is is bad for a a brother and sister duck to mate if you dont let the eggs hatch??

[MySweetChickens]

what subhanalah is saying is that it is healthier to breed brother and sister if you are going to hatch ducks but it wont affect the two ducks you are breeding or their eggs if they mate so you should be fine to eat their eggs and the ducks should be fine to mate with each other

 

[subhanalah]

what subhanalah is saying is that it is healthier to breed brother and sister father and daughter if you are going to hatch ducks but it wont affect the two ducks you are breeding or their eggs if they mate so you should be fine to eat their eggs and the ducks should be fine to mate with each other

 

[GOLDENSEABRIGHT]

If you let the eggs hatch, the chicks will be different and odd. this applies to any thing even humans

 

[Speceider]

If you let the eggs hatch, the chicks will be different and odd. this applies to any thing even humans

Huh? No, ONLY if there are deleterious genes in the lineage. The probability of homozygous pairs of deleterious genes is increased, but that is all. That is because brother-sister
Pairs share 50% of their genes ON AVERAGE, so the statistical probability of bad gene pairs is increased. There is no way of predict I g a head of time. Usually it will be fine, particularly for domestic breeds.

Clint

 

[HollyDuckFarmer]

Huh? No, ONLY if there are deleterious genes in the lineage. The probability of homozygous pairs of deleterious genes is increased, but that is all. That is because brother-sister
Pairs share 50% of their genes ON AVERAGE, so the statistical probability of bad gene pairs is increased. There is no way of predict I g a head of time. Usually it will be fine, particularly for domestic breeds.

Clint

Usually.

Not always. If a breeder knows that they are breeding from a limited gene pool, the responsible thing to so is to be on the lookout for any issues *and* follow thru with a preparedness plan to not allow further limitation of the gene pool.

ETA: not saying any of that to be rude in any way, I just think that it is important to think of the flock's health long term.

 

[Speceider]

Usually.

Not always. If a breeder knows that they are breeding from a limited gene pool, the responsible thing to so is to be on the lookout for any issues *and* follow thru with a preparedness plan to not allow further limitation of the gene pool.

ETA: not saying any of that to be rude in any way, I just think that it is important to think of the flock's health long term.

Yeah...but look, cheetahs have 99% homozygosity, California condors go back to less than 20 breeders, whooping cranes back to about 30 birds...inbreeding by itself is not the problems, it is the "genetic quality" (a very ambiguous term because we can not measure genetic quality....the probability of deleterious genetic pairs a head of time). You can get inbreeding depression by breeding related individuals if the have several "small" deleterious genes.....you can also get out breeding depression if the genetic pairings are too different. To me the answer comes back to culling....maintaining weak genes in your clock will affect performance even if they are not related.

Clint

 

[pekin1234]

ok thx for giving me the info, so no problems will occur ?? if so i will return the baby ducklings to the store ..

 

[subhanalah]

They will be fine, but don't breed their babies together (the next generation of brother and sister)

 

[Speceider]

ok thx for giving me the info, so no problems will occur ??  if so i will return the baby ducklings to the store .. 

Can not say no problems will occur because there is no way of knowing if they have any deleterious genes. Unlikely they do, but can not tell. Usually those problems are expressed by dead-in-the-shell.

Clint

 

[pekin1234]

If you let the eggs hatch, the chicks will be different and odd. this applies to any thing even humans

will they have birth defects