# Why is my horse considered "inbred" and why specific to his case is that bad?



## jbolt (Jan 1, 2012)

*Why is my horse considered "inbred" and why specific to his case is that bad?*

:-|Why, specifically in my horse's case, is his pedigree looked upon poorly? 
www.allbreedpedigree.com/LZM+Toby+Hancock

Also some pics are posted.


----------



## Ladybug2001 (Mar 15, 2011)

I'm not good with pedigrees except with a few different lineages. Normally, in horse breeding inbreeding isn't horrible. Infact, it is practiced. Fathers bred to daughters, mothers bred to sons. It is to improve certain traits within that lingeage. It doesn't do any damage to a horses health, foals normally come out healthy as can be. Looking at his pedigree, as far as my eyes could tell, there was no inbreeding. Someone else will ahve to tell you on that.


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

Prancing hancock was in there twice on the mares side, as great grandfathers, i wouldn't technically class the horse inbred, in the dog world it would be line breeding BUT line breeding really is a nice word so the public doesnt think of drooling idiots be it horses or dogs lol. If there is ANY relation its inbred. But if I remember the research correctly, it takes 37 generations before you will get any kind of deformities, (again this is dogs). BUT thats not to say that there wont be genetic diseases that crop up. If you cross a mother to son, and they are both carriers, higher chances of the resulting offspring having the issue. You are doubling upi the good and the bad. Make sense?


----------



## Ladybug2001 (Mar 15, 2011)

InStyle said:


> Prancing hancock was in there twice on the mares side, as great grandfathers, i wouldn't technically class the horse inbred, in the dog world it would be line breeding BUT line breeding really is a nice word so the public doesnt think of drooling idiots be it horses or dogs lol. If there is ANY relation its inbred. But if I remember the research correctly, it takes 37 generations before you will get any kind of deformities, (again this is dogs). BUT thats not to say that there wont be genetic diseases that crop up. If you cross a mother to son, and they are both carriers, higher chances of the resulting offspring having the issue. You are doubling upi the good and the bad. Make sense?


 
Ah, did not see him twice. Well in this case, no, your horse isn't really "inbred". My mare has Doc O'lena on both her sire and dams side. Meaning she has Doc Bar and Poco Lena on both sides. I mean, it wouldn't be smart to inbred a mother and son if they both were carriers for a genetic disease. Mostly it is done if they both have what an owner wants. Conformation and so forth, by breeding them together would bring out the better qualities. That is why when shopping for a stud, you go for what he has that your mare doesn. Vise versa, does your mare have what he doesn't?

Again, not sure what is going on in your horses pedigree.


----------



## Cinnys Whinny (Apr 10, 2010)

I see a LOT of Hancock horses, but I don't think that really means inbreeding. Cinny has a lot of Doc in him and I don't think he's considered inbred, and have never heard him called that. I really didn't think it mattered too awfully much in horses unless there was a very bad trait being passed down.

Don't horses in the wild, technically inbreed for eons anyway? I mean, usually a band of horses had one main stallion and every year he got with all of his mares whether or not they were mothers, daughters or sisters? They only run off the stud colts, not the fillies....

If I were a breeder, I wouldn't do it, but that's my own personal choice. Doesn't mean anything is wrong with it.


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

There are 4 horses that are shown twice in the pedigree. 

Horse #1: Great great grandfather Prancing hancock on the mares side. 

Horse #2: Great great grandfather and ggg.grandfather seminole charley on the mares side 

Horse #3: GGGG.grandfather Driftwood on the studs side. 

Horse #4: GGGG grandfather Baldy Joe on the studs side. 
Genetically if one animal appears twice the animal is considered 'inbred'. BUT the percentage is VERY low. Most breeders ( again talking dogs here but would assume its relatively the same) would call the pedigree a linbreeding, since the inbreeding doesn't occur in the first few generations. The term inbred means : to produce by breeding closely related individuals. So if you had cousins in the pedigree it would be inbred. No ifs, ands, or buts. 

The term line breeding was brought about by breeders as the general public dislikes hearing the term 'inbred', as in humans its a bad thing. 


In dogs I have done father -daughter breedings. Once and then all the off spring was outcrossed. When I breed dogs I go for phenotype ( type to type) more then I do for pedigree breeding. But that's just me.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

Linebreeding or inbreeding, it makes no difference, the definition is still the same except "line bred" is usually used to describe a supposed 'quality':roll: animal and "inbred" is usually used to describe the junk animals.

