calculated. This is also listed on the summary report. So Val's actual 10 generation Wycliffe Influence is 2.1%, however, her total % Wycliffe is estimated at 47.0% (ok... so she's not quite as exciting when I see that number). 

Now moving on to the 15 Generation Summary:
There are a possible of 65534 ancestors in Valentine's pedigree. She has 64 missing ancestors (those are dogs who we don't know who the parents are), so a bit of an incomplete pedigree. Ignoring those 64 dogs, she only has 2666 ancestors (out of the 65534 possible). Don't feel too bad for my sweet gorgeous girl though.. she actually has more ancestors than many black standards! 

15 Generation COI--As expected, the calculations on 15 generations is 11.87% and this is subject to a bit of change.... remember that there are 64 missing dogs. If those dogs (if and when, we find out who they are) are repeated in the pedigree it could influence the COI.

Then take a look at the %Wycliffe number.. hmmmm, it now reads..39.65% for 10 generations. So what happened? Not a thing.. remember that there are 64 missing dogs. The Standard Poodle Database calculated the %Wycliffe with accuracy, for 10 generations as there were no missing dogs in those first 10 generations, it then added in the calculations for the remaining 5 generations and did it's usual estimate for anything beyond that.. which resulted in a total estimate of just over 51%. I have found these estimates to be highly accurate.

Now here's the really dramatic thing.. compare the two charts ( the 10 generation summary to the 15 generation summary) which show the %Wycliffe Calculation and take a good look at the number of occurances by generation. These two charts may help folks to understand a bit more about how as each generation goes by, so does time and we are getting far enough out from the Wycliffe bottleneck that a simple 10 generation pedigree really doesn't tell us much of anything anymore.


Hope these two pedigree summary's were helpful.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Yadda...wonderful, informative post explaining it all it simple terms. Thank you!


----------



## cliffdweller

Thank you ! A post everyone interested in Poodle heritage should read ! Very interesting and helps explain the importance of seeking to diversify bloodlines and problems faced by breeders attempting to do this !

You have made a contribution to the breed with this educational post !


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Thank you Nu 2 Poodles! That is the ultimate praise. Put a big smile on my face. So I'll bask in the glow.. for a couple more moments. All I did was try to give an explanation as I see things.

The real praise and gratitude goes to the folks who give us these tools. Those behind the scenes folks at Poodle Pedigree and at Poodle Health Registry are the real heros.

Darla


----------



## Countryboy

Thanx, Yadda. 

I think u said sumthin' abt the Wycliffe influence on Blacks. I wonder how strong this effect would be on Parti Poodles?


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Countryboy said:


> Thanx, Yadda.
> 
> I think u said sumthin' abt the Wycliffe influence on Blacks. I wonder how strong this effect would be on Parti Poodles?



Excellent Question!

Unfortunately, I can answer it. The Bottleneck narrowed the entire gene pool, for all of our standards. The Blacks were hardest hit, so made for the most dramatic example. If you take a look on the Poodle Health Registry Database, up in that left hand corner, you will find the Wycliffe Influence as it is currently calculated for each of the standards on there.. including the parti's.

That is why the bottleneck is so harmful. There are very few poodles with low Wycliffe.. as time goes on and we continue breeding our poodles together, those Wycliffe influences can and will continue to climb unless breeders are diligent in pedigree research. 

I do want to mention again.. it's not that the Wycliffe poodles were "bad". Far from it. What happened, how we breeders utilized those genetics is what was bad. Our actions caused our breed to lose much of our diversity.

Diversity is critical for health. Someone shared a link to an article with me which says things much better about diversity then I ever could. It's about cats, it applies to poodles as well and I hope that everyone takes the time to read/think about this article. Here is the link: 

Inbreeding And Its Effect On The Immune System

Darla


----------



## Countryboy

Thanx again, Yadda. 

The thing that really fascinates me abt breeding, and is not explained yet to any satisfaction, is the Belyaev experiments. 

How in the heck would breeding for temperament in Silver Fox cause a change in coat colours, eh?!! And tail structure?? Who'da thunk? . . . and why??? 

Just goes to show ya how much we DON'T know... :confused2: lol


----------



## cliffdweller

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> Thank you Nu 2 Poodles! That is the ultimate praise. Put a big smile on my face. So I'll bask in the glow.. for a couple more moments. All I did was try to give an explanation as I see things.
> 
> The real praise and gratitude goes to the folks who give us these tools. Those behind the scenes folks at Poodle Pedigree and at Poodle Health Registry are the real heros.
> 
> Darla


I agree that they deserve praise. When I began looking at the Poodle as a possible companion dog I was very impressed with these data banks and the devotion of the people involved. You gave a very good explanation of their significance and how Poodle breeders should be using them, imo. Thanks !


----------



## Fond of Poodles

We are lucky as poodle breeders/owners to have access to those databases. I have friends who breed other breeds and they often comment that they don't have easy access to that kind of information.

Maybe an Admin could "pin" this topic in the breeding section? It is something anyone considering breeding standards should read and have knowledge of.

Again thanks yadda!


----------



## petitpie

I'm trying understand how breeders begin to fix the diversity problem;

Use 15 generations to calculate %?
Use new outcrosses of poodle lines?

Sorry, if I have to simplify to "ideal" conditions for understanding this.


----------



## DivinityPoodles

I have to agree petitpie...

How do you begin to fix the problem? If I am understanding this... all registered standard poodles are essentially at some point going back to Wycliffe dogs, especially if they are black. So now what? And I understand that as we get further away from the Wycliffe dogs it seems like they have less influence but really they don't because everything is coming from the same original gene pool. So, again, now what??

Humans are such idiots.


----------



## A'n'A Mom

CB,

Let's take a look at some dogs that factor prominently in a bunch of parti pedigrees...

Pioneer's Texas Size Spot 
COI = 16.8%[10G,10F,530U,213C] : %Wycliffe= 41.70%

Rocking Y's Rambo
COI = 2.2%[10G,10F,866U,130C] : %Wycliffe= 22.13%

Cherdons Parti-N Mardi Gras
COI = 4.7%[10G,8F,835U,64C] : %Wycliffe= 38.42%

Hmmmmmm.......


----------



## Countryboy

Thanx, A'n'A Mom 

I was lookin' at Tonka's PHR entry. I see he's got abt 26% Wycliffe. He's altered anyway, so it's only a side interest to me. 

But now I was reading this part...

Sibling_with = Good[OFA](1)
COI = 6.3%[10G,10F,591U,207C] : %Wycliffe= 25.99%

And, as I was reading it, I was thinkin' that u might be the perfect person to explain that to me. And here u popped up on the forum!!  lol

That would be a COI of 6.3 . . over ten generations???... And the rest is all Greek to me..  lol Even the first line I don't completely understand. I hear lots abt OFA but never searched it to find out what it is. Duh...  lol

OK . . so it's hips. I just DID search it.  lol


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

petitpie said:


> I'm trying understand how breeders begin to fix the diversity problem;
> 
> Use 15 generations to calculate %?
> Use new outcrosses of poodle lines?
> 
> Sorry, if I have to simplify to "ideal" conditions for understanding this.


Yes, to 15 generations.. that is the most that affordable pedigree programs are capable of calculating. 15 generations usually will take us back in time at least 30 years, give or take depending on what ages and how frequently the dogs involved were bred.

Yes.. to outcrosses, the problem is.. there isn't a whole lot of unique poodle genetics to outcross to. All are related somehow, so need to find the least related and...then develop some individual bloodlines based on those least related poodles. IF we just breed those least related poodles with all the rest.. the least related genetics are going to be mixed up in the more common genetics irretrievably and we've just lost out on genetic resources. Hope that made some sense....


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Luvmyspoos said:


> I have to agree petitpie...
> 
> How do you begin to fix the problem?
> 
> First, by recognizing it.
> Second by learning from it so we don't repeat it.
> And Third.. well ---The Standard Poodle Project is a big part of the "fix" (standardpoodleproject.com)
> It is critical to identify individual poodles who have unique or rare genetics and then to maintain those unique or rare genetics without letting them be totally "absorbed" into the mainstream genetics.
> 
> If I am understanding this... all registered standard poodles are essentially at some point going back to Wycliffe dogs, especially if they are black.
> 
> Correct. Initially it was the blacks, however due to the structures and the attributes that were so popular, other colors then crossed into those blacks and now the Wycliffe genes make up the foundation of almost every standard poodles genetics.. with a few rare exceptions.
> 
> So now what? And I understand that as we get further away from the Wycliffe dogs it seems like they have less influence but really they don't because everything is coming from the same original gene pool.
> 
> Exactly. And even though it may look like there is less influence as we get farther out.. in most cases, there is more.. as we breed, we continue to lose more and more of our genetic diversity. We may gain a bit back through spontaneous genetic changes also.
> 
> So, again, now what??
> 
> Identify rare and unique genetics (one of the ways beyond pedigree research, which is more accurate then pedigree research is MHC or DLA haplotype testing).
> 
> Establish and Maintain lines of those rare and unique genetics.
> 
> Report and track health issues, so that the lowest health risk breedings as possible can be done and there is quick recognition of any new health issues or mutations which may occur.
> 
> Humans are such idiots.
> Well, we have our moments, but I'm not too sure about that one.. after all.. poodles didn't occur naturally, so we should give ourselves a bit of credit! Now we just need to figure out how to keep healthy what we've got!


......


----------



## outwest

Countryboy said:


> Thanx, A'n'A Mom
> 
> I was lookin' at Tonka's PHR entry. I see he's got abt 26% Wycliffe. He's altered anyway, so it's only a side interest to me.
> 
> But now I was reading this part...
> 
> Sibling_with = Good[OFA](1)
> COI = 6.3%[10G,10F,591U,207C] : %Wycliffe= 25.99%
> 
> And, as I was reading it, I was thinkin' that u might be the perfect person to explain that to me. And here u popped up on the forum!!  lol
> 
> That would be a COI of 6.3 . . over ten generations???... And the rest is all Greek to me..  lol Even the first line I don't completely understand. I hear lots abt OFA but never searched it to find out what it is. Duh...  lol
> 
> OK . . so it's hips. I just DID search it.  lol


10G= ten generations, 
10F= 10 full generations looked at 
591U= 591 unique dogs found in the pedigree (there only once- you would like this high), 
207C= 207 dogs that are found more than once (this is something you'd like low)
25.99% Wycliffe mean 25% of his genetic makeup is from the Wycliffe dogs

I would expect partis to have a lower than average Wycliffe because at the time Wycliff was being used extensively, they were often culling (killing) parti pups as undesireable. 

