International Register of Belgian Shepherds with Stomach Cancer

 

 

http://www.belgian-stomachcancer.com/Index.htm

Reproduction canine: 20 faits que vous devez savoir sur le moment de l'ovulation chez la chienne.

(source : par Emmanuel service technique PRO ROYAL CANIN Canada, le 09 Janvier 2014)

Si vous lisez mes messages précédents, vous savez déjà que, quand il s'agit de la reproduction, l'espèce canine est vraiment unique.

Récapitulation courte:
la progestérone est sécrétée avant l'ovulation chez les chiennes et nous pouvons utiliser cette caractéristique du cycle œstral canine pour déterminer quand la chienne ovule. C'est ce que nous appelons «le moment de l'ovulation": excellent outil pour améliorer la fertilité et la prolificité de vos animaux d'élevage et éviter le moment de saillie inopportun qui est, de loin, la cause la plus fréquente de l'infertilité chez la chienne. Quand je travaillais au centre reproduction à l'École vétérinaire d'Alfort (Paris, France), ces consultations ont fait partie de ma routine quotidienne. Voici 20 faits qui pourraient vous aider à mieux comprendre.

• Fait n ° 1: Quand commencer? Nous avons recommandé une première consultation environ 6 jours après début des chaleurs. C’est trop tôt? Eh bien, mieux vaut plus tôt que jamais: malheureusement, certaines femelles peuvent ovuler dès qu’elles sont dans leur cycle œstral.
• Fait n ° 2: Très souvent, j’ai des clients qui m'appellent: "Doc, ma chienne est à [nombre] de progestérone. Qu’est-ce que je dois faire? ". Ma réponse typique: «[nombre] quoi?". Je me demande pourquoi? Les résultats de la progestérone peuvent être exprimés en unités différentes: 2 ng / ml ou nmol / L. Nous n'allons pas interpréter un résultat de la même manière en fonction de son unité.
• Fait n ° 3: Parfois, on m'a demandé de déterminer quand la chienne allait ovuler sur la basé sur d’un test unique. La plupart du temps qui n'est pas possible (je vous dis qu’il y a des chiennes qui ovulent 6 jours après le début de l'œstrus, mais j'ai eu aussi certaines qui ovulaient 30 jours après!): Au moins 3-4 essais seront généralement requis.
• Fait n ° 4: "Dois-je venir chaque jour jusqu'à l'ovulation ?". Non, ce serait peut-être nécessaire lorsque vous faites des tests de LH (une autre hormone sécrétée par le cerveau qui culmine 2-3 jours avant l'ovulation): la sécrétion de LH est pulsatile et nous avons besoin de détecter un pic transitoire, c'est pourquoi des analyses quotidiennes sont nécessaires dans ce cas. Au contraire, la progestérone va progressivement augmenter au cours de l'œstrus, et c'est sur cette hausse que nous allons nous baser pour définir de moment de l'ovulation.

• Fait n ° 5: Si la progestérone est faible (= valeur de base), généralement nous pouvons attendre 4-5 jours avant de voir à nouveau l'animal.
• Fait n ° 6: La progestérone est dit "de base" quand sa concentration dans le sang est inférieur à 1ng/ml.
• Fait n ° 7: Voir le graphique ci-dessus? Je souligne les deux principaux événements qui permettent de déterminer l'ovulation: le "pic de LH" et "ovulation".
• Fait n ° 8: pic de LH se produit généralement lorsque les niveaux de progestérone atteignent 2-3ng/mL. Lorsque ce niveau est atteint ovulation se produit 2-3 jours après.
• Fait n ° 9: Ne jamais arrêter de déterminer le moment de l'ovulation lorsque vous pensez que vous avez passé le pic de LH comme mentionné ci-dessus! Vous avez encore besoin de détecter l'ovulation: certaines chiennes pourraient bien faire ce que nous appelons un cycle anovulatoire.
• Fait n ° 10: Qu'est-ce que c'est un cycle anovulatoire? Un cycle qui ne conduit pas à une ovulation (et donc évidemment, la chienne ne sera pas gestantes). La progestérone pourrait augmenter en raison de la croissance des follicules ovariens contenant les ovocytes, mais tomber subitement (nous ne savons toujours pas pourquoi), les follicules vont tout simplement se rétrécir et disparaître: l'ovulation ne se produit pas. J'ai eu une chienne qui a atteint le taux le plus haut de 4.9ng/mL de progestérone, puis qui est retombé.
• Fait n ° 11: L'ovulation se produit lorsque les niveaux sanguins de progestérone atteignent 5-6ng/mL.
• Fait n ° 12: Cette valeur est la même quelle que soit la taille de l'animal. Que vous ayez Chihuahuas, Labradors, mastiff anglais, etc, les femelles ovulent toujours autour du même taux de progestérone. Jetez un œil au graphique ci-dessus et vous verrez qu'au moment de l'ovulation, les différentes courbes se superposent les uns aux autres.
• Fait n ° 13: Nous savons que le taux de progestérone au moment de l'ovulation. Toutefois, au moment de la reproduction, il n'y a pas de niveau "idéal". Lorsque la fertilité est optimale, les valeurs de progestérone pourraient être autour de 10, 30, parfois même> 60ng/mL! Le protocole de sélection doit être déterminé en fonction du jour de l'ovulation estimé. Nous ne pouvons pas dire que la chienne doit être saillie quand elle est à [nombre] ng / mL dans progestérone!
• Fait n ° 14: Pourquoi effectuer un test de progestérone après l'ovulation alors? les taux sanguins de progestérone augmentent rapidement après l'ovulation, et il est bon de confirmer que cette hausse se produit. En effet, si un plateau (= taux de progestérone stagnation autour de la même valeur) est observée, ce n'est pas juste, et un kyste ovarien peut être suspectée.
• Fait n ° 15: En fait, chaque fois qu'un tel plateau est observé pendant le moment de l'ovulation, la chienne doit toujours être suivi attentivement. Cela peut en effet arriver parfois, mais un plateau ne devrait pas durer plus de 3 jours. S’il n'y a un doute, une échographie ovarienne doit être effectuée, pour s'assurer que la surface des ovaires semble normale.

