Labrador Retriever Forum

General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
Line Bred On?

I often hear a breeder talk about a breeding being line-bred on "so and so". I am thinking the dog has to appear a certain number of times in the pedigree? and only in so many generations back? Can someone clarify this for me?
I have MBF software and just did a "Crystal Ball Ancestor Contribution Report" a few dogs have popped up 2, 3 and 4 times.

Re: Line Bred On?

Sorry to change the subject but what is the software you are talking about? It sounds interesting.

Thanks,

Toni

Re: Line Bred On?

Mine is "The Breeders Standard" by Man's Best Friend.

Re: Line Bred On?

Mine is "The Breeders Standard" by Man's Best Friend

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Thanks!

Re: Re: Re: Line Bred On?

I have it too Toni and it's a pretty good one! My pedigree data base is HUGE.

Re: Line Bred On?

I would say a general line-breeding would be within a 4 generation pedigree. You have loose line- breedings, and close line-breedings as well. hope that helps.

Re: Line Bred On?

A line breeding would be the same ancestor in the bitch's and the dog's pedigree. It can be a close line breeding or a distant line breeding.

Re: Line Bred On?

I would also say that inbreeding is a form of line breeding when the dog being doubled on is an immediate family member.

There is also family breeding when you are doubling on the same kennel. The dogs may have similar ancestors and were bred with the same type in mind (by the same breeder), but no repeat dogs are in the 4 generation pedigree. This is more far away linebreeding and almost an outcross.

Re: Line Bred On?

Inbreeding is the broader term. Most geneticists
call line-breeding (if they mention line-breeding at all)
inbreeding. Many formulas have
been developed to determine a "co-efficient of
inbreeding" which evaluates how closely related
animals are.

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate's correct. All line breeding is inbreeding.

Re: Line Bred On?

When reading the literature, I defer to the definitions used by geneticists.

Us lay people however, need words that better apply to our use of them. I find it helpful to clearly distinguish between immediate family breeding (which I call inbreeding), distant line breeding involving similar typed dogs bred by or produced by dogs from the same kennel with similar ancestors but nothing within 4 generations (which I call family breeding), and something in the middle involving doubling on a specific dog within 4 generations but not involving an immediate family member (which I call line breeding).

Defining our terms is necessary. Imposing your definitions is not. Although being aware that in different venues words may be used differently is important. thanks

Re: Re: Re: Re: Line Bred On?

I have a technical question about MFB software (which I, too, love). Got a new computer, and cannot figure out how to transfer the files from the old one to the new, even after I reload the software.

Anybody know? Thanks!

Re: Line Bred On?

Okay, so with my hypothetical breeding, ( I am staying anon and not mentioning dogs/bitches names, as I do not want this construed as advertising)

In this hypo breeding:

Bitch: A Dog appears once in the 3rd generation on the Sire's side and once in the 2nd generation on the Dam's side.
Dog: The same Dog mentioned above appears once in the 4th generation on the Dam's side.

Would you say this is a linebreeding on "so and so Dog"?

Re: Line Bred On?

yes

Re: Line Bred On?

"Let the sire of the sire become the grand sire of the dame."

Basically the sires sire should appear in the third generation of the dam on the stud side.

Re: Line Bred On?

What is the purpose of such a description?

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate, To whom are you asking your last question?

If it was me, I just like to use consistent (therefore defined) terms to describe close, medium, and distant line or in-breeding. I think of it as 3 types of line breeding and you point out that it may all be more correctly termed types of in-breeding. But the point is, they are really distinctly different types of breeding.

The distinctions are not arbitrary either. 4 generations is a pretty standard limit (the math seems intuitively obvious) and immediate family is clearly very close (also intuitively obvious). The nest step in terms of proper science is clearly the indexes but I don't find them all that intuitively helpful.

Re: Line Bred On?

Calculate the Coefficient of Inbreeding, COI, and you will know how close is the mating.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

My understanding of line breeding is mating animals who are closely related to the same ancestor. Using parent dogs who are closely related to that ancestor, but little, if at all, related to each other through any other ancestors.