Here another example showing how it can be flawed (Bonnie's again from PHR)-
COI = 4.4%[10G,4F,501U,192C] : %Wycliffe= 28.27%
I was very happy with her Wycliffe since she comes from a ton of black showdog ancestors, but then notice they only looked at the first four full generations on her. Why? I just checked her pedigree more carefully there and one dog, who has known ancestors way back, is not being listed! I need to email them to fix it. I had assumed it was the Latvian dog, but it isn't at all. It is an entire known line. The point is, the database is great, but it has a few gliches. 

and here it is from poodle pedigree (notice the difference):
The COI (Coefficient of Inbreeding) is calculated up to a maximum of 12 generations. However, if a generation is found where fewer than 75% of the dogs in that generation are known, the calculation stops just short of that generation. So if all dogs are known in the 5th generation but only half of them are known in the 6th generation, a 5-generation COI will be calculated. For dogs with more than 10 generations of pedigree information available, a 10-generation COI is also calculated for comparison and statistical purposes.
10-generation COI 3.66% 
12-generation COI 4.39% 

me again:
You can see the poodle pedigree did have the missing pedigree. Still, it is nice they do this at all! Thank you.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

*Balyaev Experiments --For Frank*



Countryboy said:


> Thanx again, Yadda.
> 
> The thing that really fascinates me abt breeding, and is not explained yet to any satisfaction, is the Belyaev experiments.
> 
> How in the heck would breeding for temperament in Silver Fox cause a change in coat colours, eh?!! And tail structure?? Who'da thunk? . . . and why???
> 
> Just goes to show ya how much we DON'T know... :confused2: lol


You got me! I debated starting a second threat because we've covered such huge concepts with this one.. but decided it fits in well with changes that we don't plan/can't anticipate. One of the important things to consider with the Balyaev experiments is that the inbreeding COI was monitored throughout to keep it at a certain level. There may have been tremendous genetic variability retained.. although this attached article doesn't think that is the answer. (I've read a number of articles on the Balyaev Fox, hadn't read this one before. There are also some videos on Youtube of them).

http://www.hum.utah.edu/~bbenham/2510%20Spring%2009/Behavior%20Genetics/Farm-Fox%20Experiment.pdf


----------



## outwest

Countryboy said:


> Thanx again, Yadda.
> 
> The thing that really fascinates me abt breeding, and is not explained yet to any satisfaction, is the Belyaev experiments.
> 
> How in the heck would breeding for temperament in Silver Fox cause a change in coat colours, eh?!! And tail structure?? Who'da thunk? . . . and why???
> 
> Just goes to show ya how much we DON'T know... :confused2: lol


I've always thought that the patterned coat in the Belyaev experiments were a natural mutation that would also occur in the wild. In the wild a fox with a highly visible coat would have a hard time avoiding predators, so would likely not survive to adulthood. Since the foxes were captive, there were no predators and they lived to breed, which produced more patterned coats at the same time they were breeding for temperament. It could be pure coincidence that gentle temperaments occured at the same time that the coat pattern change was perpetuated. It was nice to believe there was a connection to the coat, but I don't fully buy it. 

It is the same with the curly tail. A natural mutation occured (a curl in the tail). On a wild fox it would mean they weren't as agile to slip away from predators. They would be less likely to survive to perpetuate curly tails. Name one wild animal with a curly tail. I can't think of any. A curly tail means you don't have quite the balance you would have with straight tail (which acts like a rudder at full speed). The tails got curlier because they weren't absent from the breeding pool. 

That experiment is interesting, but they have been talking about it for so long drawing the same flawed (flawed to me anyway) conclusions over and over. 

Now we're way off topic.


----------



## cliffdweller

Luvmyspoos said:


> I have to agree petitpie...
> 
> How do you begin to fix the problem? If I am understanding this... all registered standard poodles are essentially at some point going back to Wycliffe dogs, especially if they are black. So now what? And I understand that as we get further away from the Wycliffe dogs it seems like they have less influence but really they don't because everything is coming from the same original gene pool. So, again, now what??
> 
> Humans are such idiots.


When I was reading around on diversity, I think one of the proposals involved leaving _more &/or different_ dogs intact for breeding purposes. The "bottleneck" threw away much potentially good genetic material. From this perspective, Yadda is responding in the correct way (looking everywhere, even where many breeders wouldn't dare tread, outside the established "show/pet" lines).

Scary, but still an interesting point of view: A football field of dogs (health testing…yeah, you know I’m going to stir this pot) | Ruffly Speaking: Railing against idiocy since 2004

The Poodle and the Chocolate Cake by Dr. John Armstrong

Also, interesting in this regard, I think, fjm's thread http://www.poodleforum.com/29-poodle-health/11789-hypothetical-discussion.html#post149179

_The Canine Diversity Project_ homepage seems to be down (under construction ?) or has it been moved ?


----------



## A'n'A Mom

outwest said:


> 10G= ten generations,
> 10F= 10 full generations looked at
> 591U= 591 unique dogs found in the pedigree (there only once- you would like this high),
> 207C= 207 dogs that are found more than once (this is something you'd like low)
> 25.99% Wycliffe mean 25% of his genetic makeup is from the Wycliffe dogs
> 
> I would expect partis to have a lower than average Wycliffe because at the time Wycliff was being used extensively, they were often culling (killing) parti pups as undesireable.
> 
> Here another example showing how it can be flawed (Bonnie's again from PHR)-
> COI = 4.4%[10G,4F,501U,192C] : %Wycliffe= 28.27%
> I was very happy with her Wycliffe since she comes from a ton of black showdog ancestors, but then notice they only looked at the first four full generations on her. Why? I just checked her pedigree more carefully there and one dog, who has known ancestors way back, is not being listed! I need to email them to fix it. I had assumed it was the Latvian dog, but it isn't at all. It is an entire known line. The point is, the database is great, but it has a few gliches.
> 
> and here it is from poodle pedigree (notice the difference):
> The COI (Coefficient of Inbreeding) is calculated up to a maximum of 12 generations. However, if a generation is found where fewer than 75% of the dogs in that generation are known, the calculation stops just short of that generation. So if all dogs are known in the 5th generation but only half of them are known in the 6th generation, a 5-generation COI will be calculated. For dogs with more than 10 generations of pedigree information available, a 10-generation COI is also calculated for comparison and statistical purposes.
> 10-generation COI 3.66%
> 12-generation COI 4.39%
> 
> me again:
> You can see the poodle pedigree did have the missing pedigree. Still, it is nice they do this at all! Thank you.


Thank you, Outwest. That's a really good reply. You got it very close....but not quite. Let me clarify a bit....

10G = the calculations were based on 10 generations

4F = there are only 4 FULL generations to calculate from. The program looks at and considers all the dogs that are there, but warns you that the data isn't complete because there are dogs missing after the 4th generation.

591U = 591 Unique dogs....but they don't appear only once. Think of a pedigree as a form with blank spaces to be filled out. There are 2 spaces in the 1st generation, 4 in the 2nd, 8 in the 3rd, etc. Actually, in a 10 generation pedigree, there are 2046 spaces that need to be filled.....and the PHRDB calculation is telling you that only 591 dogs filled all those spaces. Well, this is a bad example because we know there are some missing dogs, ie unfilled spaces. But if the report read [10G,10F,591U,192C], then the 591 dogs would have filled all 2046 spaces. That obviously means that some dogs appear more than once. Yes, the higher this number is, the better. It demonstrates greater diversity....at least back 10 generations.

192C = 192 COMMON ancestors, dogs that appear on both sides of the pedigree. In other words, 192 dogs on the dam's side of the pedigree are the same as 192 dogs on the sire's side. In the most extreme example, a brother to sister breeding would result in 1022 common ancestors! So with this number, lower is considered better.

We would love to have the calculations run for 15 generations.....but unless someone wants to donate a Cray computer to PHR, it's unlikely. In going from 2046 ancestors in 10 generations, you jump to 65534 in 15 generations and 2,097,150 in 20 generations. More that either Lynn's or my computers can calculate for all 174K + dogs in the PHRDB!!

Outwest, we are working to fill in the ancestors of the Minis behind the Standards in the PHRDB. It's going to take a while, but we'll get there eventually.


----------



## Countryboy

Well, here I am with one tab on PP, one on the PHR and still one open on the Farm Fox Experiment. I feel like I'm crammin' for an exam and instead I'm simply trying to get my facts straight. Sooo much new information available now that I know how to read it! :afraid: lol

Thanx for that O/W and A'n'A Mom. *U*nique and *C*ommon were two terms I didn't know.

The Databases are fun to finally understand!  It's interesting to me that 1.33% of Tonka's COI comes from one dog, World Ch. Lux./Dt .Champ. Chantal Rayon D'soleil. She must have been a great dog!  lol

I think that the questions raised by the Belyaev experiment will probably only be solved thru Yadda's observation that breeding will be, maybe ultimately, perfected thru DNA knowledge alone. We'll see, eh?


----------



## A'n'A Mom

CB....

LOL!!! Been there, done that!! Kinda makes your head spin, doesn't it. 

The only thing I'm 100% certain of in all of this.....that just when we think we've got it all figured out with DNA and genetics, Mother Nature can be counted on to throw us a curve ball!!


----------



## outwest

Thank you SO MUCH A n A Mom for all that work. My dog does have a mini line. I understand now why that mini line was missed. One nice thing is I know it won't contain Wycliffe.  

Thank you for clarifying the calculations, too. I am only wallowing in the data trying to understand it myself. I get it now. 

Where or where are the nonWycliffe standards? It is so hard to find any.


----------



## Countryboy

outwest said:


> Where or where are the nonWycliffe standards? It is so hard to find any.


I searched Wycliffe earlier. Strangely enuf, the first link offered was to PF.  lol

But another link lists the non-Wycliffe dogs at the very bottom of the page.


----------



## petitpie

How unusual is it that one breeder from the '50's can have such an impact on a breed of dog?


----------



## A'n'A Mom

OW,

I think that's the point to all of Yadda's posts on this thread. 

The increasing fear is that there aren't any. Or if there are, a bunch of really knowledgeable people in the US, Canada and England who have been searching for 10 or more years haven't found them. 

Just when it seems someone's found a really good candidate from some obscure village in Outer Wayback, we fill in the holes in the pedigree only to find Caddy or Snapper in the 4th generation!! It boggles the mind.


----------



## outwest

My dog has one standard that is Wycliffe light at 24% and one who may be Wycliffe free (but can't go back far enough to be sure). Even so, her Wycliffe is 28%! It IS mindboggling. That Wycliffe is the reason the mini was used that one time, to try and shake things up. One of those black standards is alive, well and available, but he is her Grandpapa, so I don't want to breed back to him! 
Five generation pedigree: GRCH Romeo's Solo Del Belcanto Allegro

10-generation COI 0.18% 
12-generation COI 0.65% 
Top 5 ancestors contributing to COI, in order of influence:
AM/CAN CH Wycliffe Kenneth 0.07% 
AM/CAN CH Wycliffe Thomas 0.07% 
AM/CAN CH Bel Tor Mccreery TP 0.05% 
AM CH Wycliffe Virgil 0.05% 
AM CH Wycliffe Jacqueline UD 0.04% 

PHR numbers:
COI = 1.2%[10G,10F,604U,32C] : %Wycliffe= 24.41%

Bonnie's mama is 26% Wycliffe and her papa is 30% Wycliffe. I really believe that genetic diversity makes a difference in the dogs intelligence and vigor. I would hate to mess it up by not choosing carefully!

