[peeps]

Ignore my question, I re read the entire page and realised she has the photo of him posted and his story but he is in the distant past of one of her dogs pedigrees.

 

[paranthesis]

My biggest problem with this breeder is that she is also breeding Goldendoodles & "Comfort Retrievers" under the name of DoodleQuest. http://www.goldendoodle.net/doodlequest.html

:doh:

Wow, that is truly unbelievable. How can someone say they are for the betterment of the breed while they have a website promoting the breeding of mix breeds ??Not that mixed breeds do not deserve to be loved liek anything else, but a breeder of purebred dogs takes an oath or should anyway, to abide by certain ethics in regards to breeding. And can someone with more knowledge then me explain if she was a part of breeding Gainsborough ? There is something on her site about that litter and I am curious.

Question: What is your opinion of Sir Dudley Marjoribanks? Was it unethical of him to create the Golden Retriever 141 years ago, then a designer dog, by crossing a yellow lab with the Tweed Water Spaniel, Irish Setter, Bloodhound, and St John's Water Dog?

The world isn't what it was 141 years ago. 80%+ of the population lives in cities and only 7% of the population hunts. We drive cars to work, live in carpeted houses with 1/3 acre yards, get our food from supermarkets, prevalence of asthma is up greatly, and both members of the household work full time jobs.

The Golden Retriever has the combination of ranking 4th of all breeds in intelligence/trainability as well as arguably the best temperament of all breeds- being laid back, eager to please, tolerant of children, trainable, are touch and sound insensitive, and make good assistance dogs. But they also weigh 55-80+ lbs and are terrible shedders making them a very difficult breed for most people to own in today's world.

So what is so wrong about breeders working to get the golden traits in a smaller, low shed package? Is it health problems? No, crossbreeds are more healthy due to hybrid vigor. Is it that the owners are unhappy? No, there are a heck of a lot less labradoodles in the shelters compared to Golden Retrievers (just ask Obama, he's trying to find one.) There is no lack of demand, in fact people are willing to pay more. So what could it possibly be really?

 

[AmbikaGR]

So what is so wrong about breeders working to get the golden traits in a smaller, low shed package? Is it health problems? No, crossbreeds are more healthy due to hybrid vigor. Is it that the owners are unhappy? No, there are a heck of a lot less labradoodles in the shelters compared to Golden Retrievers (just ask Obama, he's trying to find one.) There is no lack of demand, in fact people are willing to pay more. So what could it possibly be really?

Okay, I'll bite
First "Goldendoodles" are NOT small. I do not think I have seen one that wold not measure out of the "Standard" for a Golden
They do NOT provide a "low shed package"
You have no idea what health probelms will arrive from grossing these breeds.
I know of a number of people who were disappointed in what they got with their "Goldendoodles".
As to there being less in shelters I do not believe there is. But due to the efforts of "Golden Rescue Groups" they are normally easier to find. I have not yet seen a "Goldendoodle" rescue group.
People are willing to pay more because many are gullible to the claims made by these breeders.
Now that answers your points, but here are more.
You ask about Sir Majoribanks being compared to this. If you are able to provide me "Goldendoodle" breeders who have kept extensive records on all the breedings that have transpired as the result of their breedings you might be able to get my attention. I am sorry but all these folks are doing is taking a Golden and a Poodle mating them selling the offspring and pocketing the money. These people have no intent on creating a new breed only interested in selling their pups. There are a number of service organizations who will crossbreed for different reasons. They take "proven" dogs and breed them. They know the prior history of these dogs going back for many generations and then track the resulting offspring for generations to see if they were able to accomplish what they were looking to do.