Inbreeding is a much closer realtionship between the mating pair. Instead of involving second, third or more distant generations, it is generally with only four relationships - son to mother, father to daughter, brother to sister, half-brother to half-sister.

Re: Re: Re: Line Bred On?

What would you consider a close coefficient? 20% , 30% ??

Re: Line Bred On?

COIs are widely accepted and understood ways to
understand the impact of inbreeding. Breeders in
other species use them. A precise scientific
vocabulary already exists.

Re: Line Bred On?

If I were breeding cows where say I had a herd of over 100 very closely related females, the coefficient of inbreeding would be very helpful in determining what bull to use. But a female dog has a litter of 7. There are millions of combinations of genes. The probabilities will not hold with that small of a population. That is why breeding dogs is more of an art, and breeding cows is more of a science.

Yes, I believe the terms I am using are consistent with AKC sponsored educational programs. I do understand professional geneticists use the terms differently. That is why it is so important to operationally define your terms. Language is wicked cool, fluid but cool.

Re: Line Bred On?

I need to add.....in the context of this forum, arguing over proper vocabulary is way less important than discussing concepts. Simple models will be much more helpful for people not as familiar with the science of genetics. Please remember, most domesticated breeds were developed long before Mendel. There were breeders much more successful than any of us will ever be who never heard the words gene or locus or polygenic. Teaching real science is very important but not at the level of technicalities. Help people with conceptual understanding. Especially since, like I said earlier, we are dealing with a bitch who may have 3 litters of 7 with 3 different sires her whole life. We are not commercial livestock operations inseminating thousands of cattle to be used for hamburger. Think of how many qualities we are concerned with, how many genes control each, and how much we actually know about each parent... Science is only part of what we do. We need to also think like artists.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Animal husbandry is also an art form. Kate, scentific filibustering is so tediously droll.

Re: Line Bred On?

Is not about a number 10, 12 25, 12.5.

You should know the lines you are using, I know of one of the most important stud in the world, if you linebreed or inbreed him to much, you have problems of prognatism, even do he is the Stud.

So, you not only need to now what is the magic number, you need to study the lines a lot of generations back.

And if there are problems, the owners wont say anything, you have to find out by yourself.

Re: Line Bred On?

Math Geni you are absolutely right. Knowing precisely how close a particular breeding is means nothing unless you know what is behind the parents.

But Kate is not wrong in what she is saying. Inbreeding coefficients are wonderful tools as part of a big toolbox. I am just advocating considering more breadth of knowledge as opposed to depth for this particular thread. I just thought being more conceptual than technical was more appropriate in this situation.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

OK, here's a simple version. If you don't
have the education to understand COIs, don't
inbreed because you are playing with
fire; by inbreeding, you increase the risk for
auto-immune diseases, infertility, skeletal
anonmalies, missing and malformed teeth, etc.

If you don't understand even the basic premise
that linebreeding is a another word for inbreeding,
breed phenotype to phenotype (based on appearance
only) and outcross. It's a perfectly fine
method of getting what you want without inbreeding.

If you don't have the education to
play with fire, stay out of the kitchen. Simple
enough for you?

Frankly, I gave everyone more
credit than you do. When you say
I am being boring by using scientific
concepts, you are saying that
people have no ability and no
interest in understanding
the genetic techniques they are using.
Fine, maybe statements about
statements about me, prove your
point. But I sure do hate it when
people dumb down their expecations
of the general public. Kate

Re: Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Me thinks Kate is very impressed with her own education. Really , a civilized conversation does not take a PHD. Shall we all agree on good manners ?

Re: Line Bred On?

Methinks that you don't understand what I said. So let
me say it more simply yet: I don't talk down to people;
I presume that they are just as capable as I am of
understanding the scientific principles they use.

And I am darn sick of being criticized for being
educated, being intelligent, and not dumbing down
what I say. Talk about rude! You take the cake.

Re: Line Bred On?

