Line breeding: how do I get started?

[Yoyo with chick]

I've been reading up on it but have never found out how to get started.

 

[Yellow House Farm]

What the hobby needs is more talented breeders, and less talented talkers. Of all the new interest in poultry, there are only a few sincerely interested in learning the craft.

I just said this on the phone minutes ago. If a given variety in a given breed has more than six serious, hardcore breeders at the moment, well, that's a lucky variety. As Bob would say, "KISS..."

 

[gjensen]

Yes, it would make little sense to line breed EEs. There is no standard to breed to. The whole idea is to have some vigorous egg layers of blue AND green eggs. The whole idea is for them to be mixed and variable.

Like I mentioned earlier. Line breeding is about emphasizing an individual or individuals. Whether or not that is what is intended, that is the result. When you mate a sire's daughters back to the sire, you are accentuating his influence. When you mate sons back to a dam(s) you are concentrating the genetics from that female(s). These tings should be done for a reason and a purpose. I have to really like an individual to "double" up the influence. Otherwise, I am looking at what I have and what I need and where my problems are. Then making (hopefully) appropriate decisions on who goes with who. Line breeding fixes the good and the bad.

Now if that individual that outshines the rest is identified, then certainly I want to maximize the influence of that individual. Even if I am using that individual for a single trait.

I would even use a brother to sister mating in an attempt to set a trait or traits.

Line breeding is a tool and a method. It is helpful to understand why, why not, when, and when not to. For example is if a particular sire is not producing a good average of good birds to another, why would I want to use him again on his daughters? Why would I want to emphasize an individual cock bird that should be in the stew pot?

I think we can get too religious about these methods. They seam to have a romantic appeal, I guess. I agree in the importance of these structures, but we seam to want to go their before we even identify anything worth moving forward with. A lot of newbies like myself, tend to want to focus on the method more than the traits found in individual birds. I say get moving forward, and identify something that is worth emphasizing. Then line breed with that superior individual.

 

[chooks4life]

I wasn't saying it was related to the original topic, but that it's one of the most likely-looking explanations behind the topic we diverted into, which was the question of why younger parents would produce poorer offspring --- or rather the sharing of differing experiences supporting/not supporting that finding.

In sharing your opinion on the topic, unfortunately, you're repeatedly making some rather unnecessary statements about things like 'talented talkers' and 'internet authorities' and other terms like that which don't have any use in this discussion, or any reasonable debate on any topic. All they do is show your feelings on the subject but that's of no use to anyone trying to learn here.

I never made any claim I was an expert --- in fact I made one very simple little observation and the response has been excessively derogatory in general. Since we began discussing epigenetics, you've made many remarks referring to supposed experts, authorities, fanciful thinkers etc, but here's my first reference to it... Let me know if anywhere in there you see any claim or even suggestion of authoritative knowledge:
Quote:
Going by your own statements on epigenetics, it's not something anyone can dismiss out of hand nor arbitrarily claim as a cause of some effect, but nobody here has done the latter.

Without intending to cause offense, I can't see how you're able to legitimately claim epigenetics are irrelevant, unless you're an authority on epigenetics.

I see you hold this subject in some contempt, that's clearly within your rights, but using derogatory phrasing to describe people who have different beliefs and theories than you do is never constructive. I don't know if it's aimed at me or anyone else here but it's pointlessly distracting from the actual topic being discussed, which is off topic in the first place. It was a simple remark I made, not intended to ruffle any feathers.

I'm not sure where in any discussion derogatory remarks have a functional purpose, other than shaming people for daring to ask questions or be different; generally it's a control method used by those who want to dismiss others' opinions, often with either a belief in their own complete correctness driving it, or a vested interest. (Neither of which I am accusing you of nor implying, after all you've stated you're not sure of the science behind it as it's still in much conflict, and I doubt you have a vested interest in it. Just a general observation on the general context in which derogatorily dismissive statements begin being applied in attempting to shoot down an opinion.) Reminds me a bit of the majority of the scientific communities' scornful and vitriolic dismissal of all the herbal knowledge our ancestors collected, which has since had to be retracted in increasingly large amounts as we learn to stop scoffing without knowing the full story or even being open-minded to comprehensively learning about it before passing judgment on it. The old 'quack feather-&-tarring' treatment has been used on many pioneers of the way of the future by often well meaning but mistaken sorts.