Does anyone know of another black standard with a Wycliffe under 30% and so few common ancestors like her Gpa. If you do, speak up!  pm me if you can. I am sure there are many out there, but I can't find them. I am not asking for a Wycliffe free dog, just one that is Wycliffe light.


----------



## A'n'A Mom

O/W,

If you look on PHRDB, expanding the search to 7 or 8 generations, you'll see that Allegro is only about 25% from black lines. He's about 50% apricot and 25% brown. That's generally speaking, of course. Both the apricot and brown lines tend to have lower Wycliffe numbers than the blacks.

I don't know if he had any littermates or if he was a single pup. If there were littermates, they weren't registered with AKC. It would be interesting to see what color they were...if there were any. 

N


----------



## outwest

My dog is apricot.  Allegro's mama was apricot and her entire line was all apricot plus some other apricots in the brown line. Allegro's brother was apricot. So, maybe I should look for a black dog from apricots to get the lower Wycliffe? Say...I know one around here. Bonnie's mama's second litter also has black, brown and cream with one that is appearing apricot like mine. There is no white on either side (if there is, it is one or two dogs only), so finding a black without white in the background is tough, too. Goodness, maybe i should just look at the neighborhood dog! LOL. This is much harder than I thought it would be. I wanted to stick with a black to strengthen her black points (she remains dark, but not as much as when a pup). So far the browns out of this line have very little fading, but I am not sure I should add too much brown.

Add all this interest in diversity and it is harder to find the conformation to compliment faults. oy. No wonder people give up and go with conformation over diversity. sigh.

Anyway, thank you for putting the Wycliffe there. I suppose I could choose a nonblack dog, but not sure if it's a good idea.


----------



## Countryboy

Just don't go thinking abt making any Whoodles eh, O/W? That COI would be getting a little too low!


----------



## outwest




----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

outwest said:


> Does anyone know of another black standard with a Wycliffe under 30% and so few common ancestors like her Gpa. If you do, speak up!  pm me if you can. I am sure there are many out there, but I can't find them.
> 
> That's kinda where I was going with all of this. There are exquisitely few, and I'm not talking Wycliffe free.. even the Wycliffe light poodles are exquisitely rare. Those who are out there tend to be from non-show lines.
> 
> If you have some free time, spend a few minutes reviewing the superb charts and graphs on the standard poodle project on this page:
> http://www.standardpoodleproject.com/Standard%20Poodle%20Population%20Statistics.htm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not asking for a Wycliffe free dog, just one that is Wycliffe light.
> Kinda like asking for the winning lottery ticket! There are a few winners out there, takes persistance as well as a bit of luck to turn one up


......


----------



## ladybird

it's true, apricots and browns, at least in the uk, sometimes have low Wycliffe... I've been browsing on phr some of the dogs I know and there are 0% Wycliffe ancestors born in the mid 80s, but after that I can't seem to find any with 0% because it gradually rises since then. There are some dogs of certain lines with low Wycliffe (Canen browns, Dorvalle and Ivanola apricots to name a few), e.g. Canen Thank Goodness is 15%W born 2004, Dorvalle Amazing Grace 11%W born 2001, Ivanola Extra Gold 9%W born 2010


----------



## ladybird

I found a line of blacks with low Wycliffe - Leatherstocking is the affix. as low as 1-2%, born 2000. there are browns and reds also with that kennel name and also with low Wycliffe


----------



## outwest

ladybird said:


> I found a line of blacks with low Wycliffe - Leatherstocking is the affix. as low as 1-2%, born 2000. there are browns and reds also with that kennel name and also with low Wycliffe


What do they look like?


----------



## outwest

Yadda,
Yah, I want a nice conformation. That's the trouble. The Wycliffe light dogs Bonnie has in her pedigree were not bad conformationally, but the breeder went to enormous trouble and expense to do it (waiting three freaking generations to get one over to AKC, for example!). Those dogs conformation is not as good as the ones with high Wycliffe, but they were not ugly. The plus is the conformation is back up in the last generation while keeping the Wycliffe low like Bonnie at 28%, but where to go from here? 

It's a quandry. The only really good looking, longer legged black dogs I can find are well over 40% Wycliffe.

I wonder if I shouldn't sweat it and forget about the Wycliffe, sigh. Maybe a dog of color with black points, but with a black background? Nah, it would be the same issue. 

I could line breed to one of her relatives and keep the Wycliffe below 30% like hers is, but then the COI would go above 10%.

Which is more important- a 12 or 15 generation nice and low COI or a low Wycliffe? The public doesn't know anything about Wycliffe and those that are researching more than average will look for a low COI before they look for a low Wycliffe!

I could find a good conformation unrelated dog and get a very low COI, but then I'd get a higher Wycliffe. I could line breed with a excellent conformation black dog (have one in mind right now), but a test breeding showed COI at 13.4%, but a great Wycliffe (less than 30%). That dog would also entail artificial insemination or shipping Bonnie to him (don't want to do that). 

Which do you think is more important- COI or Wycliffe?


----------



## Countryboy

Well here's how my twisted mind works... :afraid: LOL

How abt find the grave of a pre-Wycliffe stud, get some of his DNA and clone him. Is that possible after what?? . . 50 yrs?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
U could control the Poodle World!! MUAHAHA!! :evil: 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Seriously tho. In this forum I'll bet we have some people who could discuss DNA and cloning. And now I've got it like a brain worm. I wonder if it could be done? :confused2:


----------



## outwest

LOL. 

I guess I am one of the weirdo's.  I think diversity is important, but darn, I like a nice looking dog, too.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

outwest said:


> What do they look like?


Both lines tend to be a bit large, heavier bone substance, incredible temperaments. One of the downfalls.. both lines have been outcrossed to lines with known AD producers (just like the majority of bloodlines out there). I am aware of HD cases with both bloodlines.

The Canens range in color, browns, apricots, creams, occasional blacks. Some US parti's were imported to the UK and there are also some Canens which carry parti genes. They tend to big large poodles, with heavy bone substance... frequently between 25 and 28 inches at the shoulder. Tails tend to be set a bit lower than what we see in the US in show lines. I don't believe that Sophie Duncan is still breeding.. not sure. Her poodles are from Canen lines. Here is a link to her website: 

Real French Poodles from the Languedoc, South of France: standard Poodle Photos


Shirley Bell who is the breeder behind the affix "Canen" passed away earlier this year. However over the last handful of years she had been reducing the numbers of poodles kept so there are only a few Canen's left.. most of those very closely related. No testing on the majority. This is a direct quote from Shirley's website from a couple of years ago (which has been taken down):

"These days I only keep a couple of poodles, but occasionally breed and I have some out on breeding terms. Suffice to say in all the years I have kept them (since 1953) my total vets bill for the breed, excluding vaccinations and final goodbyes has been £4 and that just for stitching up a wound!
To date I have never had anything tested for any of the afflictions to which this breed is now prone, since I have had no report of any trouble with anything I have sold"

As for Leatherstocking, well, they have been discussed in depth on this forum. Basically, the older low Wycliffe lines tend to be blacks, browns, and not much left of that as they too have reduced the number of poodles they own and are now focusing their efforts entirely on their reds. The poodles out of their older lines tend to be a bit long in body, quite angulated, round eyes, with a somewhat low tailset.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

outwest said:


> Yadda,
> 
> Which do you think is more important- COI or Wycliffe?


That is a really great question... 

Diversity! 
Usually when people are looking for low COI's, they are doing it with a goal of maintaining diversity. However, due to the genetic bottleneck, most of our poodles are quite related. Thanks to the efforts of the folks behind the Standard Poodle Project, we now know that the best indicator of diversity in our standards is not the COI, but it is the Wycliffe influence that is now the best indicator of diversity in standards. That's kind of a new paradigm, tough to get one's mind around. If you take a super good look at the standard poodle project site, you will see that it is true.

So.. the answer for me is: Wycliffe.


----------



## outwest

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> That is a really great question...
> 
> Diversity!
> Usually when people are looking for low COI's, they are doing it with a goal of maintaining diversity. However, due to the genetic bottleneck, most of our poodles are quite related. Thanks to the efforts of the folks behind the Standard Poodle Project, we now know that the best indicator of diversity in our standards is not the COI, but it is the Wycliffe influence that is now the best indicator of diversity in standards. That's kind of a new paradigm, tough to get one's mind around. If you take a super good look at the standard poodle project site, you will see that it is true.
> 
> So.. the answer for me is: Wycliffe.


I have examined that site. I want a nice looking dog, with a Wycliffe under 30% ad a COI under 8%. Not too hard, right? :angel2:

Would a COI of 13% with a Wycliffe under 30% be preferable to a COI of 1% and a Wycliffe of 45%? 

For yadda I assume (correct me if I am wrong), the low Wycliffe puppy is preferable? How about other people?


----------



## ladybird

outwest said:


> Which do you think is more important- COI or Wycliffe?


Definately Wycliffe because of the bottleneck - it means ALL poodles with any Wycliffe are related. We need as much diversity as possible, so we need to find lines with no Wycliffe to preserve diversity. Otherwise the breed might as well have started from scratch (from those few Wycliffe founders)


----------



## outwest

I looked on that website of the low Wycliffe poodles. They have a lot of substance. They look like terrific dogs, but they aren't 'show quality'. The standards are nice looking, though, in a working dog way. It's hard to know which direction to go.


----------



## Keithsomething

Outwest a working dog should still conform to the breed standard...and lets be frank, those dogs look more like irish water spaniels than they do standard poodles...soooo IMO keep looking for your stylish low wycliffe dog

Also...don't worry about what the public thinks, if YOU are comfortable with the breeding and YOU are happy with the results thats all that matters. Always breed true to the breed for conformation, health, and temperament...but never make choices on breeding on whether or not a pet buyer knows anything about COI's


----------



## outwest

I agree that they do look like water spaniels. I couldn't put my finger on it. I don't care what the public thinks, honestly. I care what I think.


----------



## ladybird

what site are the pictures at?


----------



## outwest

http://www.realstandards.info/poodlephotos.htm


----------



## Countryboy

Well I like them, O/W. 'Specially some of the Blacks.

But then I'm a 'working dog look' fan too.