Fire away flame retardent suit always in place. :FIREdevil

 

[paranthesis]

Okay, I'll bite
First "Goldendoodles" are NOT small. I do not think I have seen one that wold not measure out of the "Standard" for a Golden
They do NOT provide a "low shed package"
You have no idea what health probelms will arrive from grossing these breeds.
I know of a number of people who were disappointed in what they got with their "Goldendoodles".
As to there being less in shelters I do not believe there is. But due to the efforts of "Golden Rescue Groups" they are normally easier to find. I have not yet seen a "Goldendoodle" rescue group.
People are willing to pay more because many are gullible to the claims made by these breeders.
Now that answers your points, but here are more.
You ask about Sir Majoribanks being compared to this. If you are able to provide me "Goldendoodle" breeders who have kept extensive records on all the breedings that have transpired as the result of their breedings you might be able to get my attention. I am sorry but all these folks are doing is taking a Golden and a Poodle mating them selling the offspring and pocketing the money. These people have no intent on creating a new breed only interested in selling their pups. There are a number of service organizations who will crossbreed for different reasons. They take "proven" dogs and breed them. They know the prior history of these dogs going back for many generations and then track the resulting offspring for generations to see if they were able to accomplish what they were looking to do.

Fire away flame retardent suit always in place. :FIREdevil

As for size I was referring to the Comfort Retriever designer breed (3/4 golden retrievers and 1/4 miniature/toy poodle) on the Doodlequest site: http://www.goldendoodle.net/comfortretrievers.htm The size of the Goldendoodle designer breed will depend on whether a standard, miniature, or toy poodle was used in the breeding as well as a little bit of luck. If a miniature poodle is used you can usually expect a Goldendoodle about half the size of a Golden retriever (30-45 lbs) and if a toy poodle is used they are usually 15-30 lbs although there are exceptions.

Goldendoodles do in fact shed a lot less than Golden Retrievers. And 2nd generation backcross (F2B) that are 3/4 poodle, 1/4 retriever are nearly always nonshedding.

As to Sir Majoribanks and extensive records, for many years there was controversy over which breeds were originally crossed. It wasn't till nearly 100 years later that his breeding records were published and the myth was dispelled concerning the purchase of a whole troupe of Russian sheepdogs from a visiting circus.

If you have a first generation Doodle, there are no extensive records to keep. However the Australian Labradoodles are multigenerational and do in fact have extensive records regarding the breeding. The following is taken from the Australian Labradoodle Club of America's website:
"Then, in the late 1980's, Tegan Park and Rutland Manor, the two founders of the Australian Labradoodle as we know it today, began carefully infusing several other breeds into early generations of their Lab/Poodle crosses, to improve temperament, coat, confirmation, and size. The infused breeds include Irish Water Spaniel as well as the American and English Cocker Spaniel. The resulting labradoodles subsequently have been bred to each other, continuing the multi-generational tradition."
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/Page2.html
However, 1st generation doodles are often preferred because they have more hybrid vigor and more golden traits.

As to how many Labradoodles are in shelters vs Golden Retrievers... go to Pets 911, Petfinder, and Adoptapet.com. You will find no lack of labrador or golden retrievers. And you will be lucky to find one labradoodle or goldendoodle. There are no doodle rescue clubs because there are no doodles needing rescueing.

So I ask you again, what is the problem?

 

[AmbikaGR]

Well a 5 minute Google searched proved me wrong, there are Goldendoodle rescue groups out there - I guess there are more than you realize that need rescuing.

http://www.nextdaypets.com/directory/dogs/rescue/1100301/

http://www.poomixrescue.com/dog_search_results_new.php?dtype=Doodle&sort=dogstatus&submit=submit

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/213827.html

http://www.goldendoodles.com/rehomedoods.htm

Now I will agree there are far more by shear numbers of Goldens that require rescueing but that MIGHT have something to do with there being a "few" more Goldens than Goldendoodles. And I believe in 75% or more of these cases, both Goldens and ALL dogs, the people who turned them in had no business ever having a dog.