And just to head off any further erroneous assumptions
about my statements about inbreeding. Because I do
not trust my ability to foresee all the possible
problems/risks associated with "linebreeding,"
I do not do it. I use COIs strictly to avoid
"linebreeding."

I think you would be surprised at the number and
quality of breeders (many of them well-known and
experience over 30 years) who feel as I do.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Okay I'll bite, so what dogs do you have in the ring that the world would know ? Is there a web site I can view your breeding accomplishments ? How many Champions have you produced, and have they been outstanding producers ? Do your dogs win Specialties ?

Re: Line Bred On?

As soon as you reveal your name and your kennel, I will
be happy to tell you about my dogs.

Re: Line Bred On?

I believe that a good understanding of this is important but, someone else pointed this out below, if you don't know the dogs involved the COI should not give you any comfort.

To me, the most important thing is working with one of the excellent breeders that have been linebreeding for decades and know the dogs involved until you have gained their experience and knowledge.

Tough crowd here!

Man oh man, this is a tough crowd. Watch out for that bite!

Re: Line Bred On?

Because I only use the COI to eliminate dogs, I find
it quite useful and understanding it essential. For
those who can't manage the math (and I find it
tedious myself), you can use CompuPed to find out
the contribution of various dogs in your pedigrees.

But I have also relied on my mentor in dog breeding
who did not inbreed and did not want me to do so.
She taught me well.

My mentor bred the first champion on whom I put
a conformation championship; my foundation bitch
thus has a diverse pedigree. My mentor also
suggested the stud dog for my first home-bred
champion--a French import brought into the country
by Kendall Herr.

I next used the Finnish/swedish import that Kendall
brought into the country; the offspring of this
breeding gave me the freedom to choose a dog closer
to home who would still give me the kind of health
that I want in my dogs. Diversity does buy some
freedom with peace of mind.

Kendall has been very good to the Lab community in
providing us with breeding stock who allow
diversification. I thank her for her foresight and
her modeling of good breeding practices in providing
these dogs to our community.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

I, too, can attest to the wonderful dogs that come from the Kendall Herr breedings. I hope there are some more of them in my future.

Re: Line Bred On?

Hi Virgina, Even though linebreeding has a sexy ring
and all the new breeders seem to want to try it,
I believe that true masters can outcross and
create something new and incredible. These folks
have such an incredible knowledge of their lines
that they know what combinations will bring out the
best, even when they outcrossed dogs. They step
outside the boundaries of their own lines with skill
and artistry.

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate, What mathematical model do these "true masters" use to assist in their outcross decisions?


"Hi Virgina, Even though linebreeding has a sexy ring
and all the new breeders seem to want to try it,
I believe that true masters can outcross and
create something new and incredible. These folks
have such an incredible knowledge of their lines
that they know what combinations will bring out the
best, even when they outcrossed dogs. They step
outside the boundaries of their own lines with skill
and artistry."

Re: Line Bred On?

Line breeding is breeding cousins to cousins.

Inbreeding is closer than cousins to sousins.

Outcrossing is 4 or more generations back.

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate, This thread is on genetics and another recent one you are actively involved in is on joint disease. You have referred to your educational background in general terms. I am just curious. What type of science is your formal education in??? Are you a biologist, or do you do research in physiology or something similar?

Re: Line Bred On?

You can do your own research and you will find wonderfull dogs with a total outcross 0.0% COI, but you will find also wonderfull dogs with a high COI %, but you have to know the lines. I can not put dog names here, but I can assure you, there are dogs out there that are superb, wonderfull with a COI in the 18%, you just have to study a lot. But like Kate said, if you dont know this, just go phenotype to phenotype, but a loy of the best breeders in the world work with inbreeding, just learn how to calculate, go to the pedigrees of the most famous dogs and you will find a lot of inbreeding, just see in any pedigree how many times Arnold appears.

Re: Line Bred On?

