Make your own free website on Tripod.com

siteheader.gif

How to Build a Better Dog
Home
How to Build a Better Dog
News
The Pit Bull Problem
History
Breedings
Photo Gallery
Puppies Spring 2007
Available
Princess x Junior Offspring
Princess' Page

Some interesting articles on breeding dogs.


 

 


 

FOUNDER'S EFFECT
by
Carmen L. Battaliga
 


 

When a popular sire appears in so many pedigrees that it causes the gene pool of a breed to drift in the direction of that sire, the gene pool loses genetic diversity and the phenomena is called the "Founders Effect". The underlying fear from this phenomenon is that one dog will have an extraordinary effect on his breed through his genetic influence. This includes not only his qualities but whatever detrimental recessives he carriers. The excessive use of inbreeding and line breeding on such a dog will further reduce genetic diversity. Eggleston (2000) reported on the range of genetic diversity among the AKC breeds. She constructed a continuum for all of the breeds. At one extreme she placed the Bull Terriers which had the least amount of genetic diversity. This means that they tend to be line or inbred. At the other extreme were the Jack Russell Terriers who she found to have the most amount of genetic diversity. This means their pedigrees were for the most part the result of outcross breedings. This meant that the ancestors tended to be unrelated to each other.

In the world of purebred registered dogs, it can easily be demonstrated that the most popular dogs are those who are more likely to have influence over future generations. At the same time these same animals can also be shown to have contributed a disproportionately higher number of defective genes into the gene pool of their breed. In the case of a "Founder", who is usually a popular stud dog, there are four reasons to explain why such a dog will have produced a higher number of defective traits then other stud dogs who are not well known and who are used less often.

A prominent stud dog including a "Founder" is usually well known and popular. This is because the breeders choose to use them based on what they produce and their winning offspring that have been observed by many exhibitors and breeders. If several poor quality pups are produced, gossip about them usually spreads quickly which causes others to avoid using them. Hence, their status is reduced to a lower popularity.

It can also be shown that there are other sires that will have produced the same defects. Less will be known about these sires because they will be used less often and they will have fewer litters and offspring to be seen. These less popular studs may have produced the same number of defective traits and health problems, but the gossip about them is controlled and minimized because fewer breeders are involved and there are less offspring to be seen. It must be remembered that in order for a genetic disease or a recessive trait to exist in a breed there must be three kinds of dogs. Those that are affected, the carriers, and the normals. Suffice it to say that popular sires and those called the “Founder”, are animals that are widely used. These dogs will have a better chance to come in contact with carrier bitches, which is why they will have more opportunities to produce genetic problems than the other stud dogs that are only bred a few times.

When a pedigree begins to show an over emphasis on one individual, the traits of that individual are generally well known. It makes no sense to exclude such a dog, a "Founder" or one of his close relatives without good reason. It must be remembered that each time a breeding occurs, one half of the genes of the sire and one half of the genes of the dam are carried forward to their new pups. By the third generation, only 25% of the grand parent's genes are carried forwarded. The impact of one dog even if he were the "Founder" would have been minimized.



 

TABLE 1. RELATIONSHIP OF ANCESTORS

 

Relationship Common Ancestor Coefficient of Inbreeding
Father/daughter 1/2 on sire .25
Mother/son 1/2 on dam .25
Brother/sister 2/2 grandsire 2/22 grand dam .25
Paternal half sibs 2/2 on grandsire 12.5
Maternal half sibs 2/2 on grand dam 12.5
First cousins 3/3 grandsire 3/3 grand dam
4/4 on ancestor
6.25
.78


When a stud dog that is closely related to the “Founder”, is bred to an unrelated bitch only 50% of his genes will appear in their pups. Thus, the effect of the "Founder" is reduced and will continue to be reduced in each subsequent generation simply by using an outcross. These breedings will dissipate rather then concentrate the genes needed to retain and strengthen traits. The continued use of an outcross is equivalent to throwing genes away. A better strategy is to analyze each pedigree that includes the "Founder" or one of his other close relatives to see what traits and risks are involved.

