I was researching some of Kariba's lines, and her cousin is this:
Intensely line bred, "Sadie" has crossed well with Tug Hill Whamunition, producing Futurity Helen C, Futurity J. Wilamina, our own 2003 brown filly, Jessebelle - Reserve World Champion Park Harness two-year-old, whose 2006 full sister is very sharp. EDIT: its not working, so just go here, 2nd horse down: http://www.bostonmorgans.com/mares.html
This is what line breeding is/ has come to? Breeding full brothers and sisters? Doesn't this create some genetic defect or something? I mean, Kariba's line bred, but not NEARLY that bad!
My favorite quote when it comes to this sort of thing is:
"When you do it right, it's linebreeding. When you do it wrong, it's inbreeding."
I think the term linebreeding is ridiculously tossed around nowadays. I don't much agree with it to begin with, I think the cons far outweigh the pros as we've seen in the rampant genetic disease that keep surfacing from specific lines in different breeds. But lately it seems that ANY inbreeding is just called linebreeding and considered acceptable.
Look where it got the dog people - horse people are NO different and we're heading down the same route.
Haha, you already know my opinions TH! Kariba seems to be a great mare, but I reacted pretty strongly when you showed me her bloodlines, to how closely linebred she is. I agree with Macabre. I understand the premise of linebreeding, I just don't agree with it. Breeding within a closed system has already proven catastrophic with dogs and is going that way with horses too, IMO. Outcrossing is something desperately needed to be given thought to within most bloodlines.
With Arabians, yes, line breeding is done quite frequently. It can be good and it can be bad, IMO.
The good is when the breeder, 1. Doesn't inbreed too close (full brother to full sister or son to dam) and 2. Line breeds for a reason and with horses who are correctly conformed, especially in their feet and legs.
I think that when a breeder is trying to achieve a certain "look" to her breeding program, then sometimes line breeding is necessary and fine. I DON'T agree with son breeding his dam, full brother to full sister. Too close.
The bad: In the Arab world, people are starting to breed feet problems because of all the careless breeders who just want to make a pretty foal and aren't looking at feet and legs because in the end, "It just doesn't matter". All they want is living art (I'm talking about the Show Arabian world. And of course, this doesn't apply to everyone who shows. I'm speaking generally and from experience.) Father is bred to daughter, then that foal is bred to father again. Sometimes this is a non-issue (as in, the foal will grow and be perfectly normal. But what about when that horse breeds on? )....but when the horses in question have feet problems and the breeders ignore that? Don't they realize that all they are doing is condensing the problem?
Anyway, long post from me, but I just wanted to explain some of my thoughts from the Arab Show world perceptive. Wow, thunderhooves, that second mare in the link is full brother bred to full sister. I haven't ever seen that in the Arab world. That's as close as it gets! LOL.
Oh, and when I say that a breeder can achieve a certain "look" to her breeding program by linebreeding, I'm not condoning or agreeing with continuous linebreeding. Generation after generation of that, even if the horses have correct conformation, you're going to have problems somewhere and eventually. Occasional, distant LB is ok, IMO, but definitely get new blood in there more than you LB.
I agree - linebreeding is a jargon for inbreeding - it just sounds better!!! They did it with friesians and look at the mess that has caused - although no-one will admit it!!! I think it is wrong no matter what - even Darwin figured out that closing a gene pool meant you get weaker and weaker specimens and more and more health problems with each generation!! It also causes fertility problems so the breed becomes infertile eventually - so I guess it solves itself eventually!!
Why is it with breeders they are so obsessed with purity - what does purity mean anyway - all breeds started with a mixture or a base type - always baffles me that one!!!
I think it is wrong no matter what - even Darwin figured out that closing a gene pool meant you get weaker and weaker specimens and more and more health problems with each generation!! It also causes fertility problems so the breed becomes infertile eventually - so I guess it solves itself eventually!!
I agree with your premise 100%, but you have a few facts wrong. Darwin actually believed in linebreeding - even in humans. :) He thought of linebreeding/inbreeding as his theory of evolution put in high gear. He married his first cousin, and had ten children. Here's what happened:
In closing, it is worth recounting where "race improvement," through eugenics, took Darwin and the rest of the world.
It seems Charles Darwin was interested in maintaining the 'genetic superiority' of his own bloodline and so he married his first cousin. From this marriage, Darwin produced ten children.
Of Darwin's four daughters, one girl, Mary, died shortly after birth; another girl, Anne, died at the age of ten years from Scarlet Fever; while his eldest daughter, Henrietta, had a serious and prolonged breakdown at age fifteen.
Of Darwin's six sons, three suffered such frequent illness that Darwin considered them semi-invalids, while his last son, Charles Jr., was born mentally ******ed and died nineteen months after birth.
Of Darwin's adult children, neither William Darwin, Elizabeth Darwin, Leonard Darwin or Henrietta Darwin had children of their own -- a startling high incidence of infecundity.
Of the three children that grew up reasonably unafflicted physically and mentally, Leonard Darwin went on to serve as chairman of the Eugenics Society (serving from 1911 to 1928) where he used the value of his father's name to lecture the world about "good breeding."
He too married his first cousin.
It was the Eugenics Society, under Leonard Darwin, that popularized the "Great Idea" of improving man through selective breeding and encouraged a program of state-sponsored negative eugenics.
Model laws, popularized by the Eugenics Society, advocated the mandatory sterilization of the ******ed and the feeble-minded. Within a few decades, Europe was rounding up of entire classes of "mongrel" people of "low breeding" and shipping them off to be disposed of in the ovens.
The above is quoted from my FAVORITE blog, Terrierman's Daily Dose, from an absolutely BRILLIANT post about linebreeding/inbreeding, it's affects, and closed registry systems. It's primarily about dogs, but the facts in the article remain the same. A very worthwhile read guys, check it out!
Yeah..Well "Just my two cents worth" but inbreeding/linebreeding whatever you wanna call it has been proven over, and over again to cause defects in animals and humans alike...not just physically but mentally...
I wouldn't want to try my luck with it....
I don't wanna mess with any 1200 lb animal that crazy.... ;)