FOR JERE

[GONEHUNTIN']

Or anyone else that knows the answer. On another board, this old adage was posted: "Another thing to take into account is the old saw, an animal may out-perform it's pedigree, but can never out-produce it."

Jere, you know more about this than anyone else I know. If this is true, how are bloodlines ever improved? To me, it makes no sense but I'm neither a breeder nor a geneticist.

[orhunter]

Blood lines are improved by bringing up the average (or worse) dog. Improvement come at the bottom.

[hicntry]

It isn't true for starters. That in itself makes it hard to explain GH.

[GONEHUNTIN']

It isn't true for starters. That in itself makes it hard to explain GH.

t

That was my argument, but I'm a trainer, not a breeder. I don't see how a breed is ever improved it that statement is true. I didn't think of asking you. You explain things in terms I can understand.

[hicntry]

It isn't true for starters. That in itself makes it hard to explain GH.

t

That was my argument, but I'm a trainer, not a breeder. I don't see how a breed is ever improved it that statement is true. I didn't think of asking you. You explain things in terms I can understand.

Yes, a breed can be improved. Look at it this way, there a lot of really good dogs that come from mediocre breedings.That tells you that even a mediocre breeding has the genetics to build on. You take two of these dogs that came from mediocre breedings and work on them to build a line of prepotent dogs by close linebreeding. Let's face it, those dogs with great pedigrees were just average dogs until someone took the time to make them great.

[crackerd]

GH, I am pretty sure the Professor is hard and fast at work in his secret igloo-boratory up there working out the test-tube development of an uber-chihuahua lead dog for next year's Iditarod. The template he's working with cannot be divulged at this time, canine intellectual "creative" property, what-what, but you may extrapolate from this https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/science/12dog.html at least a hint of how he's going about it.

MG

[GONEHUNTIN']

That's some pretty far out stuff there Crackered, thanks. I posted that link on Duck Hunting Chat and said you gave it to me. You might want to get involved in that discussion with Dawn. Rather, I might want you to.

[crackerd]

That's some pretty far out stuff there Crackered, thanks. I posted that link on Duck Hunting Chat and said you gave it to me. You might want to get involved in that discussion with Dawn. Rather, I might want you to.

You're scaring me now, GH - thinking Dawn and Rick Hall may be conspiring over there to build a Bully Boykin, and looking further back into the Boykin's pedigree for foundation DNA (and maybe CGH - canine growth hormone!).

MG

[JTracyII]

Or anyone else that knows the answer. On another board, this old adage was posted: "Another thing to take into account is the old saw, an animal may out-perform it's pedigree, but can never out-produce it."

Jere, you know more about this than anyone else I know. If this is true, how are bloodlines ever improved? To me, it makes no sense but I'm neither a breeder nor a geneticist.

So, most here seem to feel that this statement is false. I wonder though if you traded the later part of the statement out for "but generally won't out-produce it" if others could get behind that a little more.

[AlaskaMagnum]

Jere is building a cabin out in the bush, and probably hunting some spruce grouse and ptarmigan.

[crackerd]

Jere is building a cabin out in the bush, and probably hunting some spruce grouse and ptarmigan.

So Professor Murray's gone all Dick Proenneke of Pointing Labs on us Lower 48ers!

MG