In every breeding there will be some degree of risk. The key is to minimize the potential for problems. For example, if the "Founder" was a quality dog known to produce desired traits it would make no sense to eliminate him or a pedigree with him in it just because he had produced an undesirable trait. If the “Founder” was a popular dog what he produced is a reflection of the pedigrees bred to him. Because he was popular explains why he has produced some or all of the undesirable traits known to his breed. A certain percentage of these bitches will have been carriers. Avoiding these popular dogs because of a known fault provides a false sense of security based on undefined “fears”. It makes more sense to make decisions about their use after their pedigree has been analyzed for breadth and depth of the traits desired along with what they have produced.

Planned breedings are the best way to avoid problems. A breeder's objective is to find the best stud dog for each bitch. Experienced breeders know there are always risks. It is the novice who continues too avoid using the popular sires because they have produced faults. Their preference is to use unknown and untested dogs that have little or no track record. Experienced breeders know to avoid using these untested sires because they represent test breedings most of which are nothing more than the breeding of "likes to likes", “winners to winners” etc. These are not effective ways to retain traits. A series of planned breedings using a variety of relatives (close and distant) has been shown to be a superior method.
 

 

Reference:
Battaglia, C. L. - Breeding Better Dogs, BEI Publications, Atlanta, GA 1986
Battaglia, C. L. - Genetics - How to Breed Better Dogs, T.F.H., Neptune, NJ, 1978
Bell, Jerold S. "Choosing Wisely", AKC Gazette, August 2000, Vol. 117, Number 8, p-51.
Bell, Jerold S. "Choosing Wisely", AKC Gazette, August 2000, Vol. 117, Number 8, p-51.
Bell, Jerold, S. "Developing Healthy Breeding programs", Canine Health Conformance, AKC Canine Health Foundation, Oct. 15-17,1999. St. Louis MO.
Eggleston, Marsha, "Genetic Diversity", Report given the AKC DNA Committee, 2002, New York, New York.
Foley, C.W; Lasley, J.F. and Osweiler, G.D., “Abnormalities of Companion animals: Analysis of Heritabliliy” , Iowa University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1979
Hutchinson, Robert, "Breeders Symposium", Sponsored by IAMS Company, Hotel Pennsylvania, NY, NY February 10, 2001.
Hutt, Fred, Genetics for Dog Breeders, WH. Freeman Co., San Francisco, CA, 1979
Willis, Malcolm, Genetics of the Dog, Howell Book House, New York, New York, 1989
Willis, Malcomb, "Breeding Dogs" Canine Health Conference, AKC Canine health Conference, Oct. 15-17, 1999. St. Louis, MO.
Willis, Malcomb, "The road ahead", AKC Gazette, August 2000, Vol. 117, number 8, p-47.

 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Carmen L Battaglia holds a Ph.D. and Masters Degree from Florida State University. As an AKC judge, researcher and writer, he has been a leader in promotion of breeding better dogs and has written many articles and several books.Dr. Battaglia is also a popular TV and radio talk show speaker. His seminars on breeding dogs, selecting sires and choosing puppies have been well received by the breed clubs all over the country.

__._,_.___


 

 


 

"BRACKETT'S FORMULA"
by
Carmen L. Battaglia
 


 

By the early 1950's”, Lloyd C. Brackett had become a legend in his own time. In part because of the quality of the dogs he produced and in part because of his candor when addressing problems related to the breeding of canines. He had much to say about the selection of sires, how to correct problems and how to make improvements. Brackett was considered one of the fathers of the German Shepherd breed in the United States. At the time of his death he was the oldest living continuos fancier of the breed (since 1912). His kennel was called Long Worth and he is remembered throughout the dog world for his theories about breeding methods. Brackett was well read and a quick learner. Through his writings he shed light on the confusion and misunderstandings associated with line and inbreeding. One of his greatest achievements was to have produced over 90 champions in twelve years.