I wasn't going to get into this but I remembered a post which I kept from my much regretted contributor on this board, Pam Davol. This was part of a very long thread, with examples of segregations of chromosomes - fascinating stuff which I re-read regularly. This part explains why outcrossing it not necessarily an answer:

"""............If a breeder learns nothing else about genetics in his lifetime, one important factor that s/he must come to understand (and this isn’t simply my opinion, this is something anyone will be taught if s/he takes time to pick up and read an elementary book on genetics) is that selection against autosomal recessive (AR) mutations (genes, disorders, etc.) in a population by selection of phenotypically normal breeding stock produces no clinically significant impact upon incidence of that particular disease within the population. Despite this, in general and with regard to autosomal recessive disorders (ARD), breeding practices have not “caused” the problems that one sees in our Lab population today (or any other breed population for that matter). Autosomal recessive mutations arise spontaneously in a breed population. The ARDs that we are aware of today as being preponderant in the breed population (PRA for example) occur as a result of early mutations (historical), however, new mutations are occurring within the population and before one can identify disorders associated with these new mutations, some of these mutant alleles will already be genetically “fixed” within the breed population.

Once a mutant allele is introduced into a population, the frequency of heterozygotes (carriers) for that allele increases. The level of polymorphism (the number of gene loci that are heterozygous) within a single pure-bred population is considerable. The concept that one should not breed carriers of autosomal recessive mutations is simply improbable, if not impossible. Therefore, while a breeder may denounce breeding known carriers of an ARD, the same breeder, while selecting against a “known” ARD, is indiscriminately breeding unknown ARs that may give rise to another type of ARD. Is the effect on the breed population any different simply because one breeder can claim ignorance? Answer: Genetically speaking, the results are the same with respect to the population. The difference lies in how the individual breeder wishes to take risks…with an ARD that is known or with one that is unknown. Some breeders go from line to line to line looking for the magic bloodline that is going to be free of all problems (similar to the idealistic novice puppy owner that expects a breeder to provide them with a pup that will never develop a genetic problem in his/her life) rather than fixing the problem that they have within their bloodline and continuing on with a bloodline that they know well. The problem with the gene pool today is that too many breeders have tried to move on without correcting the problems that have arisen and already exist. This is, in general, what I find to be a big difference between American and foreign breeders (again, in general; I know there are exceptions). For instance, an American breeder is more likely to handle the problem by dropping a cultivated bloodline and starting over again with a new bloodline (an approach known to be futile even if it appears morally correct). A foreign breeder, however, is more likely to in-breed for expression of the disorder. Breeding for expression of the disorder is actually the fastest way (in the absence of genetic testing for an ARD) to remove the mutation from the bloodline, since within one subsequent generation it can identify homozygous “normal” individuals , thus eradicating the risk to subsequent generations while preserving a genetically sound bloodline. Additionally, periodic in-breeding may bring to light other potentially detrimental ARs within a bloodline that can be eradicated before the allele becomes genetically fixed within the population. This method is not a new revelation nor should it be practiced without some inkling of genetics. Additionally, as many are aware, until the time when genetic tests are available for all the potential ARDs (and since new mutations occur with each new generation, it’s not likely that we will ever be able to screen for all potential ARDs), there are definite repercussions and responsibilities that go hand-and-hand with this approach. Those breeders who may proceed in this manner perhaps have accepted that ensuring freedom of risk in future generations may justify sacrificing (culling) one or more entire litters. In the US, some breeders do practice this approach, but most do not do so openly; to do so brings down the wrath of the moral majority. In contrast, in those foreign countries where breeding is viewed more in light of animal husbandry, there is more acceptance of this approach.