Scientific roads to knowledge are paved with countless mistakes, failures, and often scathing scorn directed at anyone who didn't go with the preferred opinions of their day, many of whom were later shown to be correct... At least as far as we know at this given time, lol. May be subject to change without warning.

With that in mind I'd suggest that because the subject is still under much debate, though with some proven aspects, we should probably refrain from making absolute statements, and it should go without saying that any discussion of conflicting viewpoints is bettered by the lack of usage of emotive/dismissive adjectives.

Best wishes. Each to their own, different worldviews and all.

 

[gjensen]

Sigh, management has a lot to do with epigenetics. Diet and environment are key to those on/off switches.

Don't you worry about bottlenecks and a lack of diversity using the posted breeding plan? I realize the plan posted was the quick version but what do you do if your ten best are all siblings? How do you deal with the complete loss of some potentially valuable genes? Lowered MHC? It has to be important in poultry too.

FYI- I have no plans for poultry breeding. Not interested. Plus no roosters, no breeding. Common problem I'm sure. Worked with parrot breeders. Not sure why you can have Cockatoos and Macaws yet not roosters, I think my hearing is permanently affected. Raising chickens is a piece of cake compared to them.

This could have been a discussion about a multitude of species in almost any time in history. It's both funny and sad. I am sorry that some poultry breeders feel an us/them mentality. It only lessens your chances of learning.

That is good question, and for me it is settled on a few points.

One is the side mating, by which you can add "new blood" safely.

Another is numbers. Notice the author mentioned minimum numbers. Also qty that is hatched is a relevant consideration. There is variability in the numbers. The more offspring that are hatched, the more variation that is seen. I believe one can work their way out of a corner, just by hatching in qty and smart selection.

Selection is a key point. There is always a bird or birds that are more vigorous and healthy than their hatch mates. A viable flock requires good vigor. It does not take long for a keeper to be able
to identify who those individuals are.

A point that I like about breeding poultry is not being bound by a piece of paper. That point alone gives enough freedom to never have the excuse why the flock is in poor health.

Chickens tolerate inbreeding better than mammals.

All of it boils down to good decisions/ good breeding. A breeder should know when he/she needs to do something, why, and how. Often that is done on the side, before it is decided to add the bird(s) to the main effort. Otherwise the breeders efforts could be compromised.

It is not all that different in the rest of creation. A pride, herd, pack etc. does not necessarily receive a complete genetic exchange every year. Also the adjacent groups usually share some degree of relation. Instead of natural selections, the breeder is the pressure and brings in what is necessary and wen it is necessary.

You could go quite some time with the above breeding plan IF food decisions are made. If their is poor selection, the flock could head down hill in a very short time.

Yes, management could be considered part of epigenetics. Just remember most changes in animals are not heritable and reversible. I do hope before anyone decides to breed any animals, they learn to take good care of them first. There is no pleasure in unhealthy stock. A vigorous, healthy, well bred flock is a pleasure to own.

 

[tridentk9]

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Eleanor Roosevelt


I'm not on the great mind level. I can only try. It is a good thought to remember during discussions.

 

[Yellow House Farm]

1. For clarity, I am a Latin teacher.

2. I think you misunderstand what George and I and several others do here. If you follow through the threads and read them, you will notice that we spend very little time discussing random ideas per se. Rather, our focus is in helping would-be breeders learn the craft of standard-bred poultry breeding, and our discussions remain practical and applicable.

It would appear that you would like to discuss certain ideas for the sake of the idea or to debate for the sake of the debate, which of course has it's time and place. However, if you follow what we have written for the last several seasons, you'll notice that that is not our tone nor our general intention. No one is engaging the debate because it does not serve the purpose of what we are doing here. There are other spaces here where folks discuss all sorts of matter they do not actually practice, but that is not the case here. My realization via your tone and modus dicendi that you do not actually breed poultry was not a mere ad hominem attack for the purpose of reductio ad absurdum, but rather an expression of situation definition that you were seeking to discuss matters not as an example of your practical poultry experience but rather in an effort to sort out imagined ideas. Again, that's a great thing to do, but it's not the general reason for which, I'd argue, most of us come here.

Just a few clarifying observanda,

Best!

 

[gjensen]

The best information on line breeding specific to chickens I have found has been on the game bird cock fighting forums. I don't approve of the practice, but most of the famous lines have been line bred for decades, some for more than one hundred years.