All of his methods and ideas were not new. For example, he combined the study of pedigrees with the results they produced. After years of watching what combinations produced the better offspring he refined his ideas about how to select breeding partners. Out of these experiences came a formula that later he would make him famous. The formula was not new but his ideas about how to use it attracted attention. Breeders of domestic animals had used it for years. It relied on the principles of line and inbreeding. But it was Brackett and his approach to planned breedings that made it well known. Brackett believed in pedigree analysis, litter evaluation, the use of line and inbreeding and a record system that was easy to use. Those ideas are what set him apart from others who did little more than practice the art of breeding. While Brackett is best known for his emphasis on the use of line breeding he was not afraid to inbreed if the situation dictated it. Brackett believed that it made no sense to go forward with breeding before the needed information about the sire and dam had been collected. He placed great emphasis on health, temperament and breed characteristics. His planned breedings were based on the results that occurred in his pups. In other words, he learned from his mistakes.

Brackett understood the value of using quality dogs that were related to each other. This approach allowed him to concentrate the genes needed to produce desired traits. His techniques for reducing error and improving quality focused on the careful selection of breeding partners. They were central to maintaining and improving specific traits while at the same time reducing disease and other unwanted problems. Brackett became famous for breeding quality dogs with consistent type. His strategy relied on a series of breedings using relatives. Often times he was quoted as saying, "never outcross when things seem to be going well, do it only as an experiment or when some fault or faults cannot be eliminated". He was careful to study each stud dog and their offspring, eliminating those who did not measure up and those who produced faults. Close inspection of his pedigrees show that many of his sires were themselves inbred or line bred and most were usually related in some way to the bitches in his breeding program. Brackett's success helped to make line breeding popular. He demonstrated how to make improvements by retaining a common pool of genes through the use of related dogs. He believed that out-crossing was the least desirable method because it introduced new genes into his pedigrees, which in turn produced differences and genetic variations among the offspring.

It has been well documented that two full-brothers usually do not have the same genetic potential even though they both come from the same two parents. One sibling might inherit one set of genes from his father and the other might get a different set from an uncle through his mother. While each pup always receives half of its genes from the sire and half from the dam it does not mean that they each will get the same set of genes. This explains why littermates do not always look alike or have the same capacity to produce quality. Brackett kept detailed records on the differences between siblings. He was well read on this subject and occasionally mentioned the works of Aristotle and Mendel in his articles. In practice they all shared similar beliefs.

Brackett was usually quick to comment on what he observed and how things could be improved. In a statement taken from one of his articles, he said, “whenever two or three dog fanciers get together there is almost sure to be talk about linebreeding. The term may be used without anyone of them having a real understanding of what it means. There seems to be much confusion even in the minds of experienced dog breeders about the actual meaning of the terms and how to differentiate between them”. He referred to this dilemma in several articles in a variety of scenarios. He once raised several questions when he heard two breeders discussing a line breeding. He referred to the breeder who recommended it with the statement, “linebred to what? He knew that the answer to the question would be a measure of what the breeder actually knew about the term. It was his way of evaluating the wisdom of others. He knew that line breeding can mean many things. For example, a dog can be line bred on its sire's side of the pedigree or on its dam's side. Those who use the term usually understand it to mean only that the dogs are related to each other.

Brackett was concerned about the future of breeding better dogs and the lack of breeder education programs. He believed that “the majority of dog breeders formulate no breeding plan and seldom if ever, when making a mating consider how or what they will mate any of the resultant progeny.”