With that being said, I see a bit of line breeding back a few generations but it's far enough away and a limited enough number that it won't effect your guy. It's kind of like when people claim that their horse is Doc Bar bred like it's supposed to prove something, even though Doc Bar may be 4 generations off the papers LOL. Once you get past about 2 or 3 generations, the ancestors really don't mean much.


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

I think inbred animals don't necessarily mean they are poor, its just the general publics perception that they are poor. I have used inbreeding in my lines. 

There is nothing wrong with your horse's pedigree, the inbreeding is far enough back, and wasn't done an outrageous amount. 

In Smooth Fox Terriers (my breed) almost every smooth in Australia and North America goes back to Ttarb the brat. So technically they are all 'inbred' but its SO far back its doesn't matter.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jbolt (Jan 1, 2012)

Thank you, I have been using the forums to try to figure out some differeent things and you all have been very helpful


----------



## rbarlo32 (Aug 9, 2010)

Usually inbreeding doesn't cause any damage ut it does significantly increase he chances of genetic abmomalties apearing.

I have two very inbreed colts and my new stallion has a lot of inbreeding in his pedigree all three are very well breed well conformed ponis.
Grindins Shooting Star Shetland Pony
Napier of Belmont Shetland Pony
Enrique of St Ninian Shetland Pony


----------



## animalartcreations (Oct 26, 2010)

It's not a "bad" pedigree. It's just that if somebody isn't a fan of Hancock horses, they won't like it, obviously. I like Hancock horses in general, although most of the ones I've seen are too tall for me. 

The danger with inbreeding/line breeding comes when bad genes are clustered along with the desirable traits. If I see a carrier for HERDA (all trace back to Poco Bueno), for example, on more than one line or 4-5 generations back, then I consider that horse a good candidate for genetic testing if it's a breeding animal or in the case of HERDA, I won't buy a horse under 3 years old like that unless I know that there is no way that the colt can have two copies. There are competitive HERDA carrier horses like Doc O'lena, Dry Doc, Topsail Starlight, Smart Little Lena, and High Brow Cat, etc. King, by Zantanon, was a GBED carrier so doubling or tripling up on horses that go back to him increase the chance of carrier status.


----------



## animalartcreations (Oct 26, 2010)

Of course some inbreeding/linebreeding is actually desirable! Take for example the X Factor horses. These are horses which have a double copy of the large heart gene which is attributed to incredible endurance and when combined with excellent conformation, has created champions of the highest order. It is found in QH's that trace back to a certain line of TB's.


----------



## MangoRoX87 (Oct 19, 2009)

Hancocks seem to be constantly rebred to eachother as a way to I guess keep that part of the foundation lines alive. JUST MY GUESS. Most of the Hancocks you see aren't of that high of quality horses (your horse is actually a really good looking horse) and seems like at this point they just keep striving for that roan color


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

looks linebred to me.


----------



## Annnie31 (May 26, 2011)

Agree with Farmpony. I would consider your horse linebred not inbred. I believe inbred would be when you breed father to daughter or mother to son. It is not uncommon. Linebred is in my opinion when a breeder is trying to create a line specific to that animal (in this case the Hancock bloodline) in order to achieve better confirmation, genetics, and temperment (not necasarilly in that order or to achieve all stated). 
It can be complicated to explain as in many circles both inbred and linebred are considered the same thing so different ideals exist.


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

Does no one care about genetics and terms ? LOL. If there are ANY ancestors in common its inbred. If no ancestors are common its outcrossed. Linebreeding was a term that breeders invented, so the general public wouldn't think of inbred animals ( 2heads, 5legs etc etc). Provided inbreeding is done properly ( don't cross a father with a daughter if they both have the same faults! Or are both carriers for a genetic disease) there is nothing wrong with it. I have done father/daughter and half bro to half sis breedings, the puppies were lovely! Often times inbreeding/line breeding has a better chance of a great result then outcrossing as you are breeding type to type. 

The horses pedigree in question would be inbreed as it has 4 horses that are the same on both the mares and studs side. 

Not trying to nitpick, just I think people need to realize the inbreeding is not inherently bad.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

I've always been told, T.I.C., that linebreeding is when it works and inbreeding is when it doesn't.


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

**** @ dreamcatcher ! If only!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Annnie31 (May 26, 2011)

I found this explanation in an article and I believe it explains very well why breeders use the different terms. Its quite simple and the same terminology is used in horse circles unless you are a scientist I guess.




