Breeding related chickens

[brothfeder]

I know nothing about breeding chickens so here goes a few basic poultry breeding questions: It seems everyone as no issue backcrossing F1s with parent generations. This IS considered inbreeding, right? Can this be repeated many times? Can you safely cross F1s together? Its okay to inbreed chickens like this? I assume you should add a fresh cock or hen to the mix once in a while? The major question is how safe is it to cross related individuals and how long can I get away with it? Any references to professional breeding info would be awesome

Thanks (yes I've researched my questions - but I gotta ask because inbreeding seems dangerous).

 

[Fred's Hens]

Dangerous? Hardly.

Line breeding, a controlled, systematic kind of inbreeding, if you will, is the basis of poultry breeding. Might want to take some time to do more reading. Here's some links that may help you wrap your mind around the program.

http://bloslspoutlryfarm.tripod.com/id16.html

http://bloslspoutlryfarm.tripod.com/id60.html

 

[3riverschick]

Hi and

Here ya go. One of my all time fav poultry books. These are laws, not opinions or theories.
Wid Card was a noteworthy veteran poultry man. He had a gift for making complex subjects simple. Could often be found at poultry shows with a semi-circle of learners explaining the ins and outs of poultry breeding. Originated the White Laced Red Cornish fowl. Tho the book is vintage, the knowledge is timeless.
Laws governing the breeding of standard fowls.
A Book Covering Outbreeding, Inbreeding, and Line Breeding
Of All Recognized Breeds Of Domestic Fowl With Chart
Card, Wetherell Henry.
Manchester, Conn. : The Herald printing Company, [191
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=chi.087299559;view=1up;seq=5
Best Regards,
Karen and the Light Sussex
in western PA, USA

 

[tridentk9]

It depends. What is your goal in breeding? If it's just the SOP and shows- inbreeding is a fairly accepted idea in many species. If it's an all around healthier bird, you'll probably get a different answer. Inbreeding does "bring out" recessives so you have a better idea of the genes your chickens have, both those initially seen and unseen. Some recessives are good, some aren't but the inbreeding makes it easier for a recessive gene to find it's match and be seen. It also makes it easier to lose genes- and once they're gone they don't suddenly just reappear by themselves. Inbreeding does lower the Major Histocompatability Complex (MHC) , a big factor in how the immune system works. It's also been noted that a higher inbreeding coefficient is related to a shorter egg laying lifespan and less eggs per year.

Some of the problems with the MHC and immune system may be counteracted with the environment of the chicken from pre-conception to neonate. The study of epigenetics has shown that the environment, even back to the formation of the egg and sperm can alter some genes. In other words the offspring's genes may act different than expected from the parents. The area that seems to be the most affected, both positively and negatively, is the immune system. A great environment may be able to counteract the lower MHC. Or maybe not.

So the answer after all that is- it depends.

 

[brothfeder]

Thanks guys/gals you've all been super helpful. It seems that inline breeding is pretty beneficial for hertitage breeds, which is the type of breeding I hope to get into. Looks like adding fresh genetics once in a while can be helpful though, I'm hatching a clutch of french copper Maran which have the 'extra dark egg' gene. The breeder tells me that its totally fine to breed these together. The issue is that I'm pretty sure I would be mating brothers and sisters. I know now that inline breeding requires you keep parents as distantly related as possible. However I HAVE read that its okay to mate brother/sister once as long as you choose likes with likes (ex. they both make extra dark eggs and look similar).

Does anyone feel its unwise to cross brother/sister for the first generation then parent/children the next? I could then start mating more distant relatives for the next generation(s).

Thanks again folks your input and resources are invaluable.

 

[3riverschick]

Thanks guys/gals you've all been super helpful. It seems that inline breeding is pretty beneficial for hertitage breeds, which is the type of breeding I hope to get into. Looks like adding fresh genetics once in a while can be helpful though, I'm hatching a clutch of french copper Maran which have the 'extra dark egg' gene. The breeder tells me that its totally fine to breed these together. The issue is that I'm pretty sure I would be mating brothers and sisters. I know now that inline breeding requires you keep parents as distantly related as possible. However I HAVE read that its okay to mate brother/sister once as long as you choose likes with likes (ex. they both make extra dark eggs and look similar).

Does anyone feel its unwise to cross brother/sister for the first generation then parent/children the next? I could then start mating more distant relatives for the next generation(s).

Thanks again folks your input and resources are invaluable.