The formula Brackett preferred concentrated genes in a pedigree. He did this by placing emphasis on the sire of the sire. In Figure 1, notice that the same dog appears on the sire and the dam's side of the pedigree. Brackett liked to use one important dog and have it appear twice in a three-generation pedigree. The basic formula he preferred can be stated as follows, "Let the sire of the sire become the grand sire on the dam's side". Said another way, “ let the father's father become the mothers grandfather”.

FIGURE 1        PEDIGREE OF A BRACKETT STUD DOG

 


 

 

The sire that is circled appears on both sides of the pedigree. Because it is the same dog it must be an outstanding dog free of disease because his genes are being preserved on both sides of the pedigree and carried forward to the new stud dog.


Brackett knew that Mendel was able to consistently predict the traits in his offspring especially when he knew what characteristics were carried in the pedigrees of the parents. They both knew that when two individuals with known ancestry are bred there is more certainty about what they are likely to produce then when there is missing information about them. Mendel demonstrated these principles in the 1860's. Brackett used these ideas because he knew that the unexpected is more likely to occur when there are gaps in information about the ancestors and their littermates. While heredity has the tendency to produce resemblance' s, the science of genetics teaches us to search beneath the superficial resemblances of the phenotypes for the important clues in the genotypes. Thus, when an individual is said to be dominant for a trait, it should be taken to mean that a large percentage of their offspring were observed to have a certain trait. It does not mean that all of their offspring will have that trait. Figure 2 illustrates how Brackett would approach breeding a hypotical bitch called "A". The Stick Dog Color Chart pedigree described in Battaglia's book, Breeding Better Dogs is used to illustrate Brackett's approach. The stick dog pedigree illustrates how the strengths, weaknesses and trends in a pedigree can be recorded and then easily coded. Notice that each stick figure is drawn with seven structural parts. Using the breed standard each of the seven structural parts are color coded to show there quality or lack thereof. The color-codes for quality:

 

COLOR RANK QUALITY
Blue First Place Ideal based on the standard
Black Second Place Less than ideal based on the standard
Red Third Place Faulty based on the standard
Gray Fourth Place Faulty based on the standard


 

Figure 2 illustrates how Brackett would begin collecting information about “A”. The notes that were collected about “A” indicate there are warning signals about several traits. Circles around a trait or ancestor are used to show what information is missing.

A breeder's notes might read:
“Her parents were of good quality, one of her four brothers was dysplastic, another a monoricid. Two others had missing premolars, one sister was white. All six of her littermates were of average quality”.

It must be remembered that the value of a bitch must also be determined by what she has produced. The breeder's notes about her pups might read:
“Her first breeding was to a quality dog with an open pedigree. All four of her pups were of poor quality, one had a disqualifying color; two others had an undershot jaw, one was dysplastic. Her second breeding was a line breeding to another quality dog. This dog was related to her sire. Two of eight pups died of heart disease, one was diagnosed with clinical hip dysplasia, and two others had missing pre molars“. The summary notes about bitch “A” are useful because they present an overview of the bitches qualities.

FIGURE 2        STICK DOG PEDIGREE
 

 


 

Note 1. First breeding, N=4, to a sire with an open pedigree. Pups produced: 1 with a white coat, 2 with undershot jaws, 1 dysplastic, and 4 of poor quality
Note 2. Second breeding, N=5, A line breeding. The pups: 2 of 8 died of heart problems, 2 had missing pre molars, and 1 was dysplastic, all of average quality
Note 3. Littermates of "A" (N=6): One monorchid, 2 had missing premolars, one sister was white. All average in quality
Note 4. The sire and dam of "A" - Both were of good quality but her dam only produced average offspring when bred to three different quality sires. Little is known about her sire.
 