Paranthesis wrote
If you have a first generation Doodle, there are no extensive records to keep. However the Australian Labradoodles are multigenerational and do in fact have extensive records regarding the breeding. The following is taken from the Australian Labradoodle Club of America's website:
"Then, in the late 1980's, Tegan Park and Rutland Manor, the two founders of the Australian Labradoodle as we know it today, began carefully infusing several other breeds into early generations of their Lab/Poodle crosses, to improve temperament, coat, confirmation, and size. The infused breeds include Irish Water Spaniel as well as the American and English Cocker Spaniel. The resulting labradoodles subsequently have been bred to each other, continuing the multi-generational tradition."
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/Page2.html

This sounds to me like a group genuinely trying to develop a breed. With out doing any further research on this group I would say I do not have an issue with it.

Paranthesis wrote
However, 1st generation doodles are often preferred because they have more hybrid vigor and more golden traits.

And they are the LEAST predictable as to what you will get.

 

[paranthesis]

This sounds to me like a group genuinely trying to develop a breed. With out doing any further research on this group I would say I do not have an issue with it.

Paranthesis wrote
However, 1st generation doodles are often preferred because they have more hybrid vigor and more golden traits.

And they are the LEAST predictable as to what you will get.

Is predictability all it boils down to then? If you know what traits a Golden Retriever has and you know what traits a Poodle has, then you probably aren't going to get any surprises (not any more than people get when buying a purebred pup anyway.) Of course it is going to probably take after one side more than the other, but as long as the owner knows this and doesn't care I don't see how this alone makes the breeder a bad breeder or the dog a bad choice.

 

[AmbikaGR]

Is predictability all it boils down to then? If you know what traits a Golden Retriever has and you know what traits a Poodle has, then you probably aren't going to get any surprises (not any more than people get when buying a purebred pup anyway.) Of course it is going to probably take after one side more than the other, but as long as the owner knows this and doesn't care I don't see how this alone makes the breeder a bad breeder or the dog a bad choice.

It is much more than just traits. It is health and temperment. First generation "Goldendoodles" are a complete genetic gamble. Ther is no breeding away from good and bad traits behind these dogs. These dogs are prone to te diseases which affect both breeds. That is why I tend to be okay with the what you presented about the Australian Goldendoodle Club and what they are apparently attempting. But I can not accept what is in my opinion a deliberate attempt of the majority of the Goldendoodle breeders to mislead the public that there is an advantage to these dogs. Just as I have issues with breeders of "British Cremes", "Rare White", "Minature", "Comfort" and so on Goldens. They are in it for themselves and their financial gain, period.

 

[Pointgold]

Question: What is your opinion of Sir Dudley Marjoribanks? Was it unethical of him to create the Golden Retriever 141 years ago, then a designer dog, by crossing a yellow lab with the Tweed Water Spaniel, Irish Setter, Bloodhound, and St John's Water Dog?

The world isn't what it was 141 years ago. 80%+ of the population lives in cities and only 7% of the population hunts. We drive cars to work, live in carpeted houses with 1/3 acre yards, get our food from supermarkets, prevalence of asthma is up greatly, and both members of the household work full time jobs.

The Golden Retriever has the combination of ranking 4th of all breeds in intelligence/trainability as well as arguably the best temperament of all breeds- being laid back, eager to please, tolerant of children, trainable, are touch and sound insensitive, and make good assistance dogs. But they also weigh 55-80+ lbs and are terrible shedders making them a very difficult breed for most people to own in today's world.

So what is so wrong about breeders working to get the golden traits in a smaller, low shed package? Is it health problems? No, crossbreeds are more healthy due to hybrid vigor. Is it that the owners are unhappy? No, there are a heck of a lot less labradoodles in the shelters compared to Golden Retrievers (just ask Obama, he's trying to find one.) There is no lack of demand, in fact people are willing to pay more. So what could it possibly be really?

Okay, here's where you lost me: "No, crossbreeds are more healthy due to hybrid vigor."