----------



## Keithsomething

well...I think for a dog to have a working dog "look" it better be doing those jobs, I don't see any title from any performance on these dogs? The Louter Creek dogs don't look like this...yet they still possess type

Also, absolutely NOTHING to do with Wycliffe or COI's...but what makes a dog that conforms to the breed standard any less of a working dog? I completely get that there are key things that people can like and dislike in standards and breed away from them yet still retain the look of a standard...but to throw almost all of it away because of a "working" dog look...get a different breed then

VV
Which is the IWS and which is supposed to be the poodle? THAT makes me sad that it actually has to take thought to figure it out on some peoples part!


----------



## ladybird

They look like pretty normal poodles to me! (looks like they are from Canen line too)


----------



## A'n'A Mom

I think what you're seeing as the standard is actually the current interpretation of the standard. 

Standard Poodle Club Gallery :: Historical Pictures

And it's the result of having narrowed the gene pool down to basically only one of the original founding bloodlines as the result of the Wycliffe bottleneck.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

*Grrrr!!!*

Darn it all, wrote a reply and it disappeared.

Basically, standard poodle breed has not been around for a whole lot of years and is always evolving, always. It was based on a combination of genetics from a lot of different dogs and as we can all tell by the pics Keith posted.. more than likely there are a whole lot of genes in common with IWS.

Many people today equate the ulta refined, sculpted look of poodles with... poodle. Although historically, there were some poodle lines that had that sculpted look to some degree, it was the Jean Lyle/Wycliffe line where it really became "extreme" (probably a better word choice, just not coming to mind right now). A lot of people equate the look of the Wycliffe poodles with "poodle", which is, in my opinion, doing a bit of a disservice to the few other remaining lines. Again, keeping in mind that the majority of our poodle lines are inbred on Wycliffe, most poodles alive today are going to have a bit of that Wycliffe look about them.. even the backyard stuff. So when we see poodles of different linage, we can absolutely anticipate them having a bit different look than what we are used to. Think how many people struggle with accepting the appearance of undocked vs docked. Some folks just simply detest the look of an undocked poodle because they have such a strong personal concept of what is "right.

When I've mentioned the "numbers" aspect of breeding.. hopefully everyone understands that people don't breed for a number on a piece of paper. That number reflects the potential for diversity which in turn plays a role in longevity, resistance to heath issues, large litter numbers, easy breeding and easy whelping ( just a few of the perks), it is those things that is the goal.. not the number on the paper. The number is a "hint" a clue to what the genetics of the dog may hold. When looking at inbreeding percentages, it is critical to keep in mind that ANY highly concentrated inbreeding of any line can have the same consequences--it is the inbreeding and the degree of inbreeding itself that is the problem. Not any particular line. The breeding choices of a whole lot of breeders have cause the genetic bottleneck with the Wycliffe line, it is a lesson for all of us and we should all be diligent not to repeat that with other lines. IMO--Color breeders are most at risk for this at this time.

back to the IWS--while certain lines of poodles may have the look of the IWS (or is it the other way around?)--I strongly believe that there is something about a poodle.. the way they think, their people pleasing personalities.. their actions, which is one of the biggest defining traits that goes into what makes a poodle.. a poodle.

Back to Wycliffe numbers/diversity--although selecting poodles who have the right "numbers".. hedges the odds in favor of diversity, the ultimate resource for confirming that is having DLA haplotype testing. If a poodle has a Wycliffe % of 60%--and you are interested in diversity along with all of the benefits that diversity can bring.. I would be tempted to look elsewhere UNLESS that poodle had been DLA haplotyped and is heterozygous. In which case... the diversity that is being looked for is there and the test results make the Wycliffe % irrelevant. The same holds true in the case of a %Wycliffe of 20%, but the poodle tests as homozygous on a DLA haplotype test--keeping in mind that if the goal is diversity, the Wycliffe % gives us a clue or a hint about the potential in a poodle, but the DLA haplotype testing actually confirms what is there.


----------



## Keithsomething

Perhaps poodles did once look like IWS and curly coated retrievers and all the other breeds that could have potentially been mixed together to produce the individual breeds...but I feel (and I don't expect everyone to share my exact opinion...just something close) that people need to understand that Humans have the ability to change things drastically, for the good and for the bad.

There isn't a single breed of dog that remains unchanged from the dawn of its existence because that doesn't make sense genetically...they're a product of their environment and the purpose they serve at that time in history

I've said it before and I'll say it again, dogs (poodles in particular) are no longer *needed* to do the job they were initially bred for...but they should still be capable of doing that job while conforming to the breed standard...

Was the Wycliffe "bottleneck" severe...sure it was, it had a huge impact on our breed...for the good and maybe for the bad. Bad being a smaller gene pool, good being it set a type that we still breed for to this day! With the choices those breeders made we have our breed as it is today...and lets face it the dogs that DON'T have wycliffe behind them just don't look like stankin' poodles!!! (any retriever breed has a certain look about it but come on people...labs and IWS and PWD's shouldn't look like poodles...)


----------



## petitpie

Sounds like the same sort of thing that happened to Uga the Bulldog.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Reply included in message:


Keithsomething said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again, dogs (poodles in particular) are no longer *needed* to do the job they were initially bred for...but they should still be capable of doing that job while conforming to the breed standard...As the most versatile of dog breeds, the original purposes varied with the time and the location, pot dogs,war dogs, sled/cart dogs, hunting dogs, retrievers, herding dogs, circus dogs, tracking dogs, may of these "jobs" have certain associated physical characteristics which allows a dog to excel at that particular job. Despite being versatile and talented, not all poodles excelled at every job. Lot of diverse poodles, lot of jobs.. when we all look the same..we no longer have that diversity and that loss of diversity equates to loss of longevity and loss of health.
> 
> Was the Wycliffe "bottleneck" severe...sure it was, it had a huge impact on our breed...for the good and maybe for the bad.There is no "maybe" about it. I do tend to be a bit of a doom and gloomer.. because my personal pet poodles have paid the price with their health and longevity and have broken my heart. On a much larger spectrum, if we continue to inbreed, with no thought to maintaining diversity, we are dooming our poodles to extinction. That is a particularly stong statement. It is a statement of fact. Talk to the geneticists. I have. While we may have some genetic shift/drift, it isn't happening at a rate fast enough to protect our poodles from the consequences of our breeding practices. Bad being a smaller gene pool, good being it set a type that we still breed for to this day!While that "type" is the preferred type.. and I suspect only a fool would try to present anything else in the showring.. there are a whole people out there who don' t like that look. It is possible to have a diversity in appearance, while still retaining "poodliness". It saddens me when there is no tolerance for different people's likes/dislikes. With the choices those breeders made we have our breed as it is todayWe have some gorgeous poodles, we have some less than gorgeous.. but the choices those breeders made have doomed a whole heck of a lot of poodles to health issues, and lack of resistance to disease. I don't blame those breeders, they THOUGHT they were making the best choices possible for the breed. Breeder's today have a lot more access to information, to research. I really hope that they pay attention to what the geneticists and researchers are saying. ...and lets face it the dogs that DON'T have wycliffe behind them just don't look like stankin' poodles!!!THAT IS EXACTLY THE TRAIN OF THOUGHT WHICH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOSS OF THE MAJORITY OF OUR FOUNDATION GENETICS!!Hmmm, I think if you showed folks their photos, most would still be very easily recognizable as poodles. Of course, I have seen doodles which were virtually indistinguishable by the average person from physically from a poodle (any retriever breed has a certain look about it but come on people...labs and IWS and PWD's shouldn't look like poodles...) I sure do agree with that one... (labs, IWS and PWD's looking like poodles.. but I think you should take that one up with THEIR breeders!<VBG>



I am a firm believer that the breeder's of today hold the future and fate of the breed in their hands.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

See comments below:



Keithsomething said:


> well...I think for a dog to have a working dog "look" it better be doing those jobs, I don't see any title from any performance on these dogs?My own, very harsh opinion: You show me a title on a dog.. and I can tell you a whole heck of a lot about the owner of that dog. Titles frequently do tell more about an owner then the dog. There are very, very few true working poodles out there. One of the
> "new" jobs that I see poodles doing.. and yes, I would consider these to be working dogs.. are service dogs. No titles there. My old girl.. is/was a working poodle. No titles there. Many people who have a poodle who does a job is busy enough at their job that they don't take the time out to get a piece of paper which tells them what they already know about their dog. At that point.. the paper is all about ego, about showing off, about proving what you have to other people. I find that most people who have true working dogs, whatever the breed, know what their dogs can do, they tend to be a bit quiet, they don't have the ego involved and they don't need to show off. I am personally acquainted with a purebred heeler, take your breath away structure, owned by a local rancher. I have watched this girl work cattle on a couple of occasions. These aren't feed lot cattle, these are range cattle, cattle who have dealt with coyote, bear, mountain lions and feral dogs. This heeler bitch handles those cattle like a piece of art, smooth, in one minute, out the next. While the owner/handler/rancher directs her, the communications between them is so well developed and frequently so subtle (depending on what she is being told to do), that sometimes it appears as if she is working totally without direction.. sometimes she does! I asked once about herding competitions. The baffled look he gave me still brings a smile to my face. He let me know that he was busy and had work to get done. I am aware of a poodle who was used as a goat herder for many years. No title on her, I did see a couple of vague mentions of her skills, but nothing else. You wouldn't have liked her.. she was strong, with more substantial bone structure than what is in the ring and minimal facial sculpting. The Louter Creek dogs don't look like this...yet they still possess type
> 
> I do not know anything about Louter Creek poodles, this is absolutely not intended to be a statement against them in any way.
> 
> Also, absolutely NOTHING to do with Wycliffe or COI's...but what makes a dog that conforms to the breed standard any less of a working dog?Nothing. There is absolutely no reason that working dogs can't also conform to the breed standard.. however, there is a bit of variability in interpretations in breed standard. Also.. just to throw out there yet again, our standards are what certain people consider to be the ideal poodle. The goal. As a goal, not every poodle is going to look like that standard. Further, if you take a look at the disqualifications, there aren't a whole lot. Which means that poodles who look less than the current show lines can't be included into a breeding program to add certain desireable traits they may carry. It also means that there is no reason that someone can't develop them into their own line. There is a whole lot of interest by some folk in color breeding. Particularly in reds, the history is very well known, involved crosses with mini's which resulted in "bobbleheads" and other really ugly structures. Those dogs were not only 100% pure poodle, even though they may not look like what is currently in the showring, they are the founders to some of our color lines! I completely get that there are key things that people can like and dislike in standards and breed away from them yet still retain the look of a standardBut there are different concepts of what the "look of a standard is. Just because someone has a standard or likes one that doesn't resemble a top producer, doesn't make it any less a standard... and there may be people who really appreciate the looks of that poodle. They are equally as entitled to their opinions as everyone else....but to throw almost all of it away because of a "working" dog look...get a different breed then Bad on you Keith! (said gently) To include a "working dog" look in your program would be wrong... it is not at all inline with your goals and dreams and it would set you back many generations, other people have different goals and dreams. It may not only NOT be a setback, it may be what they are wanting.. and they have just as much right to their goals and dreams as you do.. I only wish that we could all not only accept our individuality, but also respect and support each other in our endeavors. As humans, we don't all come out of the same mold, no reason our poodles should either.
> 
> VV
> Which is the IWS and which is supposed to be the poodle? THAT makes me sad that it actually has to take thought to figure it out on some peoples part! Try comparing poodles in full coats, to those of doodles. Even titled poodles. Most poodle folk can't tell the difference.....


