# Inbreeding.....



## Marcia (Mar 10, 2009)

I thought i would post these 2 quotes as they really show that inbreeding isn't all that bad when you pair 2 healthy animals together. Obviously this shouldn't be attempted by anyone who isn't experienced.

And i'm not stating that everyone should do this. I just thought that people on here may be interested in both the pros and the cons 



> According to this site, inbreeding does not cause genetic defects or deformities. The reason why these things are associated with inbreeding is because if a gerbil already has these faults, a gerbil related to is more likely to also carry this trait, and in turn, the two are more likely to pass it down to their young. However, if you are breeding two healthy well formed gerbils who are related, you will be passing down positive traits and in turn, creating a strong line. Inbreeding though, should not be happening for more than 4 generations or so, as the gene pool will only become too shallow.
> 
> "Inbreeding can be a very contreversial topic, and it is true that too much inbreeding has caused some problems in other domestic animals, notably dogs and cats. However, one important thing to remember is inbreeding does NOT create genetics defects and outcrossing does NOT erase them. The genes are still there. The only thing that inbreeding does is increase the likelihood that both parents will carry the gene, and outcrossing decreases the chances. This is why many people make a policy of never breeding any animals, outcrossed or not, that have shown or are related to an animal that has shown a genetic problem.
> 
> ...





> It always annoys me when people immediately think inbreeding is bad in animals. What I usually say is, is that it can be both brilliant and awful - but it depends who is mucking with it!
> 
> When you inbreed you highlight any factors that are there and bring them to the surface in the offspring. Something you may not have noticed before could show up in a line, through inbreeding, whether that be good or bad! When you make a gene pool smaller, you have to be a lot more selective because once a problem is in, it is hard to breed it back out again!
> 
> ...


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

All I will say is I remember the school gerbil tank. Year 1 - a healthy pair of gerbils. Year 5 - a tank full of gerbils with a mixed variety of deformities, the worst being no legs at all. They ended up being put to sleep. Not a nice experience. I can honestly say my experience of inbreeding has not been a positive one and would not want to recommend it either.


----------



## StolenkissGerbils (Aug 8, 2008)

I don't know where those quotes came from but I'd be very VERY reluctant to inbreed more than 1 generation for any animal. 4 generations seems very excessive to me. I've seen the results of repeated inbreeding - 8 years of brother-to-sister, then 2 siblings from that same litter bred together, and again and again with very few outcrosses. The result was a population of gerbils with shrivelled, thin little tails, small in size, that spent their time smashing their noses into the corners of their cages and circling.

My take on inbreeding is here:
Stolenkiss Gerbils - Articles


----------



## Marcia (Mar 10, 2009)

I wouldn't inbreed full stop. And even if i did, i def wouldn't do it for more than 1 or 2 generations. That 4 generation part did make me wonder


----------



## foxxy cleopatra (Nov 18, 2008)

my robos are imbred...but they are soooooooooooo cute!


----------



## u-look-like-a-hamster (Aug 17, 2008)

not all robo's are though ^^


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

I just would never do it I know way too much about genetics and the problems it can cause to ever be able to. 
The way we were told was a random gene mutates it could be detrimental but say in the heterozygote form where there is both it and the normal gene it doesn't cause any problems. Therefore the breeders don't know it exists. They breed say brother to sister they both have this gene. There is a 25% chance the babies are going to inherit this problem. Even if they don't the gene will more than likely still carry on to the next generation. If they outcross there is a chance the gene will never carry on to the next generation or in less animals than it would in the inbred litter. This way the mutation which would have been lost can be fixed causing health problems in the future generations.
I don't think the health of the animal should be sacrificed to fix some new coat colour or whatever so the breeder can get more money from selling this unusual type.


----------



## foxxy cleopatra (Nov 18, 2008)

i wouldnt imbreed either, surely it cant ever be healthy? I dont think it should be called pros really.....


----------



## Agility Springer (Mar 15, 2009)

I personally don't think inbreeding of any kind with any animal is a good idea. i don't think its exactly nesersary (sp) its just to get a more desirable litters, am i right? is that why people in breed rodents?? 

Anyway, i dont wanna get too heavy, just my opinion but i would never do it, or condone it, think it is dangerous and unesersary (sp).


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

foxxy cleopatra said:


> i wouldnt imbreed either, surely it cant ever be healthy? I dont think it should be called pros really.....


Ah but they fix some new pretty coat type or colour or length of tail or something therefore getting more money for selling them. Thats a pro.


----------



## Marcia (Mar 10, 2009)

Nicky09 said:


> Ah but they fix some new pretty coat type or colour or length of tail or something therefore getting more money for selling them. Thats a pro.