This is an absolutely false statement. A hybrid is NOT the result of crossing two (or more) breeds. It is the result of crossing two SPECIES. And crossbred dogs are NOT more healthy.
What it is, is that knowledgeable breeders KNOW that the marketing of Doodles, Noodles, Orkis, Poos, etc etc is a marketing scam. Because they are NOT what those who breed and sell them (for exhorbitant prices) claim that they are. The "breeders" of these mutts (face it, this is what they are, and I won't apologize to anyone who feels that is a derogatory or politically incorrect term - heck, Obama called himself a mutt...) rarely, if ever, do genetic health clearances on the parents of these crosses, and we all know that Goldens and Labs can have HD/ED, SAS, thyroid issues, eye problems, etc. Poodles can have HD/ED, SAS, eye problems, Addison's Disease, etc. If any of those health issues are present in one or both parents, breeding them increases the chances of the offspring having them, as well. They don't magically go away because they are "hybrids" (which again, they are not).
Part of the problem is that just because you don't look for it it doesn't mean it's not there - and I know of very few people with mixed breed dogs who do health clearances such as hip/elbow radiographs, cardiac testing, or CERF eye checks, and having worked for many years as a vet tech, I'll tell you that mixed breeds have more than their share of health issues that very well could be any of those problems. But without checking for them, they will never know.

Stating that there are a heck of a lot more Golden Retrievers in shelters than there are Labradoodles (or Goldendoodles) would be because THERE ARE A HECK OF A LOT MORE GOLDEN RETRIEVERS THAN THERE ARE GOLDEN/LABRA DOODLES. And anyone who has done rescue will tell you that the vast majority of the Goldens that ARE in shelters or rescue are not the result of reputable breeders, but rather BYB's, HVB's, and mills. And THOSE are the "breeders" who pay little attention to the standard, health issues, and temperaments, but rather worship the almighty dollar.

 

[Pointgold]

There are no doodle rescue clubs because there are no doodles needing rescueing.
quote]

Again, false. There are plenty of Doodles turned into shelters and rescue groups - usually to the rescues of one or other of the purebred parents. (Their "breeders" were not inclined to take them back, unlike reputabe and responsible breeders of purebred dogs who not only will take a dog back, but insist on it contractually).
I have seen no less than a dozen Doodles in my classes, and I know of only 2 who remained with their original purchaser, because they were not what they had been sold as. They shed. A lot. They were larger or smaller than what they had been told they'd be. They were difficult to live with for a number of reasons - not the "calm, laidback dogs" promised by the breeders.

 

[Ljilly28]

I agree with Hank and PG. It is absurd to promote golden-doodles as the best of both breeds genetically, which is what people seeking them always naively believe. They are just as likely to be the worst of both breeds. . . It is just an insult to the careful, well-researched breeding programs of fine poodles and fine goldens to blithely cross together two less than exemplary members of each breed and call it a "doodle". There are at least twenty doodles here in Falmouth Maine, out and about in the parks and beaches, and so far none(zero) of the owners know what health clearances are. I have been actively (hopefully subtly) inquiring.

 

[hotel4dogs]

LOL, I think that typo was a freudian slip if there ever was one!!

I board several goldendoodles. They're huge, all of them. There's one that's a "mini" golden doodle, and he only weighs 55 pounds. People don't seem to get it that crossing a 15 pound dog with a 75 pound dog doesn't get you an average of the 2 weights...
The temperaments are all over the place. ALL the doodles, both labra- and golden- shed.
They're cute, fun dogs. So are a lot of the other mixes that I board. But the people who own the regular mixes got them with the idea of rescuing a dog in need, not of owning a piece of arm candy or a designer accessory.

You have no idea what health probelms will arrive from grossing these breeds.

 

[Pointgold]

I agree with Hank and PG. It is absurd to promote golden-doodles as the best of both breeds genetically, which is what people seeking them always naively believe. They are just as likely to be the worst of both breeds. . . It is just an insult to the careful, well-researched breeding programs of fine poodles and fine goldens to blithely cross together two less than exemplary members of each breed and call it a "doodle". There are at least twenty doodles here in Falmouth Maine, out and about in the parks and beaches, and so far none(zero) of the owners know what health clearances are. I have been actively (hopefully subtly) inquiring.