----------



## Countryboy

I can really see where Keith is coming from. When all yr spare energy is spent in a visible devotion to yr chosen calling, u become seeped in it. It must be hard to step back out of that milieu . . even for a bit. 

And that world is all abt form...

_My_ Poodle world was initially all abt 'hypoallergenic'. I needed that kind of dog for my GS and only then did I get involved in other Poodle worlds . . . many different Poodle worlds!!  lol

Tonka is square . . no ring form at all. And I say 'so?'... He fills a role here and looks good doin' it.  U could probably critique all his features, Keith, but 99% of the Poodle buyin' public are not in yr league. Including me. 

But having said that, if O/W is thinking abt mixing some of this non-Wycliffe with Bonnie, yr still back to some questionable health lines... 

Yadda: Is that Haplowhatever *I can't find that particular post right now* screening available now?


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Countryboy said:


> I can really see where Keith is coming from. When all yr spare energy is spent in a visible devotion to yr chosen calling, u become seeped in it. It must be hard to step back out of that milieu . . even for a bit.
> 
> And that world is all abt form...
> 
> I appreciate Keith a lot.. He is willing to listen, to ask questions, to think about what is being said. Then he will make his own choices based on what he has learned, what he knows and what he likes. I'm convinced that is the stuff the best breeder's are made of. Breeder's who don't just follow along with the status quo.. willy nilly, because that's the way things are. But breeder's who question and think. I've noticed that many breeder's tend to "evolve" in their practices as time goes on. Minds change, things get done a bit differently. I think that having flexability, based on an available base of knowledge is also critical to being a good breeder. For everything that I have posted here.. everything belief that I currently hold about diversity, if I am wrong.. and Keith continues with his current beliefs and practices, then the folks who share my beliefs will have some place to turn to in the future for poodles. If, however, I am right, then the folks who share similar beliefs with Keith, will also have some place to turn to. That is what is so important about us doing different things.. but having respect and supporting each other with our endeavors. Regardless of differences in our tastes in poodles.. I suspect that both Keith and I will agree that the best poodles are sound in both mind and body (structurally and temperament)
> 
> _My_ Poodle world was initially all abt 'hypoallergenic'. I needed that kind of dog for my GS and only then did I get involved in other Poodle worlds . . . many different Poodle worlds!!  lol
> 
> Tonka is square . . no ring form at all. And I say 'so?'... He fills a role here and looks good doin' it.  U could probably critique all his features, Keith, but 99% of the Poodle buyin' public are not in yr league. Including me.
> 
> But having said that, if O/W is thinking abt mixing some of this non-Wycliffe with Bonnie, yr still back to some questionable health lines... Not sure why you are thinking there are more questionable health issues in the lighter Wycliffe lines then there are in the heavier Wycliffe lines? There are no lines that are free of health issues... if someone thinks they know of one.. please share it as there are a whole lot of people out there who would be really interested! There are lines where the health issues are not as frequent as others. The researchers are telling us that Addison's and hip dysplasia are multigenetic diseases with environmental triggers.. what that means is a poodle may not carry all of the genetics to produce the issue, may only carry part of those genetics (Addison's is found throughout the majority of the standard lines, as well as in some minis), but it may take a particular combination of parents to produce offspring who express it, or it may take some particular environmental event or chronic situation to cause it to develop. Same with hip dysplasia. Kinda new paradigm type thinking.. sometimes hard for me to get my head around as in the past I've had a very low tolerance for health issues!
> 
> Yadda: Is that Haplowhatever *I can't find that particular post right now* screening available now?Kinda sorta. It is available through Genoscoper in Helsinki, Finland. The last time I priced it, the cost with shipping was pretty close to $150. DLA diversity - Genoscoper Oy
> The original studies of poodle DLA (the terms DLA and MHC are interchangable) were sponsored and funded by the Poodle Club of Canada and the research took place in the UK. The funding has run out at this time, there are hopes of additional funding. Part of the funding supported lowered cost for DLA haplotype testing--$85 per dog. If the newly applied for grants are accepted, I don't know if DLA testing will be offered again at that price.. but I'm sure crossing my fingers!
> 
> I suspect you were looking for the link of where to get the test kits from.. I think I had posted the one associated with the study.. so no kits available there.. from the time being.


******


----------



## Keithsomething

I say it alot, and I truly mean it...what I'm working with is all theory and hypothesis really. I haven't put any of my ideals to practice yet because I haven't bred a litter of puppies...perhaps my thinking may change as I grow and develop my line (I suspect it will, because life is all about further education as my mentor tells me all the time. You're never done learning!)

And I completely agree that different forms of thinking and different approaches are needed for the preservation of this breed! I have my opinions, and I feel very strongly about my opinions but I'd never expect every person to subscribe to all of them...(though I do wish more people knew the breed standard and understood how it translated from writing into a dog, this I feel is the most important aspect before someone ever breed or even consider breeding you must develop your eye...an example...if you only ever see poodles that are overly coarse and you finally see what a poodle head SHOULD look like will you know which is correct or will you only like what you like? Confusing I know...but we need to breed true to the standard its in place for a reason)

CB I'd never critique your dogs, I may make snide comments about some dogs (and I definitely understand how immature/b*tchy that is...) but I don't feel its my place to judge someones pet...I want to expand on this a bit...haha I do come off a lil preachy in some of my posts but I'd never expect the general public to understand basic dog structure or even know the breed standard, but I see a drastic difference between someone looking for a fantastic pet and someone choosing to breed their pet...

if a breeder places dogs on a website and chooses to breed those dogs then yes I will comment and ask WHY are those dogs being bred, what do they offer that another dog doesn't, what faults does the owner see, where is the health testing...etc. XD I'm far to opinionated and free with my mouth for my own good :3

Yadda "_I suspect that both Keith and I will agree that the best poodles are sound in both mind and body (structurally and temperament)_" absolutely 100%!!! I sometimes feel my posts come off very...short and awful at times hahaha but for me the best poodle brings to the table all 3 attributes I'm looking for conformation, health, and temperament if ANY of those 3 is missing I wouldn't even give the dog a second look


----------



## Countryboy

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> Not sure why you are thinking there are more questionable health issues in the lighter Wycliffe lines then there are in the heavier Wycliffe lines? There are no lines that are free of health issues...


It was maybe me . . reading more than u meant into this post.



Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> One of the downfalls.. both lines have been outcrossed to lines with known AD producers (just like the majority of bloodlines out there). I am aware of HD cases with both bloodlines.


----------



## outwest

My dog is a mix of top winning show dogs and dogs lacking type, but robust in intelligence, health and abilities with impeccable temperaments. She does have ancestors who had their haplotypes done and lacked haplotype 1, which is the most common, and they were fully heterozygous. For that alone, I think the line could be valuable to poodles. They are Wycliffe light. In order to get to that point serious outcrossing was done and breeding for more type is the question now. I would like to have haplotypes done, but my understanding is that it is on hold due to lack of funding. I wonder if it is possible to do it with paying (it was very low cost before)? 

I do not see why I couldn't choose a sire with loads of type now that all the heavy lifting has been done. The trouble is purely conformation show breeders often snub their noses at dogs like mine. THAT is the shame of it all. Heck, there is a wonderful brown with great conformation right now that has the good traits of Bonnie with longer legs and type, but he is slightly smaller in the 22 inch range. The brown breeders are not interested. Are they crazy? The dog is gorgeous! Perhaps they prefer to live with blinders on? It is hard for me to understand.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

This just showed up on a brand new group of FB. I thought it was rather timely.
ARE WE HELPING OR HURTING PUREBRED DOGS? by Tam Cordingley, TheDogPlace


----------



## cliffdweller

Keithsomething said:


> well...I think for a dog to have a working dog "look" it better be doing those jobs ... what makes a dog that conforms to the breed standard any less of a working dog?
> ...


I suppose this goes a ways off topic, but since the question has been brought up, and I think it is important for and relevant to the Poodle as a breed that once upon a time had a function (beyond being suitable for showing or companionship), I would like to make a couple of remarks about "working dogs".

Just as show breeders have certain qualities that they desire in the phenotype of their dogs, and concentrate their breeding efforts toward producing and enhancing these qualities, breeders of performance dogs (working dogs being among these) have a set of qualities that they breed for. In both cases, show or performance, it is customary to determine the degree to which a dog possesses the desired qualities through some sort of test, e.g., showing on the bench or in the field.

I can say, with considerable experience to back it up, that, while it is not impossible to have a dog that conforms to the standard and is also capable of competitive field performance (there are dual champions in the working/sporting breeds), _the working capability of a dog is not tested in the show ring_. Thus, for example, even though a dog may _look_ as though it could perform in the field (say) and gives a sound trot around the ring at a show, this _look_ and (very) basic soundness amount to almost nothing when it comes to actual performance. Only real testing, in the field, for example,, can tell you about the performance capabilities of the animal, where things beyond the phenotype are of paramount importance.

As I have mentioned before on this forum, using Pointers as an example, many dogs bred over many generations exclusively for show/pet no longer have the desire to perform the functions for which they were originally bred. So what are they then ? Are they still _Pointers_ if they don't have the drive to find and point birds? Are Pointers just dogs that have a particular _look_? It is also true of Pointers (and other working/sporting breeds) that the outstanding performance dogs often differ markedly in appearance from their show/pet counterparts. (It's very telling, I think ...)

Awhile back, I queried this forum about the possible origins of the airborne tendency in Poodles. I suppose it originated in association with some function the breed once had (but, perhaps I am mistaken). Do you think this ability is going to remain intact forever while the breeders are concentrating on this or that refinement of the phenotype to the exclusion of other things, generation after generation? Conversely, if I am looking for a particular set of performance capabilities, and I have a dog that is really outstanding in these abilities (has stamina and drive, is tough and healthy, etc -- in short,_ capable _in every way), do you think I am going to care very much that she's a little lacking in chest, or a little east-west in her stance, or on the small side of the standard or that I would choose a mate specifically in order to correct these faults? So you can see how the breeding goals would naturally produce dogs of differing _types_.

As outwest is finding, there is often a compromise in breeding.

Finally, my personal preference is to preserve the distinctive functional characteristics of the working/sporting breeds in the face of a sort of behavioral monoculture fostered by show/pet breeding. I would be saddened to find many breed-specific behavioral traits/abilities so watered down that the primary differences among the breeds amounted to differences of phenotype.