Brackett and Mendel would have kept similar notes about the breeding partners of “A” and her offspring. After two breedings that produced unsuitable conformation, health problems and a disqualifying color (white), neither Brackett or Mendel would have bred her a third time even if a top-producing stud were available. Experience suggests that she should not be bred. However, if producing an occasional pup of some quality were the goal, this is still a risky bitch because her pedigree has the potential to produce unhealthy and mediocre pups, many of which are likely to be carriers. Brackett was concerned about these bitches because he knew that most buyers want to know that their puppy is genetically healthy and that it will not become aggressive or so nervous that it will spook at anything unusual. One of the best reasons for not using “A” is that most of her pups are likely to become someone's house companion and require a lifetime of costly veterinary care.

Formula Variations
Breeders quickly learned that variations could be made in Brackett's preferred formula based on the strengths and weaknesses of the bitch. While they were not as productive as the preferred formula they did work to concentrate the genes needed. The variations of the formula can be stated as follows: Let the sire of the sire be the grandsire of the dam on the sire's side instead of on the dam's side. Another variation let the sire be the result of either a full or half brother and sister mating and thus inbred. In each case selecting a mate for a faulty bitch such as “A” whose wide-open pedigree offers no strength would not be a good use of these formulas.

The selection of breeding partners must always focus on correcting weaknesses in pedigrees and making improvements. To do other wise is a waste of time.

 

References:
Battaglia, C. L. - Breeding Better Dogs, BEI Publications, Atlanta, GA 1986
Bell, Jerold S. "Choosing Wisely", AKC Gazette, August 2000, Vol. 117, Number 8, p-51.
Bell, Jerold, S. "Developing Healthy Breeding programs", Canine Health Conformance, AKC Canine Health Foundation, Oct. 15-17,1999. St. Louis MO.
Brackett, Lloyd, C. "Planned Breeding," Dog World Magazine, Chicago IL, 1961. Hedhammer,Willis, Malcomb, "Breeding Dogs" Canine Health Conference, AKC Canine health Conference, Oct. 15-17, 1999. St. Louis, MO.


 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Carmen L Battaglia holds a Ph.D. and Masters Degree from Florida State University. As an AKC judge, researcher and writer, he has been a leader in promotion of breeding better dogs and has written many articles and several books.Dr. Battaglia is also a popular TV and radio talk show speaker. His seminars on breeding dogs, selecting sires and choosing puppies have been well received by the breed clubs all over the country.

__._,_.___


 

 


 

"Mendel's Puzzle"

Desired traits can be produced by direction.
by
Dr. Carmen L. Battaglia


In one way or another technology has had a profound effect on our history. It has also contributed to our material progress and effected the evolution of our social attitudes and many of our public policies. Folklore has also played an important role by affecting how we think and what we believe. Combined, technology and folklore have both had a profound influence on the way we live and the breeding of purebred dogs. Over the past half-century there have been an endless number of changes and technological breakthroughs that have affected us. Many of these changes began when the science of genetics began to redefine what was important. History suggests that most of these changes occurred after World War II when human health problems such as polio and smallpox were still considered life-threatening diseases. As these new technologies began to address the old problems, they also began to improve the quality of our lives and what we considered important. Emphasis shifted from treatment protocols to the prevention of viral and parasitic diseases. By the end of the 1960's these new technologies had eradicated most of the diseases with new immunizations. Soon to follow would be the mechanisms necessary to control the other dreaded childhood diseases and some of the animal diseases that had persisted during the past several centuries.
While advancements to improve human life moved with remarkable speed, the same pace did not take place in the dog world. The scientific community ignored the faults of conformation and many of the defects common to most breeds because they were not considered worthy research projects. In retrospect, most of the accomplishments can be attributed to one monk who in the 1850's thought he had uncovered the answer to heredity.

