Bloodstock & Breeding

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
salmon spray
26 May 11 13:04
Date Joined: 10 Jan 07
| Topic/replies: 52,405 | Blogger: salmon spray's blog
I am surprised we don`t here more about this. Even as recently as the 60s I can remember there were always a number of horses running who were registered as being either by a or b. Presumably the mare was covered by two stallions. I rather think there was a quite famous sire line which not far back had a choice of progenitors. I can`t remember what it was but it will have been European so is probably now extinct. You no longer seem to see this sort of discrepancy.Moreover it seems to have been ironed out on the excellent Thoroughbred Horse Query. I have looked at 100s of pedigrees on there and they are all non-ambivalent.
Having said that there is a section on breeding on The National Thoroughbred Heritage site which seems to suggest that some of the female families fronm the original Stud Book are plain wrong ( I think that`s what it`s saying but I wouldn`t pretend to understand it entirely )As somebody with a history degree this would seem to me to be almost certainly correct. Our ancestors were pretty slapdash with records until at least the 2nd part of the 19th century and of course The Stud Book in theory goes back into the 17th century.
I am no scientist so am not sure what you can tell from DNA but is it possible to re-write the Stud Book in light of these advances ?
Pause Switch to Standard View DNA and pedigrees
Show More
Report salmon spray May 26, 2011 1:05 PM BST
* ffs hear. I HAVE got a degree honest guv
Report Johnny_Mustang May 26, 2011 2:11 PM BST
Well there's one way to find out for sure, and it works every time. Get the mare and the two stallions on the Jeremy Kyle show - he always finds out who the real father is Shocked
Report salmon spray May 26, 2011 2:22 PM BST
See what you mean but I don`t think Kyle interviews horses from the 18th century.
Report boba May 27, 2011 10:25 AM BST
in theory one could infer alot about the thoroughbred ancestry by genetically analysing a sufficently large subset of the current population. Looking at genetic markers as they are passed down from generation to generation would allow one to infer common parentage etc. for example describes software currently used in human cases. With thoroughbreds at least it would be a deal easier as there has been a limited pool of sires. discusses errors in the general stud book of which it would seem there are plenty.
Report neill d May 27, 2011 7:58 PM BST
Too many vested interests for such an inquiry to take place surely.
Report kincsem May 27, 2011 11:32 PM BST
It would be helpful if Weatherbys had a section on revisions, at least for the major ancestors.  Some of the female line are wrong.
Report salmon spray May 29, 2011 1:42 PM BST
The link boba put up appears to be a much-simplified precis of the stuff I have been trying to plough through on the Thorougbred Heritage site. Thanks for that. the research all seems to be concentrated on dam lines. Not sure whether that is in fact the case or are there scientific reasons for it ?
Not sure about the vested interest argument. Most of this is historical and I doubt if some mare 100 years or more ago is proven to have come from family 13 rather than 8 it is going to have any effect on the value of her descendants. If there have been mix-ups,or conceivably fraud, more recently then the argument could come into play. But surely anyone who refused to co-operate would damage their own and their livestocks` reputation.
Report Jezebel June 5, 2011 4:41 PM BST
A decision was taken some years ago that while it is accepted some errors and discrepancies exist in previous generations, the General Stud Book will not be retrospectively revised, regardless of newly-developed DNA investigative techniques.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.


Instance ID: 13539