Clearly, this solution is not going to catch-on in hands of most hobbyist or even some professional breeders. As a result, as we go further out with each subsequent generation, with bloodlines carrying old AR mutations as well as developing new mutations, more (new) ARDs will present in the future generations (as frequency of heterozygotes increases). For those who read this and believe that this is a recommendation to begin in-breeding and culling litters, I assure you that this is nothing of the sort. Consider this simply as an answer to the question: “Why are there so many problems with pure-breds?” To summarize:

1) it is not due to irresponsible or unethical breeding practices,
2) it occurs because of spontaneous mutations that arise within the breed and a breeder’s inability to genetically detect these mutations before they become fixed within the breed population, and
3) the inefficacy of using only phenotypically normal breeding stock to reduce the frequency of AR alleles within a breed population (to attempt to reduce risk of expression of an ARD)

Professional breeders blame hobby-breeders, and hobby-breeders blame backyard breeders, and backyard breeders blame the other two for problems within the pure-bred populations. The truth is: none of us are clean, and genetically speaking, the breeder that uses only phenotypically normal individuals for breeding or indiscriminately jumps from one bloodline to the next producing litter after litter from different bloodlines, with no idea of history of the bloodline, but believes it’s okay because the dogs have passed the conventional genetic clearances, has the potential for wreaking just as much havoc on the breed population as the breeder who doesn’t do clearances at all.

Just something to think about.
..........""""

Re: Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Ok, folks, let's quit simplifying my approach to breeding.
I do not use COIs in some exclusive fashion to make
all my breeding choices. That would be stupid. Nor
do I toss out all inbreeding; I can't--because
it's inherent in breeding a specific breed, rather
than a generic dog. Trying to entirely avoid
inbreeding would yield a generic dog, if it even
yielded a dog.

I use the COI as *one* tool, an important tool but only
one tool.

How do I use that tool? I use it as a safeguard against
my own vanity and delusion. I use it to keep myself
honest about breeding for health, which is my first
goal--not my only, but my first. I'm just as
susceptible as the next person to deluding myself
in the service of fame and winning. So I think
the COI is a really important and powerful tool,
as is outcrossing.

I have quoted below Breeder's challenge to me as an
example of how people evaluate a breeding strategy.
Note the importance placed on winning and the
complete lack of health evaluation. Breeder
has so eloquently stated the dark side of breeding,
and I use the COI to *help* myself avoid it because
the Dark Side is part of all of us and we deny it
at our own peril.

The COI is a safeguard, like a safety belt in a
car, like a morning alarm so that I don't oversleep.
Avoiding the Dark Side of Breeding is difficult
because people are so incredibly willing to discount
anyone (most especially *themselves*) who is
not successful in the show ring and elevate those
who are, regardless of how they got there.

When people are trying to support their use of
"linebreeding," they don't tell you about
their secret desires for winning and fame. They
don't tell you about their fears that they can't
produce another champion like the old one. They
don't tell you about their secret hopes that they
can ressurect the beauty of a dead dog
by linebreeding.

They tell you that linebreeding isn't really
inbreeding. They tell you that linebreeding
is no worse than crossbreeding in producing health.
They tell you that all the great breeders used
linebreeding and how they studied with these great
breeders. They use lots of euphemisms for inbreeding
and then design strategies with names that won't
sound like inbreeding. They make inbreeding sound really sexy and inviting
and part of the right of passage for a new breeder.
If they get really testy, they questions the
credentials and the intentions of
anyone who asks them questions about their goals.

What they will not describe is what Breeder so well
described--her way of evaluating the success of
a breeding strategy, and I thank her for her honesty.
In the mirror of her honesty, we can all see our
Dark Side--and we all have one. The COI is simply
one way of helping us save ourselves--from ourselves.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Okay I'll bite, so what dogs do you have in the ring that the world would know ? Is there a web site I can view your breeding accomplishments ? How many Champions have you produced, and have they been outstanding producers ? Do your dogs win Specialties ?

Re: Line Bred On?

So that I can quote Breeder, I have posted today
earlier in this thread--for those who might be
interested.

Re: Line Bred On?

JP, I agree with Pam in her post about
ARD. I've definitely bred ARD carriers, and I will
continue to do so. I can't even imagine abandoning
dogs simply because they carry ARD genes. In fact,
such an approach would significantly decrease genetic
diversity in most of the same ways that inbreeding
for beauty does and, as she correctly notes, increase
the likelihood of other ARDs occurring.

