AKC Gazette article (June 2009) page 14...has anyone read this? this is in direct opposition to the recommendations given by Hutch.
I find a lot of the evidence anecdotal and experiencial, not scientific. Re: Breeding of a bitch, "Early pregnancies tend to produce more successful progeny than do later breedings.'

I guess I also have a hard time transitioning from the research in thoroughbreds to canines. But all of this is very intriguing to me, and I'd like to hear input from others who have read this article! Lots of interesting information brought up.

I have heard others remark on the offspring being better out of the earlier litters (of a bitch). It is interesting to ponder. I don't get the Gaz. anymore. Is the article on the author's website?

OK I can say that earlier litters tend to be larger. I'm having trouble with "successful progeny." Exactly what does that mean? Is a progeny successful if it achieves a CH, a hunting degree, an obedience degree?????

Not having seen the article, I ask the OP to please clarify.

Yes! that was my question exactly...what they meant by successful?

The author was Patricia Trotter, not sure if she has a website.

She also has a sentence at the end of the article: ..."birth rank studies indicate that earlier progeny seem more programmed for greatness, than later offspring...

I don't get what she means. If anyone finds her website of any of the research used, please share! thanks!
All she quotes is studies on thoroughbreds and her own experience ([age 15).

I haven't read the aritcle yet, but let me add my opinion regarding the Thoroughbred studies. As thoroughbred owners, Gail and I see first hand that when successful race horses leave the track to stand at stud they are supported by their owners and the farm they stand at by getting large books (numbers) of mares to breed to and better quality mares (quality defined by winnings or being from families of winners). If a new stallion isn't successful in terms of producing get that can run and win within their first three crops(years) - (first foals will begin to race as 2 years olds) then they are at risk of being sent to a regional market and standing for a lower breeding fee. Knowing this, it is only logical that a younger stallion or mare is likely to be more successful (when defined by number of runners produced) when they are younger. The same is true for younger mares - the best pedigrees are usually owned by the larger farms which have the "hot" new stallions or connections to them - so the best is bred to the best. Most studies suggest that a mare will produce her best runners within her first five foals - but again you have to remember that this is when she has access to the best stallions. If her progeny doesn't run and win then her value will decrease and she will not be as appealing to the owners of the "in vogue" stallions and will go to lower ranked and presumed less quality (in terms of producing successful runners)stallions. There are always exceptions - last years top money earner for a young stallion, Pure Prize was produced by a mare when she was 19 years old. Some say there are always exceptions - and yes this is true - but I like to believe that the exception was that known bloodlines produced a winner worthy of their heritage.

Patricia C. Trotter is a breeder, a judge and author. I attended and enjoyed one of her seminars last year. If you have any questions just email her and she'll write you back.

Patricia C. Trotter
A Short Biography

Patricia Craige Trotter has been in dogs since she was a child living in Virginia. Her Vin-Melca Norwegian Elkhounds are internationally famous as both show dogs and producers. Their honors include having the Top Sire and Dam in the breed’s history and winning an incredible 10 group firsts at Westminster, all owner-breeder-handled.

When Ch. Vin-Melca’s Vagabond became Top Dog All Breeds in 1970, he was the first amateur handled-dog to achieve that honor. Pat handled her own dogs to Top Ten All Breeds status on 10 different occasions while holding down a full-time teaching job. Amongst the current stars of the breeding program in the new century are Ch. Vin-Melca’s Silver Shadow, the #1 Hound in the U.S. in 2002 with 25 BISs; BIS Ch. Vin-Melca’s Bright Image and BIS Ch. Vin-Melca’s Margretta, #1 in the breed in 2006. The latter two bitches are both dams of young winners.

Pat’s achievements in dogs began early with the Gaines Research Center bestowing Girl Show Dog Fancier of the Year honors on her in 1953. She has been Breeder of the Year and Owner-Handler of the Year a number of times with the Kennel Review Winkie Awards. She is a member of the Quaker Oats Hall of Fame (now Nature’s Recipe) and has won two Fido Awards. -as Dog Woman of the Year and recently as Dog Writer of the Year for 1998.

A graduate of the College and William and Mary with a Masters from the Monterey Institute of International Studies, Pat spent 34 years in the classroom teaching 8^th grade American History in Carmel, California. Following her marriage to Charles Trotter and relocation to Nashville, Tennessee Pat wrote* /Born To Win/*/,/ a book dedicated to the concept of better breeding. Her retirement from teaching also allows her time to present various seminars on breeding to breed clubs across the country. As an AKC Gazette Better Breeding columnist, she won the Dog Writers’ Award for a regular column in an All Breed magazine in 1997.