Hi,
Sounds like you have some interesting and exciting plans. Do not worry about the MHC affecting the immune system.
Chickens are short lived compared to mammals and have a wider genetic base than mammals. For what you are
doing, it is not an issue. Due to some stupid novice mistakes I made I no longer own the stud cock I need to breed
back my hens too. So... on the advice of a trusted, experienced breeder, I will be doing just what you are suggesting
next season. Breeding closely related brother and sister together. Then establishing 2 families using the breeding
plan in Wid Cards' book above. I was worried the initial brother and sister breeding would be too close upon which
to establish the two families. However, the breeder counseling me thinks it is doable. Using Card's plan, once the
initial sibling cross is done, the breeding plan moves away from the 50/50 mix and, as the generations progress,
develops 2 families each of which more closely resembles the fountainhead bird of that family. This is why your
fountainhead birds must be of the very best highest quality in breed type. This breeding program will not improve
overall breed type, except in the judicious selection of the minor details. Instead it will work to replicate the existing
excellence in the fountainhead birds. So if you have 2 birds of extremely good breed type and you want to conserve
it and improve the minor details. Then this is the program for you. In my case, I am close family breeding on a
3x APA Grand Ch. stud cock. If you have average birds then your only chance for improvement comes every 4th
generation when you breed the 2 families together. Blood tells. The end result of Card's plan is to create
generations of cookie cutter birds. That's only a positive if you start out with the highest quality birds.
BTW, I totally agree with the BCM breeder. It will be fine to breed them together. Just choose wisely, as always,
and keep in touch with the breeder for future advice on things you see in your birds. If you strain cross your
BCM's you will lose the dark eggs for several generations until you restabilize the dark egg genes.
Best Regards,
Karen

 

[3riverschick]

Hi,
What are the steps in becoming a breeder? A high quality breeder. Philosophically and psychologically,
they are the same across species. They require both an evolving mindset, a love of education, and a
willingness to move from level to leve with its associated replacement of stock. Here is a fine discussion
written by an veteran elite Labrador retriever breeder from England. Respected worldwide for her dedication
to fine breeding, this is part of Mary Roslyn-Williams classic book, "Reaching For The Stars".
http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Labrador-Breeding-Mary-Williams/product-reviews/0854931589
The Seven Stages Of Becoming A Breeder : http://www.wolfweb.com.au/acd/sevenages.html
Everywhere you see a dog term just substitute the appropriate poultry term.

What about obtaining stock in the first place?
Poultry Herald - Volumes 33-34 - 1921 - Pages 123 and 124 .
books.google.com/books?id=QsxJAAAAYAAJ
( click on cover image to access volume)
Profitable Poultry And Eggs
( a column ) by George Pollard
( Mr. Pollard owned a huge poultry and duck ranch circa
1904 where he successfully raised 1,000's of each.)

FINE feathers do not make fine birds. The pretty feathers are an important item and always to be favorably considered. It Is a bad thing to forget that meat comes first in the value of the fowl for most purposes. To get a properly developed and a well meated carcass it is as necessary to breed with these ends in view as it is to breed for the feathering we desire. "Fancy" poultry has got most of its black eyes in the estimation of the unthinking public because its breeders have forgotten these facts and have pinned their faith on feathers alone, and forgotten that most people rather eat than do anything else.
===============
Any breed to retain its popularity must make good as laying stock or for market poultry, and if you doubt it look up the history of the different breeds and varieties of the last 30 years and consider how they came into popularity and consider what has helped, or hindered, them in holding it. All the booming and advertising in the world can't put over and keep over a breed which lacks the primary virtues for which the great poultry growing public keep fowls— eggs and meat and after these, pretty feathers and pleasing shapes. For either show or shop the best results will generally be obtained by breeding within well known blood lines, or, at least, introducing only such fresh blood into established flocks as is known to have been bred for the same ends. Whatever the price, no stock is cheap which does not help to increase the all round value of your flock, and none is high in price which will add to the good points already possessed by your stock.
---------------------
A few days ago a young man was looking for a trio of fowl to use in founding a flock of pure-bred poul
try. He did not know much about hens, but did know about holding onto his money—and plainly was frightened at paying twenty or twenty-five dollars for a trio. The suit he was wearing probably cost him $50 to $60, and at most would last him two sasons and would rapidly deteriorate and at the expiration of that period be worthless. If well chosen, the trio of birds would last him two or three seasons, would produce first class stock, which by proper selection could be improved each season and the worth of his stock would increase with every year's work. Like many others he could estimate only the immediate outlay, and had no sense of the value of a right start with good stock.
----------------
Breeding livestock is a proposition that calls for thought and foresight. When you build something of inanimate material you tear down and rebuild if the results are not satisfactory. Changes may mean the expenditure of some time and money, but the things can be revamped and the damage ends there. Not so with breeding livestock; what is pat in stays in—and you cannot wholly undo the mistakes what are made unleso you blot out the whole issue and make a fresh start. Then the error is not cancelled, though a fresh start has been made. So difficult it is U breed out undesirable traits in poultry that it oftens takes several generations to get rid or the unwanted features, and it is a trial of the skill of the breeder. It is so much easier to breed good qualities in than to breed out defects that it is better to pay almost any price for the right kind than to take the other as a gift

 

[tridentk9]

A bit of info on the MHC (Major Histocompatability Complex) in chickens. In wild avians as well as in mammals, there is a selection bias towards genetically dissimilar mates. Is it possible they know something? Their offspring also have greater survivabilty and reproduction rates.