But my concerns about inbreeding are big pictures issues
that do not show up in one or two generations.
Inbreeding takes risks that breeding for diversity
does not. It is not that breeding for diversity has
no risks; they are simply ones I am more willing to
take.

I see that some people did not heed my earlier
post in which I clearly state that I do not feel
qualified to inbreed without problems--despite my
education.

For those of you unfamiliar with a PhD requirements,
statistics and research design are minimum
requirements for graduation. We are required to
be able to conduct and publish a research study.
I've done more than one, and I feel really qualified
to examine and report on the research of others.
So that's what you see me occasionally doing--and
I may add that it takes a good deal of time and study
on my part with little reward from this forum. I
do it for the good of our breed.

My PhD is in psychology, and genetic transmission of disease is a significant
issue for psychology and our course of study allows
us the freedom to explore these issues. Because I
teach in a medical school, I have a world of
resources at my disposal and people who can explain
concepts about which I am sketchy. I try also to
give breeders the benefit of these resources.

But, by all means, you are all free to totally
ignore what I post. I put my name on it, and I
personally am open to critique.

Re: Line Bred On?

I for one.........read and often REREAD several times many /most of Kate F's posts also very much enjoy Maureen *Nimloth*.....J.P. and many others that have ...present and past made this "a favorite place" to learn......

I sadly do miss several popular and extremly imformative posters and look forward to their return here at some point......we have many bright and experienced folks posting here.........

BIG THANKS!!! to everyone that takes the time to patiently post / educate and to those that read / learn and "pass along" what they've learned.....

long live this forum

i ain't great at gramma or spellin but likey ta learn

Re: Line Bred On?

I am sure you know better, and I probably don't need to say this, but I am stubborn and will anyway. Please just don't believe everything you read here (or anywhere I guess). Great things to think about though....

Re: Line Bred On?

And your point is, Curious? If you have information,
I wish you would post it rather than
undermine what others say without
demonstrating that you have anything worthwhile
to add. And put your name on your information.
These are the kinds of heckling posts that
keep all the intelligent/educated people on this
forum silent.

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate, My point is exactly what I wrote. In any situation, we should all be critical of what we read. Those who think they are qualified to teach may not be. Those who are qualified to teach are not perfect.

If I thought everyone would take everything I say as Gospel, I would never say anything knowing the possibility of my own misunderstanding. But I am so glad this is not the case. I learn when someone shows me a different perspective on information I know to be true. I believe this should be what this forum is about. A give and take where breeders educate each other.

If you are asking my opinion of your posts. I think they are full of very good information. But I think you lack perspective and totally overrate your qualifications. You post to teach and not to learn. The supporting data is above if you choose to see it. The fact that you are confronting me is exactly the point. Take it in, choose to agree and disagree if you want, and move on. For you, it COMES ACROSS AS too much about your ego and not enough about the dogs.

Re: Line Bred On?

You left something out. Surely if your opinion is
worth believing, you will want everyone to know who
you are and your qualifications for saying what
you do about me. Then everyone can know whether they
can believe YOU.

Re: Line Bred On?

Kate, There is no need to defend yourself so vigorously. You really are quite bright. Thank you for your opinions.

Re: Line Bred On?

I am happy to read this thread. When I glanced at the topic I immediately wanted to know more, as I have partcipated in "line bred on" discussion with breeders, but only as a listener. Though I am intimidated by the complexity of the concept, I am willing to try and understand it more. Mind you, I am not a breeder, just very interested in learning. The crux of my point is that I appreciate Kate's, JP's, Maureen's, and the other intelligently posted comments for not "dumbing down" to me. I do not see any ego involvement at all and I thank you ladies for educating me in areas that are unknown to me.

Re: Line Bred On?

So Curious, I see that you are afraid to post your
name.

Re: Line Bred On?