----------



## outwest

a little rambling with lots of different thoughts:

There is no way they can test working ability in the AKC show ring. The rings are tiny. The dogs trot up and down and around and stop. That's about it. Many of the dogs are borderline thin, which make them lighter on their feet, more bouncy- they look nice trotting in tight circles. Often thinness is because they are poor eaters or have poor digestive tracts, both genetic issues.

nu2poodles, I would like to mention something specific to Rain that I have noticed when looking at your wonderful pictures. Your dog is extremely bouncy and airborn. If she wasn't, you wouldn't have so many pictures of her leaping and flying around, twisting/turning. Poodles lept into the water after fowl. That's what Rain reminds me of. Her body type reflects that.

My AKC show line standard (my last girl) spent much of her time prancing prettily, flinging her long neck around nicely and standing erect, but she didn't have the body control, the pure speed, the turning abilities nor was she able to catch a tennis ball (or cube of ice ) in mid air the way Bonnie does. Bonnie learned to jump through a hula hoop effortlessly and accurately, like a bullseye far off the ground. She hops like a flea on top of the patio table just to stand around up there. yadda's poodles show the same sort of abilities in their pictures, flying over stacks of sticks and such. I am not saying that the AKC show dogs do not do these things, maybe they do, but the poodles doing well in agility are generally not the same ones doing well in the conformation ring. There are a few in the show ring that I love, so I know there are some wonderful poodles being shown in the conformation ring and some people are on the same tract as what I like. 

Some people who show poodles conformation insist on the necessity to tack stomachs to prevent bloat. Why doesn't that ring a bell in everyone's head? ding, ding! Something is wrong here, better change it. Those that say, "oh, nothing to be done, every poodle line has health problems, you won't find a line without addisons, I won't test my dog for SA (or here- take the sample right here - not there), don't worry about that health stuff because we're too far gone to do anything about it, just tack the stomach, voila, problem solved, besides, they only live about 12 years anyway," are taking the easy road. 

Instead of fixing what's broke in the genes, they prefer to tack stomachs? I have thought hard about that.

Here is a low Wycliffe poodle from that site that I think doesn't look bad, but he doesn't look like the second one (over 60% Wycliffe, inbred and a top producer) and the last is my dog, a mixture of the two styles.

low Wycliffe:









high Wycliffe









Wycliffe light









My goal would be to have healthy puppies a little closer to the middle picture than the top picture.  The purely show lines are scary when i look at the poodle health registry or check their OFA testing.  I think I would prefer the middle road, moderation all the way for me (with a little more leg LOL).


----------



## Paragon

Outwest,

I actually like the top dog in his own way. He is dignified and carrys himself well with good depth of chest. His pigment is awesome as well! He carrys his head like a hunting dog. It doesn't look to the sky into nothingness.

Something like him could be used in a breeding program to add diversity, and old type. He does need refinement in topline, and tailset. His feet could also be tighter. I have seen worse in the ring, with too little jaw, too much sculpting, no muscle.

As you probally gather, I want a moderate, all purpose poodle, suitable for the ring, service, and field. Many of the Borzi heads out their would suffer a broken jaw, if asked to carry a goose to hand! We need all sorts of imterpretations out there. If we all bred to the same ideal, we would be back to a bottleneck!

We have to remember our long term goals. Breeding doesn't stop after one generation. We have to look at a what a line can give us years from now.

Paragon


----------



## cliffdweller

outwest said:


> a little rambling with lots of different thoughts:
> 
> ...
> 
> nu2poodles, I would like to mention something specific to Rain that I have noticed when looking at your wonderful pictures. Your dog is extremely bouncy and airborn. If she wasn't, you wouldn't have so many pictures of her leaping and flying around, twisting/turning. Poodles lept into the water after fowl. That's what Rain reminds me of. Her body type reflects that.


When I "adopted" Rain, I was merely seeking an athletic dog that would enjoy the lifestyle here (water everywhere, lol) and be a good companion around my ancient parents (nearing 94 and 97 yo). I avoided big show breeders. To my surprise, what I got, Rain, is the most _spectacularly_ athletic dog I have ever had. I regard this as a credit to the Poodle breeders out there. 

If I rant a little about the performance aspect of dogs, it is only because, as in the case of diversity, I have seen these characteristics virtually, irretrievably lost in other breeds, through emphasis on qualities desired in the show ring. 



outwest said:


> My AKC show line standard (my last girl) spent much of her time prancing prettily, flinging her long neck around nicely and standing erect, but she didn't have the body control, the pure speed, the turning abilities nor was she able to catch a tennis ball (or cube of ice ) in mid air the way Bonnie does. Bonnie learned to jump through a hula hoop effortlessly and accurately, like a bullseye far off the ground. She hops like a flea on top of the patio table just to stand around up there. yadda's poodles show the same sort of abilities in their pictures, flying over stacks of sticks and such. I am not saying that the AKC show dogs do not do these things, maybe they do, but the poodles doing well in agility are generally not the same ones doing well in the conformation ring. There are a few in the show ring that I love, so I know there are some wonderful poodles being shown in the conformation ring and some people are on the same tract as what I like.
> 
> ...


In some cases, it is not that the dog is physically incapable of doing these things, but that it has lost the _drive_ (desire) to do them. This happens because the emphasis is placed on other things in breeding programs. Sometimes there is an inadvertent breeding away from such traits, as is discussed in the article cited by Arreau above.

Sometimes, what is there, is suppressed through training. When I judged dogs in the field, I eventually found that I really liked judging puppies and derbies --- the finished dogs, not so much. Why ? Because many of the finished dogs had lost their "sparkle" through training. Rain has lots of sparkle, and I'm doing all I can to promote it ... but she won't be winning any good citizenship awards, lol.




outwest said:


> Here is a low Wycliffe poodle from that site that I think doesn't look bad, but he doesn't look like the second one (over 60% Wycliffe, inbred and a top producer) and the last is my dog, a mixture of the two styles.
> 
> low Wycliffe:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> high Wycliffe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wycliffe light
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Honestly, I don't know how you can compare these dogs, with the hair covering them in such different ways ~~~. outwest, in looking for longer leg, or "better" topline, or higher tailset, or whatever, I hope you do not diminish the springy, agility, or the desire to perform it, that you have in Bonnie.

Rain's legs ? ... short or long ? lol, I don't know, really; if they function well over time, and through all her leaps and bounds and flights at full tilt (something yet to be determined, in her case), _that's_ what's really important, for her sake, and mine ... (_form follows function_ --- as nature will have it; very important to remember):


----------



## Carley's Mom

I don't know anything about this subject. I know that my dog was breed for the show ring and is very fast can jump on the counter if she wants too... She is very sure footed, if that makes any sense. 

What I was wondering about is all these tails that I keep seeing that curve over the back. I don't think that looks good at all, that is my personal opinion , but is it a fault in the dog?


----------



## outwest

Carley's Mom said:


> I don't know anything about this subject. I know that my dog was breed for the show ring and is very fast can jump on the counter if she wants too... She is very sure footed, if that makes any sense.
> 
> What I was wondering about is all these tails that I keep seeing that curve over the back. I don't think that looks good at all, that is my personal opinion , but is it a fault in the dog?


Yes, curly tails are a fault. You see them a lot now because of the longer docks and undocked tails. Bonnie's tail is stick straight until about 4 or 5 inches up, right where they used to dock them, then it curls. Thankgoodness it doesn't touch her back, that is even funnier looking. If I had her tail docked shorter, it would be straight. I do not like the curly tails, but in the end it is only a tail. A tail has zip to do with anything other than looks. My dogs sire had a wonderful tailset and a very straight, long docked tail. Her dam had a great tail set and a full length curly tail. Unfortunately, my dog got the curl. Some dogs do have full length straight, but not many. Quincy is one of those dogs (check his videos). If Bonnie's was docked the length of Rain's, the curl would be gone, but hers is almost full length.


----------



## Keithsomething

has anyone commenting on the desire being missing in "show" poodles for them to do performance ever actually spent any sort of extended time with a "show" breeder and their dogs?

I have spent more than enough time around breeders and their dogs to know that these dogs are MORE than happy and capable of doing agility or hunting/retrieving. I hear so much on how "show" bred dogs lack the desire, or lack the structure to perform...I call BS on that! 

I think Yaddas posts are exactly what this breed needs! We need diversity amongst thinking in breeders...but I don't have to like what some of the people who disagree with me are doing (Especially the ones who doesn't even know the proper terms to describe their dogs structure!!!) 

Also...even if there are differences in opinion on breeding there should be a CLEAR point in the breeding, why is it being done? what do they hope to achieve? is the goal even achievable with the dogs being used?

No one needs to justify themselves to anyone else...but you do need to justify your breeding practices to the BREED and pumping out litter after litter and not keeping anything is awful and doesn't help anyone least of all poodles...


----------



## outwest

Good points. It is important to have differing opinions. I also believe there are conformation show dogs who are capable dogs. A number of them are duel titled to prove it, but to me a title isn't very important. It is the dog that is important. 

As far as proper terms to describe structure, that is a petty complaint I have heard before. It reeks of snobbery.  

chocolate:brown?


----------



## Keithsomething

outwest said:


> Good points. It is important to have differing opinions. I also believe there are conformation show dogs who are capable dogs. A number of them are duel titled to prove it, but to me a title isn't very important. It is the dog that is important.
> *
> As far as proper terms to describe structure, that is a petty complaint I have heard before. It reeks of snobbery.
> *
> chocolate:brown?


We can argue semantics and what terms mean what, but what I'm meaning and might not have made myself clear enough is that people need to understand the basic structure of a DOG not just a poodle before they breed...if you don't know how or why a dog is supposed to be built how're you going to know what to breed to to improve it?

I don't pretend to know everything about dogs, but I have enough knowledge and I continue to learn the basics from people that have been doing it far longer than most that I feel I know enough to comment on this...it infuriates me like NOTHING else that I, someone who hasn't bred and won't be breeding for some time (close to 2 years!), can recite the breed standard and basic dog anatomy more thoroughly than someone who breeds several litters a year...why not put the effort forward and learn?

ETA : 

chocolate bothers me...its called brown in poodles...now THAT is a semantic I'll argue. Just like its apricot not champagne ;D (though I like using champagne as a describing word for apricot)


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Good points. It is important to have differing opinions. I also believe there are conformation show dogs who are capable dogs. A number of them are duel titled to prove it, but to me a title isn't very important. It is the dog that is important.
> 
> As far as proper terms to describe structure, that is a petty complaint I have heard before. It reeks of snobbery.
> 
> chocolate:brown?