"It is just an insult to the careful, well-researched breeding programs of fine poodles and fine goldens to blithely cross together two less than exemplary members of each breed and call it a "doodle".

The key words here are "less than exemplary members of each breed".
Reputable, responsible breeders who have worked diligently to produce the best dogs that they can, to maintain the integrity of their breed, and to improve their own lines, are NOT going to allow their good dogs to be cross-bred. Shoot, we use limited registration so people don't randomly breed them to other Golden Retrievers, let alone Poodles. You aren't going to see the sires and dams of Doodles winning at Westminster. You wouldn't be likely to see them even making the cut at a local all-breed show. Snobbish? No. Honest. The quality of the dogs being used for "designer dogs" - MUTTS - is marginal, at best. These breeders DO NOT CARE, as long as it's a Golden, a Labrador, or a Poodle, and intact. I know. I've had people call me to ask to use one of my "studs" or to see if I want to "mate one of my females" to their "stud". After asking who referred them to me, I learned that they'd just asked around for Golden breeders, never telling anyone they were breeding Doodles. They knew nothing about my dogs, and didn't even ask. Not about clearances, not about temperaments, not about size. THEY DO NOT CARE. With no regard to any of the most important components of a good breeding, believe me, there is little chance of the resulting offspring being "healthier" than the average BYB or puppy mill dog.

"Hybrid vigor" my arse. We aren't talking about growing sweet corn, here.

 

[ragtym]

Question: What is your opinion of Sir Dudley Marjoribanks? Was it unethical of him to create the Golden Retriever 141 years ago, then a designer dog, by crossing a yellow lab with the Tweed Water Spaniel, Irish Setter, Bloodhound, and St John's Water Dog?

The difference is that Lord Majoribanks was trying to produce a specific result by breeding to these different breeds. For example, the Bloodhound added a better "nose" to the breed.

The Labradoodle was originally bred as a "non-shedding" seeing-eye dog. The Goldendoodle doesn't share those origins. Some Labradoodle breeders are actually working (and have been working) for several generations to try and establish an actual "breed". The Goldendoodles have just NOW started a organization for that end. "Comfort Retrievers" have absolutely no use except to be apartment-sized Golden Retrievers. :doh:

Now to play devils advocate for a minute but first I am NOT NOT NOT NOT advocating for Goldendoodles. I honestly can't understand why someone would want to ruin a perfectly good breed like the Golden (sorry Poodle people).

However, I have done some research on "hybrid vigor" and found that it does exist between animals of the same species, particularly in cattle. It has been found that the first generation of one breed to another breed will produce individuals with "hybrid vigor". But, it only occurs with specific traits, usually size, fertility, & speed of development. It is not an overall improvement. This phenomenon has been well documented in cattle, not so much in dogs. The F1 or first generation usually receives the most benefits from cross-breeding with an approximately 50% reduction in those benefits everytime the F1's are bred to other F1's or back to the parent breed.

So basically, while the first generations MAY be healthier in SOME traits, any further crossbreeding can result in the loss of those advantages but that is not something that is well-advertised by the Goldendoodle breeders.

If the Goldendoodle is looking for eventual acceptance by AKC or any other purebred registry, they will have to give up one of their major advertising points because they will have to establish many generations past the point where hybrid vigor is actually even a factor.

Again, not meaning to be disrespectful to anyone and NOT defending Goldendoodle breeding in general, but there are Goldendoodle breeders who ARE doing health testing on their dogs. I have found one breeder with several dogs with CHIC numbers! I'm sure that like with Golden Retriever breeders, there are good and bad breeders.