They have been doing it for thousands of years. They have taught us a lot about poultry, and breeding livestock.

You are right, those sites are a great resource for this kind of information, and poultry in general. Though their goals are different, we can take something from the emphasis and the perspective.

To them, breeding along a line, is about breeding proven performing individuals. The sire and dam is proven, and the offspring are proven. Where we tend to get stuck on color genetics, they are the opposite. They have little regard for color. The emphasis on genotype/phenotype is the opposite of what we find here.
Still a lesson that we can gather from the emphasis is proving the offspring before any real commitment is made to them.

When inheritance is as much or more about the family behind the bird, what we see is not always what we get. I have a cock bird, that I will not use again. He showed promise, but his offspring have showed otherwise. His brother, though he is equal on his own, has been a greater contributor. I intend to use him another season at least.

Good breeders of games, are also very concerned with vigor. Line breeding raises the bar concerning the emphasis on vigor. Maintaining vigor in a line will allow the breeder to go much farther than he/she would have otherwise. Vigor is priority number one. .

Among well bred birds, you will not find any breeds that have vigor equal to the game fowl.

The best game breeders that I have met, do not fight their birds anymore. Many are still at it because they love their birds.

They are also great at conditioning poultry.

 

[chooks4life]

:/ lol it's quite simple, you allow descendants to breed with their own progenitors.

I take it though that your question is intended more along the lines of 'how do I achieve my intended outcome via linebreeding'? (Correct me if I'm wrong). But nobody can help you with that when we don't know what genetics you're starting with or what end result you want to achieve.

In order to answer that question in a relevant way or make plans/take steps towards the ideal, well, you'd need to have some idea of a breeding plan, i.e. an objective list of what you want in terms of results, time period to achieve that, the genotype/phenotype faults you want to address, the positives you want to introduce or maintain, and some understanding of chook genetics (there are a lot of great books and online sources that can help you there) so you can weed out problems along the way and prevent others from happening.

The plan for your linebreeding depends in large part on what sort of genetics and the good and bad points your chooks have.

Best wishes. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. More information is needed.

 

[Tuhmu]

Idk if this has been covered, didn't get a chance to read the whole forum yet but here is some info I came across awhile back. Not sure who the author is or who originally posted it though, so all credit to unknown helpful person.


**** I believe this to be the most practical and probably the best overall breeding system for poultry. It simply consists of breeding cocks to pullets and cockerels to hens. Yes, it requires at least two pens for each breed or variety, but it requires minimal record keeping, prevents extremes in breeding and helps to select for both vigor and uniformity. The system is also relatively forgiving of mistakes in selection or an introduction of new stock that does not combine well with an established flock. These problems will tend to correct themselves in future cycles.
Here is the formula for starting with a trio of Javas. (Note: Most old time breeders would not use less than two trios of anything, because that was not “deep enough” and preferred a “breeding” of two males and eight to ten hens).
But, in this case, we are starting with an initial trio. Let us say in a single season we raise thirty Javas (15 of each sex). From these, we would keep the three best males and eight or ten of the best females. The rest we sell or eat. The next breeding season, the old male is mated to the pullets and the best cockerel is mated to the old hens. The other two cockerels are spares and show birds. A rule of thumb is always to keep at least half as many spare males as you had breeding males and never keep less than two. This system can be expanded to any size, but when in full swing, it should have at least four males and twenty females.
The following year the two old cocks (the cockerel is over a year old now) are teamed with the 10 best pullets. The young (year old) hens join their mothers with the two best cockerels and the system is now running well.
After each season, the old birds are combined and culled to the two best cocks and the best ten hens. The best two cockerels and the ten best pullets are selected from the young birds. The pullets are teamed with the cocks and the hens with the cockerels. The breeder is ready for the following season.
Old time breeder, Bruce Lentz, would often have “side matings”. This might be unrelated stock from another breeder or culls that had one or more very desirable characteristics. He might work with these birds for years until he got them to the desired state of perfection. Then, they would be slowly worked in on the pullet and cockerel side of his regular matings.
The complaints I have heard about this system are that it is too easy; anybody can do it; it is not breeding, and it depends upon your ability to select breeders or cull.
The answer? It is easy; anybody can do it; it is breeding, and any system depends upon your ability to select breeders. This system will maintain a viable population while you develop the art. ********

May help you get started if anything, hope it helps!