As a judge Pat focuses on the belief that the true purpose of the dog show is to select breeding stock. She believes that the breeder is judging dogs every time he or she selects a sire and dam or grades a litter of puppies; and the judge is participating in the breeding process every time he or she walks into the ring. By working in concert with each other, breeders and judges can cooperate to contribute to the continued improvement of the breed. The Trotters have recently moved back to the Monterey Peninsula.

Now I'm confused. I assumed the article was by Patricia V. Trotter. I even looked for judges on infodog and only Patricia V. was listed.

Very interesting, Tom and Gail. I wish the article could have explained it the way you did, but you filled in the hole that was missing for me in some of the logic. Thank you for your detailed and well thought out response. I look forward to other input that people will give from a canine perspective too, in reading this article.

Blessings!

So the good genes of the bitches are alive and happy and go to their progeny only when they are young?, and when they are old they only have their bad genes to give???
I have seen great champion dogs coming from the last litter of a mother when she was old.
Sorry for my english, treat me right.

This is one in the same person. The "C" stands for her maiden name "Craige" , V is her middle initial.

I would tend to agree with the younger bitches producing larger and with the numbers more of a chance to have more of a selection -aka -"better" and potentially more successful in the show ring. Research some of your favorite strong bitch lines on OFA or owners websites and you will see that they do produce more "influential" or "finishable" progeny.

I can think of at least three bitches that were bred 3-4 times to the same stud dog and the more famous progeny were usually from the 1st and 2nd litters.

I don't know that I would use the words"in opposition" to Dr. Hutch, just a different perspective.

If I understand what Tom is stating when young you are breeding your best to your best to hope and get more of the best or top horse. For us doesn't that just mean if stud dog owners would just except the very best females to take to their very best studs. And maybe the 2-4 years olds. We could see if that produced the very best in the dog world. Ain't gonna happen. We do except females that we know are not equal to our studs. Surprise, some might be better. But we are just not programed the same way as the horse breeders.

I have to wonder if epigenetics comes to play in all this, and if Pat Trotter is right. As the eggs age, could environmental factors change the epigenetics? I never heard her statement before, but find it interesting in following offspring of an internationally famous dog in another breed. His earlier pups were far more fertile than his late life pups. Other factors change the expression of the genes, that is epigenetics.

Another version might be yes, more eggs get fertilized and carried in a younger bitch so you have a greater number of offspring conceived, plus the puppy and infant mortality is greater in older mothers. Birthing alone is often harder on the older mothers.

If age doesn't change what is reproduced in older mothers, why is there such a rise in birth defects such as Down's syndrome, which can be fatal and cause early death due to heart and other defects, in people? They are the same eggs that have been there, yes? There is also a rise in birth defects with older fathers, if I remember correctly.

A fascinating program for us has been on Nova:


www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/genes/issa.html

Even coat color of mice changes in the video!

Now we need our scientists and geneticists to weigh in on this in the forum!

Very interesting, Charlotte. Thanks. I guess that may explain why my skin that was so lovely when I was 17, just does not look the same today. It makes sense.

The recent (human) studies re: depletion of DHA in breast milk and birth order intelligence is fascinating.

"If age doesn't change what is reproduced in older mothers, why is there such a rise in birth defects such as Down's syndrome, which can be fatal and cause early death due to heart and other defects, in people? They are the same eggs that have been there, yes? There is also a rise in birth defects with older fathers, if I remember correctly."

Hmmmm My mom was the youngest of 10 (9 lived) in a farming family born when my grandmother was 49. Mom has a Masters degree in Nursing (circa 1950) and has done world reknowned research into gynaecological cancer .... don't think she was on the short end of the stick even tho' granny was no spring chicken!

Better one - my grandfather was the youngest of 19! His father was 72, mother 48: second marriage, first wife passed young. Also a farming family - 18 of 19 went to college. My grandfathe went to the Naval Academy for his undergraduate engineering degree and Cornell for his Masters. Maybe we should look at the old guys for the brains!

She was saying that the first litter of a girl is usually her best- in her experience. What she said in contrast to "repro experts" (not dr. Hutch specifically) was she likes to wait until those pups are old enough to be out and successfully showing to evaluate them. She will rest a girl for 2 years by waiting like that. She only breeds a girl 3 times, believing that is the most quality she will get- she said the quality drops off each litter. Personally I have to question that, being lucky enough to see 3 repeats of a friend's breeding where every pup went on to do great things. The quality in the 3rd litter was no different than the first from what I saw. But hey, it is HER experience that this wasn't so. She is a GREAT lady that has done amazing things in her breed. I have met her and taken her lectures. I look forward to more of her articles- the Gazette did good by asking her to write! If any of you get a chance- read her book.