One of the biggest differences that I have seen between Golden Retriever and Goldendoodle (Labradoodle) breeders lately is the response to Obama's dog search. For the most part, the purebred breeders are more hesitant to put their breeds out there for consideration because they understand what having their breed in the White House would do to sales of that breed of puppy and what the result would be in the end, more pups in shelters. The Doodle breeders are looking at this as an opportunity to sell MORE puppies and get MORE exposure for themselves - I have seen this stated over and over again on their breeder boards. With all the press in the last few days over the Labradoodle, I have heard ONE dissenting opinion about the Obama's choosing a Labradoodle and that came from a Doodle rescue group.

Okay, enough rambling for now. Sorry if this is kind of rambling and jumbled. I didn't get a lot of sleep so my thought processes are a little scrambled.

Ragtym

 

[Pointgold]

The difference is that Lord Majoribanks was trying to produce a specific result by breeding to these different breeds. For example, the Bloodhound added a better "nose" to the breed.

The Labradoodle was originally bred as a "non-shedding" seeing-eye dog. The Goldendoodle doesn't share those origins. Some Labradoodle breeders are actually working (and have been working) for several generations to try and establish an actual "breed". The Goldendoodles have just NOW started a organization for that end. "Comfort Retrievers" have absolutely no use except to be apartment-sized Golden Retrievers. :doh:

Now to play devils advocate for a minute but first I am NOT NOT NOT NOT advocating for Goldendoodles. I honestly can't understand why someone would want to ruin a perfectly good breed like the Golden (sorry Poodle people).

However, I have done some research on "hybrid vigor" and found that it does exist between animals of the same species, particularly in cattle. It has been found that the first generation of one breed to another breed will produce individuals with "hybrid vigor". But, it only occurs with specific traits, usually size, fertility, & speed of development. It is not an overall improvement. This phenomenon has been well documented in cattle, not so much in dogs. The F1 or first generation usually receives the most benefits from cross-breeding with an approximately 50% reduction in those benefits everytime the F1's are bred to other F1's or back to the parent breed.

So basically, while the first generations MAY be healthier in SOME traits, any further crossbreeding can result in the loss of those advantages but that is not something that is well-advertised by the Goldendoodle breeders.

If the Goldendoodle is looking for eventual acceptance by AKC or any other purebred registry, they will have to give up one of their major advertising points because they will have to establish many generations past the point where hybrid vigor is actually even a factor.

Again, not meaning to be disrespectful to anyone and NOT defending Goldendoodle breeding in general, but there are Goldendoodle breeders who ARE doing health testing on their dogs. I have found one breeder with several dogs with CHIC numbers! I'm sure that like with Golden Retriever breeders, there are good and bad breeders.

One of the biggest differences that I have seen between Golden Retriever and Goldendoodle (Labradoodle) breeders lately is the response to Obama's dog search. For the most part, the purebred breeders are more hesitant to put their breeds out there for consideration because they understand what having their breed in the White House would do to sales of that breed of puppy and what the result would be in the end, more pups in shelters. The Doodle breeders are looking at this as an opportunity to sell MORE puppies and get MORE exposure for themselves - I have seen this stated over and over again on their breeder boards. With all the press in the last few days over the Labradoodle, I have heard ONE dissenting opinion about the Obama's choosing a Labradoodle and that came from a Doodle rescue group.

Okay, enough rambling for now. Sorry if this is kind of rambling and jumbled. I didn't get a lot of sleep so my thought processes are a little scrambled.

Ragtym

LOL. Unless you are a geneticist (and even if you are, or, maybe because your are :curtain I find most discussions about this topic always are rambling and jumbled!

I appreciate your post. You are referring to the heterosis effect.

I've opened another thread - Genetics 101 (Mendel for Dummies) and hope that the whole topic will be discussed more (and without hijacking other threads!)

 

[paranthesis]

Okay, here's where you lost me: "No, crossbreeds are more healthy due to hybrid vigor."