Numerous studies confirm that genes in the chicken major histocompatibility complex exert major genetic control over host resistance to autoimmune, viral, bacterial, and parasitic diseases. Examples of major histocompatibility complex associations with traits of growth and reproduction in the chicken are also available. Thus, the major effects of the major histocompatibility complex on the economically important traits of disease resistance, growth, and reproduction make the major histocompatibility complex a valuable subject for intensive analysis in agricultural species. This paper examines, as a model for integration of genetics and immunology, the research on the chicken major histocompatibility complex, which confirmed its role in genetic control of disease resistance, focusing on Marek's disease, a virally induced cancer. Current knowledge of associations of the chicken major histocompatibility complex with specific disease resistance, immune response, and other economic traits are selectively reviewed. Use of major histocompatibility complex typing in the poultry industry, including speculation about future applications, is presented.

The reference list link. http://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(89)79240-7/references

And then a link to articles co-authored or authored by the same guy. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Lamont SJ[Author]&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=2568373

The COI (coefficient of inbreeding) is in reality much much higher when the parent stock are both inbred on the same family. The COIs listed imply only the parent generation is of consequence when discussing heredity.

Breeding is a gamble. Mother Nature is the house and the house always wins!

 

[tridentk9]

Thank you Karen. The link to 7 stages had a link to an article on epigenetics. This article explains so much more than I did!

And here you go! http://www.healtoxics.org/5news_htm/news50.htm

WSU findings show that disorders can be passed on without genetic mutations

by Tom Paulson, Seattle Post

It's just a study involving a few rats with fertility problems in Pullman, but the findings could lead to fundamental changes in how we look at environmental toxins, cancer, heritable diseases, genetics and the basics of evolutionary biology.

If a pregnant woman is exposed to a pesticide at the wrong time, the study suggests, her children, grandchildren and the rest of her descendants could inherit the damage and diseases caused by the toxin -- even if it doesn't involve a genetic mutation.

"As so often happens in science, we just stumbled onto this," said Dr. Michael Skinner, director of the center for reproductive biology at Washington State University.

Skinner's team at WSU and colleagues from several other universities report in today's Science magazine on what they believe is the first demonstration and explanation of how a toxin-induced disorder in a pregnant female can be passed on to children and succeeding generations without changes in her genetic code, or DNA.

"We were quite surprised ... we've been sitting on this for a few years," said Skinner, who is expected to present his findings today at a scientific meeting in San Diego.

The report in Science, entitled "Epigenetic Transgenerational Actions of Endocrine Disruptors and Male Fertility," also sounds like an attempt to avoid attention. That's unlikely to work. The findings prompt serious and, in some cases, disturbing questions about a number of basic assumptions in biology.

The standard view of heritable disease is that for any disorder or disease to be inherited, a gene must go bad (mutate) and that gene must get passed on to the offspring.

What Skinner and his colleagues did is show that exposing a pregnant rat to high doses of a class of pesticides known as "endocrine disruptors" causes an inherited reproductive disorder in male rats that is passed on without any genetic mutation.

It's not genetic change; it's an "epigenetic" change. Epigenetics is a relatively new field of science that refers to modifying DNA without mutations in the genes.

"It's not a change in the DNA sequence," Skinner explained. "It's a chemical modification of the DNA."

Scientists have known for years about these changes to DNA that can modify genes' behavior without directly altering them.

One form of epigenetic change is natural. Every cell in the body contains the entire genetic code. But brain cells must use only the genes needed in the brain, for example, and kidney cells should activate only the genes needed for renal function.

Cells commonly switch on and off gene behavior by attaching small molecules known as methyl groups to specific sections of DNA. The attachment and detachment of methyl groups is also an important process in fetal development of the male testes and female ovaries -- which is where Skinner got started on this.

But the common wisdom has been that any artificially induced epigenetic modifications will remain as an isolated change in an individual. Because no genes get altered, the changes cannot be passed on.

"We showed that they can be," Skinner said.

The experiment got its start four years ago by accident. His lab was studying testes development in fetal rats, using a fungicide used in vineyards (vinclozin) and a common pesticide (methoxychlor) to disrupt the process. A researcher inadvertently allowed two of the exposed rats to breed, so the scientists figured they'd just see what happened.

The male in the breeding pair was born with a low sperm count and other disorders because of the mother's exposure to toxins. No surprise. But the male offspring of the pair also had these problems, as did the next two generations of male rats.