While I can see your point of view, consider an alternate point of view. Using correct terminology/being open to learning about correct terminology if one is not currently using it correctly is an important part of being a learner of the breed. And that is one main point of this forum, correct? Surely I cannot be the only one who *wants* to portray the message to others that I am well educated in the breed. When a person considers others' attempts to help one learn about the breed as snobbery, it signals closed mindedness. When one considers it as an attempt to help educate, it signals open mindedness and a desire to learn. Open mindedness and a desire to be a lifelong learner is important if one wants to become well educated in the breed. It is even more important, _essential_, I'd say, for someone wanting to become actively involved in the breed as say, a breeder.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Carley's Mom said:


> I don't know anything about this subject. I know that my dog was breed for the show ring and is very fast can jump on the counter if she wants too... She is very sure footed, if that makes any sense.
> 
> What I was wondering about is all these tails that I keep seeing that curve over the back. I don't think that looks good at all, that is my personal opinion , but is it a fault in the dog?


Yes, it is a fault. The standard calls for a tail that is set high, straight, and carried up. A low tailset and a tail that is carried over the back is a fault.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> A tail has zip to do with anything other than looks.


I beg to differ.  Among other things, a dog's tail helps with balance and communication. One of the reasons why some do not like the practice of docking. When it comes to poodles, I believe the placement of the tail high on the back was to prevent the tail from getting caught while swimming which could lead to drowning.


----------



## petitpie

Does the weight of an undocked tail cause it to be carried differently? Will someone post a poodle carrying its long tail correctly.


----------



## Keithsomething

CM EXACTLY!!!! <3

and petitpie, its the tension of the muscle that holds the tail up...when its to tight the tail is curled or carried gayly if its to loose the dog isn't able to have a great tail carriage. I'm not sure if the weight of the tail has much to do with it at all.

Arreau's boy Quincy comes to mind when I think of a dog with an undocked tail that carries its as straight as possible...I don't think you'll ever find a dog that has a poker straight natural tail because its to long for that, also a former member of this forums girl has a great natural tail as well so they ARE out there...I just prefer docked :3


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

I prefer docked too. Quincy's tail is lovely. Flynn's tail is lovely. Journey's tail would be perfect docked, and is gorgeous when she is moving. I love a good dock, and if it was not so hard on a dog this age, Journey would be docked now.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Countryboy said:


> It was maybe me . . reading more than u meant into this post.


Ahhh.. I understand now.

The hopes in dealing with the lines who are less inbred is that diversity of the MHC will help protect the poodles from expressing health issues and will improve over all disease resistance as well as overall resilience when it comes to dealing with new types of health issues.

I had always held out hope that we could locate some obscure line somewhere that had no known AD, or SA.. or whatever.. but they just aren't turning up.


----------



## zyrcona

I painted a Scandinavian pompadour on the Canen poodle. I think he still does look like a poodle, albeit a bit of a coarse thickset one with a different carriage to the modern variety, but a lot of people who own these dogs seem to like to keep them in overgrown utility clips which I don't think shows them to their best.

On the question of which is best, to breed for: low COI or low Wycliffe, I personally think low Wycliffe, but it's important to keep COI as low as you can manage as well. Wycliffe influence is another form of COI, just going back to generations beyond that of those used to calculate a normal COI. Someone who is breeding for low Wycliffe is doing something for the breed by preserving and promoting what is rare and I think is worth saving. It doesn't matter to me that it might not be as pretty as some of the high Wycliffe ones, as there are enough of them around.


----------



## Paragon

Zycona,

Thanks for the photoshop... It is not far from correct, relaxed movement when working the fields for game. When quartering, the dogs hold the tails lower, while concentrating on the trail. The heads are held forward with the chin almost paralell to the topline. They snap into point raising tail, and head, lifting front paw. This would be your familiar stack position. My dogs show as well. 

If they hunted game with their heads in the air, they would never find a trail.... BTW I do like a nice head.. Diversity is important... We could use more correct fronts... Tails are comparitively easier to fix. Once diversity is lost, it is impossible to recover...

Paragon


----------



## Northern Lights

So, for a newbie, what is the Wycliffe percentage likely to mean for my new puppy's long-term health? The parents, whom I just looked up (thanks for the link!) are 51 and 53% Wycliffe. This sounds higher than most you've mentioned, so now I'm a little worried. Puppy's C.O.I. will be about 7.5.


----------



## zyrcona

Northern Lights said:


> So, for a newbie, what is the Wycliffe percentage likely to mean for my new puppy's long-term health? The parents, whom I just looked up (thanks for the link!) are 51 and 53% Wycliffe. This sounds higher than most you've mentioned, so now I'm a little worried. Puppy's C.O.I. will be about 7.5.


Not enough is known yet, but probably it does not make a lot of difference at the present time with regards to your puppy's health. If you buy your puppy from any responsible breeder who health tests, it won't get any of the tested genetic diseases. The non-testable diseases at the moment are a small risk in any poodle and dogs from low Wycliffe lines can suffer from them, just the same as the high Wycliffe lines do. However, if you do have the option of buying from a low Wycliffe breeder, you are helping to support someone in their endeavours to keep the breed diverse, someone who isn't likely to have as much support within communities like the show fraternity.


----------



## outwest

zyrcona said:


> Not enough is known yet, but probably it does not make a lot of difference at the present time with regards to your puppy's health. If you buy your puppy from any responsible breeder who health tests, it won't get any of the tested genetic diseases. The non-testable diseases at the moment are a small risk in any poodle and dogs from low Wycliffe lines can suffer from them, just the same as the high Wycliffe lines do. However, if you do have the option of buying from a low Wycliffe breeder, you are helping to support someone in their endeavours to keep the breed diverse, someone who isn't likely to have as much support within communities like the show fraternity.


I have access to Wycliffe light black standards to breed mine to, but the COI would be just over 10%. Breeder has suggested paying for the haplotype DNA tests to see where everything stands before a decision is made. I understand they are around $150 since there is no funding right now. 

It is easier to go for a dog with typical Wycliffe in the 50% range in a black, but would give a low COI (I have access to an AKC CH that matches that). The resulting pups would be around 40% Wycliffen (mine is 28%). It doesn't seem, unless going for a nonblack dog, that a person could have both. We have a black dog on this forum in the low 40% range, which is commendable. I could conceivably get pups in the 35% range who were black that way, but that dog is really far away. That one could also give a COI under 3% in the puppies! 

How important is it to do this? I am not sure. 
Would it make any difference to go to all the effort? I am not sure. 
Would be easier to choose one near me? Yes, for sure. 

There are so many factors to consider when choosing and I only have one dog. There is the conformation to consider. There is the COI. There is the health in the lines. There is the color backgrounds and dogs color. There is the temperments. There is the working ability. There is the size. Now there is the Wycliffe! 

If I was a real breeder with many choices it might be different, but since I am not, I want to make the best choice I can for the one I do have.I guess I need to decide what is most important to me first.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Paragon said:


> If they hunted game with their heads in the air, they would never find a trail.... BTW I do like a nice head.. Diversity is important... We could use more correct fronts... Tails are comparitively easier to fix. Once diversity is lost, it is impossible to recover...
> 
> Paragon


In search and rescue work, not only are trackers used, but also air scenters and trailers. They tend to work with their heads up more often than not (esp the air scenters!) The nice thing is.... correctly built poodles are physically capable of doing any of the three techniques.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

*@ Northern Lights....*



Northern Lights said:


> So, for a newbie, what is the Wycliffe percentage likely to mean for my new puppy's long-term health? The parents, whom I just looked up (thanks for the link!) are 51 and 53% Wycliffe. This sounds higher than most you've mentioned, so now I'm a little worried. Puppy's C.O.I. will be about 7.5.


My first litter was nearly a decade a go. It was plagued with heartbreaking health issues out of two parents who tested clear for everything there were tests for back then. Three of the pups went into homes where they were (are still, in one case) working as service dogs. (Yes, I know.. that's a high number, doesn't usually happen.. the pups from that litter were... incredible temperaments.. and that's not just kennel blindness speaking!) One of the pups went to a lady in her late 70's. I took a whole lot of crap from people who knew about it... why on earth would I put a pup in ahome with someone of that age (ageism is a live and well folks!!!) "she'll die!" Well, I figure that everyone is going to die sooner or later, so I just told everyone that I thought that rather than dying, she would live because she had something to live for. (sounds OT, it's not.. I'm getting there.. long winded!)

A couple years after the litter was born, their mom, Vic had her first epileptic seizure and as time passed, three in the litter also ended up having seizures. A couple years after that, Vic was diagnosed with Addison's disease. Back then there was a theory that the mode of inheritance was a simple recessive with environmental triggers as to date of onset/severity.. So.. basic Mendelian genetics.. each of the pups would be.. a carrier. I made all of the obligatory phone calls (just as I had with the seizures) and told my puppy owners the symptoms of AD. Then.. we found that the sire of the litter had produced an AD affected offspring in another litter with a different bitch. Guess what.. that meant I had unknowingly bred an AD affected to an AD carrier.. each pup now had a 50% chance of being affected with AD. Again, I made the phone calls, warning the owners of AD symptoms. The 70+ year old lady was so worried, she worried constantly. Her poor girl was in to the vet constantly. When one vet couldn't find anything wrong with her, she went to a second and at one point, I think three vets were involved in her care. Someone, despite good intentions, I had done a horrible thing. *I had stolen my puppy owners peace of mind.* That poor woman worried.. until the day she died. Her pup never did become AD affected. For those of you on Poodle Support Group (as well as a couple of other groups) you will be well acquainted with my pup owner/pup Bitlit and Magic. Magic was an incredible service dog and the two seemed the perfect match for each other. I just wish that I could have given them back that peace of mind. 

So.. guess what? You own a poodle. While some lines are higher in risks than others, there are a number of conditions that the breed as a whole is at risk for. Learn the symptoms of those things so that you can be prepared if anything ever does go wrong, provide an atmosphere of health (healthy food, exercise, love, etc), maintain contacts such as this one so that if you have questions you can ask. No one can predict what the health future holds in store for our poodles.. if we could, we probably could have figured out some answers to this stuff. 

There are many, many healthy poodles of high Wycliffe out there.. in fact.. based on statistics, I think I can safely estimate that the majority of healthy poodles do have high Wycliffe! (Ok.. so the majority of unhealthy poodles do to <VBG>, the majority of standard poodles, healthy or unhealthy do have high Wycliffe.)