 


 

MENDEL

Today, we know that the basis for this science began in the early 1790”s when a British farmer, T.A. Knight crossed a garden pea that had purple flowers with one that had only white flowers. Everyone expected that the two flower colors would blend and produce lavender flowers. To everyone's amazement they produced only purple flowers. Knight's experiment puzzled everyone for years. Then came the Austrian monk named Gregor Johann Mendel who showed a keen interest in science. In 1843, he entered the Augustinian Monastery in Old Brno where he lived as an ordained priest. In 1851, he became a member of the Natural Science Society. Membership in the society provided him the opportunity to lecture about his experiments and the ideas he was developing. His wonderful discovery of the principles of heredity draws attention to the fact that one individual working with little outside help could carry out many historic experiments. Because his ideas were new and not well understood they were not accepted. His experiments (1856-1864) on the genetics of inheritance involved the principles of dominant and recessive traits. Mendel's famous lecture in 1865 was not published until 1866. His experiments led him to propose a new way to think about inheritance and how traits are passed down from one generation to the next. For example, he suggested that each parent equally contributes to the makeup of their offspring based on their own inheritance. It was this idea that departed from the popular thinking of the 1800's. Mendel enlightened the world about many things, which oftentimes are overlooked by breeders. One of his greatest discoveries was to prove that a desired trait can be produced by direction instead of by chance.
 

The Puzzle

What made Mendel's approach so significant can be found in the strength of his experimental design and his interest in qualitative analysis. He used both to produce his postulates about inheritance. What Mendel found ultimately explained Knights puzzle. Until his experiments were published there was no understanding of dominant and recessive traits and why they could appear and then disappear. For example, Mendel found that when tall plants were bred to short plants, only tall plants were produced. After years of experiments using mathematics to calculate the frequency with which traits would appear he concluded that tallness was dominant over shortness. He also furthered the notion that there was something that could produce a non-dominant trait, which could linger in the background. Later the world would call it a recessive gene. His efforts resulted in the discovery that each trait is produced by one or more particles (“factors”) and that each offspring receives its genetic instructions for their own make-up directly from the particles of their parents. Mendel died on June 1, 1884 not knowing the significance of his discoveries. After his death, his writings, experiments and materials were stored in the school's library where they remained virtually unnoticed. His research, which was decades ahead of its time, would be ignored until they were duplicated and then cited by Carl Correns, Hugo de Vries and Eric von Tschermak in 1900. It is interesting that researchers in Germany and Holland would independently find and use Mendel's experiments to launch their own studies. What is more interesting is that they would discover that their results were very much like those Mendel had discovered forty years earlier.
Today, we know that what Mendel called the “factors” or “particles" of inheritance were actually the genes. He did not know that they were the structures contained within the chromosomes. That would come later. What he proved was that genes travel in pairs and that they seemed to be packaged in one of two distinct types or alleles. To better understand this idea and for the sake of convenience letters are used to represent the alleles. The lower case letters (b, w, l) represent the recessive alleles. The dominant alleles are represented by upper case letters (B, W, and L).
Mendel learned that if both of the alleles are different, they are said to be heterozygous (Ww) for the trait. If they are both the same, they are called homogenous (ww). It was this discovery that led Mendel to his "First Law" of genetics, which works for all animals. What is more interesting is that he developed his ideas using only the garden pea plants. Mendel proved that genes do not blend together, instead they retain their individual character even when a recessive gene is present and masked by a dominant gene. It took from 1790 to 1866 before the solution to this puzzle was found. Today, we know that the breeders who do not understand Mendel's Law of Genetics will continue to think about the occurrence of defects and recessives traits using folklore rather then science.
Figure 1 represents Mendel's First Law, which involves dominant and recessive traits. Imagine that you have bred two black dogs. One is black because it carries two dominant genes for black (BB). The other is black because it carries one dominant gene for black and one recessive gene (Bb) for the recessive color liver, which sometimes is called chocolate.

 

Figure 1 Two-Black dogs that are carriers

 

 

B

b

B

BB

Bb

b

Bb

bb


Notice that breeding two carriers does not improve a breeding program because the number of carriers is increased. Notice in Figure 2, what happens when a carrier (Bb) is bred to a dog that is dominant (BB) for its color. Carrier to a non-carrier breedings produce 50% carriers and 50% dominant for their color.