"I couldn't explain it," Skinner. This wasn't supposed to happen. The scientists didn't tell anyone about their finding and continued, for the next two years, to confirm that it was real and to find an explanation. Eventually, they documented that a toxin-induced attachment of methyl groups to DNA in the mother rat was being passed on to offspring.

"In human terms, this would mean if your great grandmother was exposed to an environmental toxin at a critical point in her pregnancy, you may have inherited the disease," Skinner said.

While the study was focused on a heritable disorder of reproduction in rats, he said there's every reason to believe this can happen for other diseases -- such as cancer.

"There has been this speculation that the increased rates of some cancers may be due to environmental factors, but they've never been able to describe a mechanism to explain this," Skinner said.

The findings also suggest a reconsideration of one of the basic tenets of evolutionary biology -- that evolution proceeds by random genetic change.

The standard view is that the environment has no direct influence, except in how it may favor or discriminate against the creatures with the latest genetic mutations.

The WSU study, Skinner said, suggests the possibility that environmental factors such as toxins may also directly cause heritable changes in creatures. "Epigenetics may be just as important as genetics in evolution," he said

 

[gjensen]

Thanks guys/gals you've all been super helpful. It seems that inline breeding is pretty beneficial for hertitage breeds, which is the type of breeding I hope to get into. Looks like adding fresh genetics once in a while can be helpful though, I'm hatching a clutch of french copper Maran which have the 'extra dark egg' gene. The breeder tells me that its totally fine to breed these together. The issue is that I'm pretty sure I would be mating brothers and sisters. I know now that inline breeding requires you keep parents as distantly related as possible. However I HAVE read that its okay to mate brother/sister once as long as you choose likes with likes (ex. they both make extra dark eggs and look similar).

Does anyone feel its unwise to cross brother/sister for the first generation then parent/children the next? I could then start mating more distant relatives for the next generation(s).

Thanks again folks your input and resources are invaluable.

The most productive laying strains of poultry in the world are closely bred, and they make up the crosses that we have in the commercial industry. Productivity and livability is very high before the cross. More and more they are being bred for a tolerance to certain disease pressures like mycoplasma.

The most vigorous and healthy pure bred fowl on the planet are closely bred. I am referring to game fowl. They have no equal when it comes to health and vigor.

You cannot make consistent and sure progress without some level of inbreeding. Constantly bringing in new is also constantly bringing in bad with the good. You are more likely to go backwards than you are forward. That is phenotype and genotype. All you will ever do is go in circles.

The goal of breeding any livestock is improvement. You cannot do that outside a controlled structured setting with a clear goal in mind.

Selection for health and vigor, is part of any smart breeding plan. You can improve both within a line. With good selection. It is impossible to select for tolerance to local pressures if something from another area is always brought in. Not to mention what is brought in with the new.

I would not be against breeding a brother and sister if my goal was to set a trait or traits. This is not a practice to make regularly, but an exception could be made. Whether or not you can do it, depends how closely bred they are to begin with.

You can go too far. It is up to you to know when that is, before it is. Depth to start is a help, and qty hatched brings in variability on it's own.

The poorest fowl I have ever seen were mongrel flocks that were left to breed willy nilly. Often they become the most inbred. Even bringing in something new periodically does little to improve the flock. They will drift.

What people forget is that a breed has been established for a reason. They do not stay that way on their own. Their natural tendency is to drift towards mediocrity. Bantams tend to drift to larger sizes, and large fowl tend to drift smaller. Maintaining and improving requires careful selection in a structured and organized fashion. Always bringing something new in is chaos. That is propagating and it is not breeding.

The fastest way to become too closely bred are letting a flock breed willy nilly, not maintaining enough depth, no regard to relationships, and poor selection. Poor selection will run the best birds in the ground in short order.

Bringing in new blood is inevitable, and necessary, at some point. It is up to you to know when that is and to do it smartly as not to lose the progress tat you have made. Your goal is to breed the finest examples of the breed of your choice. That is phenotype and genotype. That is health and production characteristics.

Laying prowess is not a single gene, but a compilation of genes that is not simply inherited. The collection of traits have to be acquired and included into a given line of birds. that is not done always bringing in something new. That is going in circles, and at best standing still. You are trying to make improvements and progress towards an ideal.

You do not breed paper, you breed birds. Get the best that you can come up with, and do as well as you can with them. In a few generations, you will begin getting an idea of what you need that you do not have. That might be when you start looking out, and looking for what you do not have. Then you introduce it smartly, preserving your own strengths. With some success and commitment, and a couple more generations, you will know what to do from there. Hopefully you have more than one family established by then. Many prefer four families, and hopefully these families are founded on good examples.

Good luck, and have fun.