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

outwest said:


> I have access to Wycliffe light black standards to breed mine to, but the COI would be just over 10%. Breeder has suggested paying for the haplotype DNA tests to see where everything stands before a decision is made. I understand they are around $150 since there is no funding right now.
> 
> Hopeful!-----Possibility that one of the University's here in the USA is going to start providing the testing and at significantly lower cost than Genoskoper. Still being discussed right now.. my fingers are crossed!
> 
> It is easier to go for a dog with typical Wycliffe in the 50% range in a black, but would give a low COI (I have access to an AKC CH that matches that). The resulting pups would be around 40% Wycliffen (mine is 28%). It doesn't seem, unless going for a nonblack dog, that a person could have both. We have a black dog on this forum in the low 40% range, which is commendable. I could conceivably get pups in the 35% range who were black that way, but that dog is really far away. That one could also give a COI under 3% in the puppies!
> 
> How important is it to do this? I am not sure.
> Would it make any difference to go to all the effort? I am not sure.
> Would be easier to choose one near me? Yes, for sure.
> 
> @Outwest-- There is a new Yahoo Group, called Standard Poodle Project I would encourage you to join.. or at least review messages periodically, they are open to the public.
> 
> There are so many factors to consider when choosing and I only have one dog. There is the conformation to consider. There is the COI. There is the health in the lines. There is the color backgrounds and dogs color. There is the temperments. There is the working ability. There is the size. Now there is the Wycliffe!
> 
> If I was a real breeder with many choices it might be different,
> 
> Confused by this. I guess I think of everyone who breeds as a "real breeder", however different breeders are on different levels of education, each having individual goals which may set them apart from others, however for most breeder's I am acquainted with the choices are always exquisitely limited. Most often limited by the desired traits of the potential pups, characteristics of the parents, location, etc. Most breeder's make the best choices they can with the limitations they have. but since I am not, I want to make the best choice I can for the one I do have.I guess I need to decide what is most important to me first.


*****


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Out of curiosity and just for fun last week, I went through the "best of the best" for the standards at PCA: (best of show,best of opposite sex.. all the bests.... 2012 National Results: Standard

and looked them up on PHR. It was no surprise to find that all but two had Wycliffe Influences greater than 50% (those two were in the high 40's). Which means that the best of the best at PCA this year.. were all so closely related and inbred as to be.. half siblings. Really.

Scary folks, really, really scary.


----------



## Paragon

Yaddaluvpoodles,

Thanks for doing the math for me... I was going to get to that one...Sad.... Conformity is not necessarily a good thing in genetics... Great for multi-nationals, but not necessarily for the public! This is the Farm girl in me... I have seen too much all ready!

I do hope the funding comes through. I have heard of some funding left for pedigrees of interest. I have to get to some calls after the shows.

I will have to look into the new yahoo group, it may be useful.

My dogs do not put their heads right to the ground like a hound. They do air scent, just like our Dales. They will lift the head to find the direction of scent. The head is lowered from the upright position while moving , like a horse at a gallop. This is their mode of following trails. If they find something interesting, they may smell the ground at a burrow, otherwise they can cover ground quickly, but methodically. A dog cannot not correctly move to cover ground with their head too high (Simple physics here). 

Correct conformation, and not extremes, is what you need for working dogs. Intelligence, and willingness to please helps too. We need to be cognisant of this at all times.

Paragon


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Well said.

A better link to the Yahoo Group (recommended read for all breeder's here):

StandardPoodleProject : Standard Poodle Project

Also, can't remember if I have posted about this, but there were very recent updates to the website, the Standard Poodle Project.. with more to come very soon.

I am not associated with these (member of the Yahoo group), but find them interesting so follow it closely.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

I too am confused by Outwest's statement. What exactly is a "real breeder" versus a "not real breeder"??? :hmmmm2:


----------



## Countryboy

It didn't confuse me at all... 

O/W doesn't consider herself a breeder. 'Cept she has one dog that she would like to mate. That's not a breeder, that's a pet owner who's looking for the best for her dog . . . and the breed.


----------



## annadee

Wow, I had no idea about this. Really interesting read!! Thanks for the info.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Countryboy said:


> It didn't confuse me at all...
> 
> O/W doesn't consider herself a breeder. 'Cept she has one dog that she would like to mate. That's not a breeder, that's a pet owner who's looking for the best for her dog . . . and the breed.


So what would that make her? A breeder?? :angel:


You gotta take ownership of what you are...

breed·er
[bree-der] 
noun
1.
an animal, plant, or person that produces offspring or reproduces. 

And if you don't want to be considered a breeder. Then don't breed.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

CharismaticMillie said:


> So what would that make her? A breeder?? :angel:
> 
> 
> You gotta take ownership of what you are...
> 
> breed·er
> [bree-der]
> noun
> 1.
> an animal, plant, or person that produces offspring or reproduces.
> 
> And if you don't want to be considered a breeder. Then don't breed.



That was a bit harsh <VBG> sometimes it takes a while to change identities. I just assume that Outwest will have a litter someday, so I accept her fully as a breeder.. didn't consider that she may not consider herself that. Same with Keith as well as some others who have never actually had a litter. I remember not long after my first litter was born, a breeder friend made a comment to me "well you're a breeder now!".. and it left me stunned. I was no longer just a poodle owner. Somehow that transition snuck up on me. It's tough changing our self concepts some times.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> That was a bit harsh <VBG> sometimes it takes a while to change identities. I just assume that Outwest will have a litter someday, so I accept her fully as a breeder.. didn't consider that she may not consider herself that. Same with Keith as well as some others who have never actually had a litter. I remember not long after my first litter was born, a breeder friend made a comment to me "well you're a breeder now!".. and it left me stunned. I was no longer just a poodle owner. Somehow that transition snuck up on me. It's tough changing our self concepts some times.


Not meant to be overly harsh at all. I just mean...Outwest has got plenty of time to change her self concept should she decide to breed a litter. Once you breed a litter....you're a breeder! Just putting things in perspective...makes me a little nervous to hear someone saying they want to breed their dog but that they aren't a "real breeder". I don't think breeding a litter should be taken lightly...and I think that an understanding that once you breed a litter you are, in fact, a breeder is important....

Breeding is something to be proud of if you are doing it right. Embrace it. Improve the breed. Shout it from the rooftops. Are you ready to be a breeder if you don't even consider yourself a breeder??

A first time breeder has every responsibility that a long time breeder has. And with less experience and wisdom. :amen:


----------



## outwest

Are you breeders CM and Keith? After all, you both plan to eventually have puppies. I guess you are both breeders, too. I used to be a breeder a long while ago. Until I actually have a litter, I'm not a breeder, I'm a talker. 

But that wasn't the point and you both know it. Breeders who have a number of dogs they are working with can experiment a little with pairings because you never know what will carry down to the next generation. I only plan, at this point, to breed my girl once and if everything goes well (sometimes things don't go well) I will keep a puppy. Just because I only want to do it once doesn't mean I don't want to do it right. I suppose I will be a BYB.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Are you breeders CM and Keith? After all, you both plan to eventually have puppies. I guess you are both breeders, too. I used to be a breeder a long while ago. Until I actually have a litter, I'm not a breeder, I'm a talker.
> 
> But that wasn't the point and you both know it. Breeders who have a number of dogs they are working with can experiment a little with pairings because you never know what will carry down to the next generation. I only plan, at this point, to breed my girl once and if everything goes well (sometimes things don't go well) I will keep a puppy. Just because I only want to do it once doesn't mean I don't want to do it right. I suppose I will be a BYB.


I am not a breeder, Outwest, but if I ever purchase a bitch and breed her, I will be a breeder. A 100% REAL breeder. Even if I only have one litter. And doubtful I'd ever have more than one litter. Heck, H.O.A. restrictions prevent me from ever owning more than three dogs. Doesn't leave much room for breeding, does it?

Doubtful, also, I'll be breeding any bitches any time soon, either, seeing as I've got a new marriage, new house, kids (hopefully) in the future, and embarking on a career to manage first.  Besides the point really, though. The point was that, yes, if I ever breed even once, I am a breeder. A real one.

For now, I'll remain a hopeful stud dog owner.  And let the breeders do all the work...


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

zyrcona said:


> Not enough is known yet, but probably it does not make a lot of difference at the present time with regards to your puppy's health. *If you buy your puppy from any responsible breeder who health tests, it won't get any of the tested genetic diseases.* .


Whoa I must be reading this wrong. Every breeding is a gamble!

I hope every breeder or buyer of poodles understand that health testing the parents of a litter *does not guarantee* you will not produce or sell a puppy that may still develop diseases such as Addisons, thryoid disease, SA, eye disorders etc. 

The only guarantees are for DNA tests and even than I do not believe 100% as some DNA tests have continued to evolve with time.

Buying and/or breeding health tested dogs *increases the odds* of *healthy puppies* but *mother nature does not do guarantees*!


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Sorry Everyone!
I was being obtuse, I get distracted sometimes (today thinking about the bear who just ripped out the rear window on my 4wd and shredded the seat of the pickup.. among other things.. because some obtuse idiot left dog food in the bed of the pickup...sigh... yes, I knew better.. and yes.. I did it anyway...) and I just missed the whole intention of the comment.

I'm VERY impressed with all of the new breeder's-to-be who are taking the time to learn before plunging in.


----------



## zyrcona

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> The only guarantees are for DNA tests


But I thought that was what I wrote. :-/

*it won't get any of the tested genetic diseases. The non-testable diseases at the moment are a small risk in any poodle*

The genes that cause vWD, NE, and DM have been mapped. If at least one of the parents is tested clear and not a carrier, none of the puppies will be affected.

With the other diseases (bloat, Addison's, SA, epilepsy etc.) the cause of these is not known. It is not possible to predict where they will occur from the current level of knowledge.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

zyrcona said:


> *it won't get any of the tested genetic diseases. The non-testable diseases at the moment are a small risk in any poodle*
> .


Well, I would have to disagree with the word "small", but it may simply be a case of semantics as I suspect you were acknowledging that there is risk. The risks are there... and so prevalent it's scary. I frequently estimate that somewhere between 1/10 and 1/4 of health issues get reported to PHR. Can you imagine what those pedigrees would look like if all of the health issues were being reported?

There is a reason that I post like this.. and it comes from the heartbreak of having dealt with a variety of heart issues.

On a sad note, I had email exchanges til late in the night last night with the owner of a Vic pup (now 11 years old).. who is also a working service dog. He collapsed in a seizure yesterday and has had a very elevated heart rate since. The owner NEEDS her boy, depends on him ever hour of every day. They have certainly considered bringing in a younger poodle, however the time just wasn't right. I suspect.. she's about to end up with out a service dog. New seizures in an 11 year old dog who has previously been seizure free.. is not a good thing. Because of the elevated heartrate, well..even though labs aren't back yet from the vet, we can pretty well eliminate Addison's. Fingers crossed it was a one time incident, but.. 11 years old is still too young to be having health issues.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

outwest said:


> I suppose I will be a BYB.


Almost every breeder out there can be defined as a BYB by someone else's definition. There are so many definitions that abound.

We humans tend to like things cut and dried, very simple.. which amazes me as we each have brains! 

There was a thread started recently comparing the traits of "backyard breeders" with those of "responsible breeders". What people don't stop to consider are 1) those are the authors defintions and 2) what the implications of each of those traits may be.

Hmmm... just for fun.. shall we take a more critical look at that comparison? I'll start a new thread..


----------