 


 

Figure 2 Carrier X Dominant

 

 

B

b

B

BB

Bb

B

BB

Bb


 

In addition to color, breeders can also apply Mendel's Law to other traits such as coat length. In this regard, the reader should note that breed standards use different words to mean similar things. For example, the word for a normal coat in one standard is sometimes called short or smooth coat in another standard. The short or smooth coat is dominant over the recessive coat, which might be called long, fluffy, feather or powder puff. Since Mendel's first law applies to many traits, let's take as our next example coat length since it can easily be seen and appreciated. In Figure 3, a long coat (ll) is bred to a short coat (Ll) that is a carrier for the recessive long coat. Notice that the recessive gene (l) is retained in every puppy.


 

Figure 3. Long Coat X Normal Coat

 

L

I

I

LI

II

I

LI

II


 

Now notice in Figure 4 what happens when two carriers for the recessive coat are bred.
 

Figure 4. Normal Coat (carrier) X Normal Coat (carrier)

 

L

I

L

LL

LI

I

LI

II


 The breeding of two carriers will produce carriers in 75% of the offspring. This same principle was illustrated in Figure 1 for color.
The problem for most breeders is that they do not know if their dogs are carriers for recessive traits and many times, the traits in the puppies can be confusing if they do not think about Mendel's First Law of Genetics. For example, in Figure 4, suppose that only two pups were born instead of four, they could both have been two short coats (normal or smooth) or depending on the breed, they might both have long, shaggy, feathered or powder puff coats. However, when just one pup occurs with a long coat or a recessive color the breeder will know that both parents were carriers. The ratios seen in these figures are the mathematical frequencies a breeder should expect if the breedings were repeated several times. Breeders can learn about their pedigrees and the carriers by keeping a record of what they produce. Breeders will sometimes over look the obvious unless they remember that a recessive trait can remain in the background for several generations. A quick glance at the AKC breed standards show that many breeds have coat and pigment faults. To avoid them, a breeder must develop a record system that captures the traits produced in each generation. Mendel's experiments demonstrated that breeders could solve many of their problems that puzzle others if they keep records. Figures 1 and 4 illustrate how breeders can be led to believe that both parents were not carriers. The point here is this. When just one pup occurs with a long coat or a recessive color the breeder will know that both parents were carriers. Keeping records of each breeding on a Symbol pedigree helps to piece together the puzzle of what traits lay hidden in their pedigrees. For more information about how to use the Symbols pedigree and the technique for breeding the better dogs use the website below or the references listed.

References:
Battaglia, C. L. - Genetics - Breeding Better Dogs, BEI Publications, Atlanta Ga., 1999.
Bell, Jerold, "Developing a Healthy Breeding Program", National Parent Club Canine Health Conference, AKC Canine Health Foundation, St. Louis MO. October 15-17, 1999.
Hutt, Fred, Genetics for Dog Breeders, WH Freeman Co., San Francisco, CA, 1979
Willis, Malcolm, ”Breeding Better Dogs "(Key Note Address) National Parent Club Canine Health Conference, AKC Canine Health Foundation, St. Louis, MO. October 15-17 1999.
Willis, Malcolm, Genetics of the Dog, Howell Book House, New York, New York, 1989
Willis, Malcomb, "Breeding Dogs" Canine Health Conference, AKC Canine health Conference, Oct. 15-17, 1999. St. Louis, MO.
Willis, Malcomb, "The Road Ahead", AKC Gazette, August 2000, Vol. 117, number 8, p-47.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Carmen L Battaglia holds a Ph.D. and Masters Degree from Florida State University. As an AKC judge, researcher and writer, he has been a leader in promoting ways to breed better dogs. The author of many articles and several books he is a popular TV and radio talk show speaker. His seminars on breeding dogs, selecting sires and choosing puppies have been well received by breed clubs all over the country.

Enter supporting content here