Most breeders don't breed for money but for the love of the animal, so that's not very fair.

You wouldn't have half of the species of cats and dogs we have if it wasn't for inbreeding. Also, every syrian hamster is inbred.

Winter whites were obtained from inbreeding.


----------



## StolenkissGerbils (Aug 8, 2008)

All Syrian hamsters are descended from ONE litter of babies found in the wild. They were actually thought to be extinct until someone found a mother and her litter in a burrow in Syria. They captured them, put the mother down because of "aggression" (read "defending her babies") and bred hundreds of millions of descendants from those few siblings.

The same is true of gerbils, though there is a much larger initial wild capture stock (40 pairs or 40 individuals, I forget). Dwarf hamsters of all varieties will be just the same.

It's obvious that rodents can tolerate a much higher level of inbreeding than larger animals before you see a problem. They are already so intensely inbred anyway. One more generation of inbreeding has a limited scope for doing *additional* harm in animals that are already so inbred and genetically identical. If you end up with babies that have problems, in the majority of cases it's not a product of the inbreeding itself directly. It just proves that the gene/s already existed in that family and inbreeding doubled up on the problem. You then have the option of discontinuing that family line because you know it has a "bad" gene. (NB I know there can be mutations but these are the exception rather than the rule).

Inbreeding is also a very useful tool when there's no genetic test available for a health problem. You might have a parent who is suspected of being a carrier for this hypothetical problem. By test-breeding two full siblings from this parent, there is a chance you double up on this affected gene. If you produce an affected baby you know you have two carriers and therefore the original question has been answered. You can then eliminate those animals and their offspring from the genepool by neutering them and/or putting to sleep any that are very unwell. 

In the past, this was the only way to find out who your "clears", "carriers" and "affecteds" were for certain illnesses. We have gene tests for some problems now but not all, and not in all species. Test-mating closely related individuals remains a valuable tool in these circumstances. But it has to be closely monitored by people who know what they're doing (geneticists).

EDIT: Just to say, I make a HUGE loss on my gerbil breeding. I have given gerbils away rather than sell them when I knew they'd be going to a good home. I'm not interested in making money from them but I have linebred my gerbils. So really that doesn't tally with what Nicky has said, and actually I find it a bit offensive to read such a sweeping statement. If you are going to make money breeding pets of almost any kind you have to be running a large-scale establishment, like a puppy farm or its equivalent for whatever other animal you have.


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2009)

u-look-like-a-hamster said:


> not all robo's are though ^^


hi dolly :biggrin5:


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

Those quotes are interesting but I don't think inbreeding should be encouraged at all (im not saying you're encouraging them, just that the article could be when people look at their inbred pets and think "well they look healthy enough to me" and then go ahead and inbreed)

Unless someone had a heck of a lot of knowledge, understanding and careful planning of what animals they were to use, then I don't think purposeful inbreeding should happen. Surely it's better to just pick unrelated animals with the desired healthy traits?


----------



## Marcia (Mar 10, 2009)

Portia Elizabeth said:


> Those quotes are interesting but I don't think inbreeding should be encouraged at all (im not saying you're encouraging them, just that the article could be when people look at their inbred pets and think "well they look healthy enough to me" and then go ahead and inbreed)
> 
> Unless someone had a heck of a lot of knowledge, understanding and careful planning of what animals they were to use, then I don't think purposeful inbreeding should happen. Surely it's better to just pick unrelated animals with the desired healthy traits?


That's absolutely right. I only brought this topic up because everyone thinks that inbreeding will bring up unwanted traits, deformaties etc....When if it is done by a very knowledgable breeder who breeds for the love of the animal and he/she wants to improve his/her lines, then i think it can be done correctly with no ill effects.

Again, this is why breeders say you shouldn't ever breed from pet shop bought animals, you don't know if they carry any faulty genes. I always use gerbils with known backgrounds, i don't want any unwanted genetic traits popping up, it simply isn't fair on the poor gerbil pups.

Again, this meant to be a friendly discussion about the pros and cons


----------



## thedogsmother (Aug 28, 2008)

Thanks Marcia, reading this has eased my mind a bit regarding little Spike and her possible babies.


----------



## flufffluff39 (May 25, 2009)

There may not be a problem in the beginning but through experience with dogs that are inbred. Way down the line is where the problems start. Before anyone says anything it was'nt me breeding the dogs I bought a dog whose mother, father, grandmother and grandfather were brother and sister.


----------



## StolenkissGerbils (Aug 8, 2008)

That level of inbreeding you mention in your dog is way higher than I would tolerate. Dogs don't take multiple generations of inbreeding half as well as rodents do. The breeder of your dog should be shot.


----------