Maria, I appreciate your support. I have heard from
many experienced and educated breeders who have
much to share with all of us but who are afraid
to post on this forum where even the mildest post
can meet with rebuke from cyberbullies who hide behind
anonymity. So I also appreciate your courage at this
time in writing. It is people like who can actually
change the face of this forum into a place where
intelligent dialogue can occur, which is my fervent
hope because we all need this kind of input.

Re: Line Bred On?

Just Google her name she is all over the Internet.

Re: Line Bred On?

Wow, this is too deep for me. I'm like my dogs K.I.S.S, and not afraid to admit it Funny enough, I know for a fact that one of the top breeders in the U.S. is the very same way. This breeder would chuckle at all of this. But hey, if it works for you, well than more power to you That is what makes the world go round after all. Good topic to boot!

Re: Line Bred On?

1) I am sure there is a small minority of people here who use the option of being anonymous to cyber-bully. I would think that most don't want to be bullied but to call them afraid is a bit strong. Others, due to their status in the Labrador world or their level of education or accomplishment elsewhere, don't want people to be intimidated by what they write. Some are just shy. But this subject has been beaten to death.

2) I questioned your perceived intellectual authority in a rather benign way and you have been trying to pick a fight with me ever since. You just taunted me like a school girl. I did take the bait earlier and think less of myself for that. But, I think it is pretty clear that a little more self-analysis on your part regarding bullying may be warranted. Just because you choose to use your name does not give you license to be rude to people.

3) People who disagree with something you write are not necessarily uneducated or lacking intelligence. Being able to explain a complicated scenerio using a simple model without oversimplifying, takes a very high level of understanding. Throughout this thread you have missed quite good teachable moments to bridge the simple model of the inbreeding vs. linebreeding tradional vocabulary with a more complex mathematical model. Additionally, you have contradicted yourself regarding inbreeding vs. outcrossing and the value of knowing the lines and the art of making related decisions. I believe in some parts of this thread you have contributed wonderful ideas and in others you have been the one to dumb it down.

4) This thread is supposed to be about genetics. If you think I am being a bully simply ignore me. If she thinks I am being inappropriate, Jill will censure me. Take a parting shot at me if you will, I promise not to respond to you or anyone else. In fact, to avoid the temptation, I won't even return to this thread (only I will know if I can really pull that off. void(0);
void(0);) My hope is that if this thread on linebreeding (or inbreeding) has ended, others like it will appear soon. I will gladly participate and I promise to try my best to stay courteous and focused on the subject at hand.

Re: Re: Line Bred On?

Sadly, cyber bully does come to mind. Kate appears to be collecting data for some purpose. Hopefully it is for a better understanding of the Labrador, and not for some political or materialistic agenda. Perhaps she will share her findings at some point.

Kate, since you initially announced yourself as "I am the voice of reason," we would hope that you would avoid a re-emergance of a sort of quasi-Enlightened Absolutisim, and perhaps re-investigate John Locke's "Essay on Human Understanding" (1690)in which he theorizes (with his metaphor of the human mind as "tabla rasa" or a blank slate/knowing nothing at birth)that human knowledge is derived from the senses of perception. Thus, if in Locke's view,the external environment influences everything, and if we, like Locke are optimistic, and consider that human conduct and behaviour is highly prefectable, we could hope to introduce to you, Kate, as well as others inclined to cyber bullying, an element of social decorum into the discussions on this very useful Labrador weblist.

And it has been quoted elsewhere that the sometimes melacholy Mr. Cowper has written that "differ'ng judgements serve but to dictate/ That trueth lies somewhere, if we knew but where" One would hope that an interpretation of this fragment by Cowper might be that the truth may be discovered in the labor of one's own journey to that understanding of truth, not in rhetorical dialectics gleaned from secondary sources and shouted as the absolute truth from the rooftops.

Peace to you all.

Re: Line Bred On?

Howdy! Thank you so much for this information! I'm sure that this essay writing strategy step by stepwill be an excellent addition for you to experiment!

Re: Line Bred On?

If you need some useful pieces of advice from experienced writer who really succeeded in this field, follow the link http://smartessayrewriter.com/blog/essay-writing-strategy-step-by-step