Part of the misunderstandings come from differences in the way the terms are used within the scientific/medical field, and how it is commonly used by breeders. These are the most commonly accepted definitions used by serious dog breeders and will be the definitions used within this article. 
In-breeding - This is the breeding of closely related animals. Brother-Sister, Parent-Offspring, ½ brother - ½ Sister.
Line-breeding - This is the breeding of animals that share common ancestors but are not closely related. For example the dogs may share a common great-grandparent.
Out-cross - This is generally considered the breeding of animals with no common ancestors within the first 4 or 5 generations.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

InStyle said:


> *Does no one care about genetics and terms ? LOL. If there are ANY ancestors in common its inbred*. If no ancestors are common its outcrossed. Linebreeding was a term that breeders invented, so the general public wouldn't think of inbred animals ( 2heads, 5legs etc etc). Provided inbreeding is done properly ( don't cross a father with a daughter if they both have the same faults! Or are both carriers for a genetic disease) there is nothing wrong with it. I have done father/daughter and half bro to half sis breedings, the puppies were lovely! Often times inbreeding/line breeding has a better chance of a great result then outcrossing as you are breeding type to type.
> 
> The horses pedigree in question would be inbreed as it has 4 horses that are the same on both the mares and studs side.
> 
> ...


While everyone has their own feelings about what is line breeding and what is inbreeding, your statement that I highlighted is of course not true. If you are going to invoke biology and genetics, perhaps you should consult more scientific sources for your definitions. In biological terms, inbreeding results from the mating of two closely related parents. While the term "closely related" is a bit subjective, the fact that the parents may have a common ancestor or ancestors somewhere beyond the second generation does not make them closely related, and certainly does not reflect "inbreeding". By your definition, virtually every animal on Earth is inbred, which would render both the word and the entire concept moot...


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

I was joking I wasn't entirely serious, its a forum so everyone has their own opinions, but I am not incorrect either. I run inbreeding %'s on my dogs pedigrees when I breed them to have numbers, we were doing this for a study, and we worked with fellow breeders who are scientists and geneticists to do this. I have spent years learning about it. 

When you start looking into this side of things it can be amazing. For example, You can have 2 unrelated parents. (Outcrossed)BUT the pedigree can still be inbred. If the sire was a result of a grandfather-grandaughter breeding, and let's say the dam was the result of a brother-sister breeding, so both would be considered inbred BUT according to the term 'the parents are related', the dog would not be inbred, when in fact the inbred % on the pedigree is rather high. So, its an inbred outcross  

In genetic terminology, inbreeding is the breeding of two animals who are related to each other. In its opposite, outcrossing, the two parents are totally unrelated. 
Since all pure breeds of animal trace back to a relatively limited number of foundation dogs, all pure breeding is by this definition inbreeding, although the term is not generally used to refer to matings where a common ancestor does not occur behind sire and dam in a four or five generation pedigree.

Breeders of purebred livestock have introduced a term, linebreeding, to cover the milder forms of inbreeding. Exactly what the difference is between linebreeding and inbreeding tends to be defined differently for each species and often for each breed within the species. On this definition, inbreeding at its most restrictive applies to what would be considered unquestioned incest in human beings - parent to offspring or a mating between full siblings. Uncle-niece, aunt-nephew, half sibling matings, and first cousin matings are called inbreeding by some people and linebreeding by others. 

Sorry I bothered saying anything. A question was asked, "is my horse inbred?" and yes technically he is. Does it matter overly ? NO. Do I think inbreeding in animals is wrong ? NO, I have done it with my own dogs. As the above paragraphs states, everyone has their own definition of inbred. I was sharing mine, as learned by geneticists and scientists. I wasn't trying to change anyone's mind. I was merely sharing my information. I have given up trying to change people minds a long time ago, I learned no matter how right or wrong someone is, a lot of people don't like change. Let's agree to disagree, you think what you want, and I will think what I want. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## InStyle (Nov 14, 2011)

@annnie31, as mentioned I breed Smooth Fox terriers, and every dog breeder I know uses the term, inbreeding, linebreeding or outcrossed, never heard the term parent -offspring. 

And I am a vet tech, breeder,trainer, groomer, boarding kennel (dogs) and I handler show dogs at akc and ckc events so I have plenty of opportunity to discuss breedings with fellow breeders. 

Maybe it was a term used a while back ? To me it would be inbred.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## reining girl (Jan 30, 2009)

I would call that linebreeding. And its quite a ways back there. This is what i would call inbreeding Hcc Sharzara Arabian there basically full brother and sister, eewwy.


----------