This is an absolutely false statement. A hybrid is NOT the result of crossing two (or more) breeds. It is the result of crossing two SPECIES. And crossbred dogs are NOT more healthy.
What it is, is that knowledgeable breeders KNOW that the marketing of Doodles, Noodles, Orkis, Poos, etc etc is a marketing scam. Because they are NOT what those who breed and sell them (for exhorbitant prices) claim that they are. The "breeders" of these mutts (face it, this is what they are, and I won't apologize to anyone who feels that is a derogatory or politically incorrect term - heck, Obama called himself a mutt...) rarely, if ever, do genetic health clearances on the parents of these crosses, and we all know that Goldens and Labs can have HD/ED, SAS, thyroid issues, eye problems, etc. Poodles can have HD/ED, SAS, eye problems, Addison's Disease, etc. If any of those health issues are present in one or both parents, breeding them increases the chances of the offspring having them, as well. They don't magically go away because they are "hybrids" (which again, they are not).
Part of the problem is that just because you don't look for it it doesn't mean it's not there - and I know of very few people with mixed breed dogs who do health clearances such as hip/elbow radiographs, cardiac testing, or CERF eye checks, and having worked for many years as a vet tech, I'll tell you that mixed breeds have more than their share of health issues that very well could be any of those problems. But without checking for them, they will never know.

Stating that there are a heck of a lot more Golden Retrievers in shelters than there are Labradoodles (or Goldendoodles) would be because THERE ARE A HECK OF A LOT MORE GOLDEN RETRIEVERS THAN THERE ARE GOLDEN/LABRA DOODLES. And anyone who has done rescue will tell you that the vast majority of the Goldens that ARE in shelters or rescue are not the result of reputable breeders, but rather BYB's, HVB's, and mills. And THOSE are the "breeders" who pay little attention to the standard, health issues, and temperaments, but rather worship the almighty dollar.

I didn't know heterosis (aka "hybrid vigor") was even a debateable subject. It's long been deemed a scientific fact. Cattle ranches use it (between Black Angus and Hereford) to keep their livestock healthy. Corn farmers use seed that is crossed and double crossed for maximum hybrid vigor. Recessive defects need both the mother and father to carry the gene in order to pass in on, if the mother and father are different breeds, each of which more likely to have different defects, then the likelyhood of passing on such recessive defects are greatly reduced.

In purebred dogs, intentionally breeding dogs of very similar appearance over several generations produces animals that carry many of the same alleles, some of which are detrimental. This is especially true if the dogs are closely related. This inbreeding (aka "linebreeding") among purebreds has exposed various genetic health problems not readily apparent in less uniform populations. Mixed-breed dogs are more genetically diverse due to the more haphazard nature of their parents' mating. "Haphazard" is not the same as "random" to a geneticist. The offspring of such matings are less likely to express certain genetic disorders because there is a decreased chance that both parents carry the same detrimental recessive alleles.

Several studies have shown that mixed-breed dogs have a health advantage. A German study finds that "Mongrels require less veterinary treatment". Studies in Sweden have found that "Mongrel dogs are less prone to many diseases than the average purebred dog" and, referring to death rates, “Mongrels were consistently in the low risk category”. Another study reports that “The median age at death was 8,5 years for all mixed breed dogs and 6,7 years for all pure breed dogs... For each weight group, the age at death of pure breed dogs was significantly less than for mixed breed dogs”, and a study in Denmark finds that "Higher average longevity of mixedbreed dogs (grouped togther).

"We found our F1 females became much superior mothers compared to the purebred animals, producing large quantities of milk and giving excellent care to their offspring, so that the F2's had a better start in life. These genetic and environmental advantages of the F1's and F2's are reflected in decreased mortality." - Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog by John Paul Scott and John L. Fuller

 

[AmbikaGR]

With respect to the OP, a new thread has been created to continue this disscussion, so this thread is returned to the topic intended.
you'll find it here

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=49644

 

[Pointgold]

Deleted reply and reposted in appropriate thread.

 

[Pointgold]

With respect to the OP, a new thread has been created to continue this disscussion, so this thread is returned to the topic intended.
you'll find it here

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=49644

Thanks, Hank. I'll repost my reply there, as well.