• Fait n ° 16: L'hormone "progestérone" est la même chez tous les mammifères (même conformation, même taille moléculaire, même tout ...). Pas besoin de "tests à l’espèce canine spécifique". Pour dire la vérité, toutes les machines qui sont utilisées pour doser la progestérone chez les chiens sont principalement développées pour le marché humain.
• Fait n ° 17: Les machines dosant la progestérone ne sont pas toutes les mêmes. Ce que je veux dire par là, c'est que si le taux d'ovulation était 5-6ng/mL sur la machine que j'ai utilisé dans ma clinique, il aurait été 4-5ng/mL ou 8-10ng/mL un sur l'autre. La valeur doit être correctement interprétée: il est important de compter donc sur quelqu'un qui a déjà travaillé avec le laboratoire ou la machine qui donne les résultats, de sorte que ceux-ci soient correctement interprétés.
• Fait n ° 18: Il existe maintenant des machines internes qui peuvent être utilisés dans les cliniques vétérinaires pour doser la progestérone.
• Fait n ° 19: Il faut habituellement 18-20 minutes pour effectuer un test de progestérone.
• Fait n ° 20: Vous avez déjà fait un suivit de l'ovulation, et votre chienne a ovulé 17 jours après début de ses chaleurs et elle était gestante. Est-ce que cela veut dire que la prochaine fois, votre chienne va ovuler à 17 jours à nouveau? Pas sûr du tout ... Il y a jusqu'à 40% de variation entre les cycles. Un moment de l'ovulation doit donc être effectuée à chaque cycle.

2014 International Conference on Dog Behavior - livestreaming

2014 International Conference on Dog Behavior

 

http://live.sparcsinitiative.org/

 

 

How to Keep Pets Cool On Hot Days

Effect of fatty acids on bitches and their offspring

Effect of fatty acids on bitches and their offspring

A number of factors can impact maternal health status and litter size, including breed, age, parity number, biological status and nutrition.

Essential fatty acid (EFA) status

Recent research indicates that essential fatty acids (EFA) are important in the maintenance of reproductive health due to the decline of these fatty acids in bitches as age and parity numbers increase. Similar observations have been made in humans. The requirement of maternal EFA is estimated to increase approximately 1.5 fold during pregnancy and lactation to meet the demands of the growing foetus and neonate since all fetal EFA is derived from the maternal diet or maternal body supplies.

EFA and reproductive performance

Until recently the majority of published literature has focused on the effect of dietary fat level on reproductive outcome with little attention to the profile of the dietary fat. It was determined that bitches consuming 20 % fat consistently produced larger litters than bitches consuming diets with 16 % fat. But in addition it was documented that the dietary fatty acid profile also critically impacted litter size. Bitches consuming an omega-6/3 fatty acid ratio of 5:1 produced larger litters, fewer stillbirths, and fewer misconceptions compared to bitches, consuming an omega-6/3 fatty acid ratio of 20:1.

Effect of maternal and post-weaning dietary DHA

DHA (Docosahexaenoic acid) is an important omega-3 fatty acid in the brain, eyes and nervous system. DHA is transferred across the placenta during pregnancy and present in canine milk, and is accumulated in the brain and retina during foetal and perinatal development. Deficiency of DHA can impact vision and cognitive function. Therefore it is of utmost importance that nutrition during pregnancy and lactation contains optimal levels of essential fatty acids and DHA.

DHA improves learning abilities of puppies

In a trial carried out by Eukanuba, puppies nourished with a DHA-enhanced diet before (via the mother) and after weaning (via puppy food) showed improved cognitive function and better performance in training challenges than those fed lower levels of the nutrient. Puppies fed enhanced levels of DHA significantly outperformed puppies fed low levels by more than double. In a second DHA study - where puppies received only high DHA after weaning (so no transfer of maternal DHA) vs a non supplemented control group - all puppies were able to pass the test, but puppies in the high DHA group still demonstrated better learning abilities and trainability than the control.

Nutritional recommendation for fatty acids during reproduction and post weaning

Based on many research data it is recommended to feed the pregnant and lactating bitch with increased levels of essential fatty acids, the right ratio of omega-6/3 fatty acids of 5:1 to 10:1 to counterbalance the negative impact of increased age and parity number, but also to provide high levels of DHA during reproduction and post weaning.
Eukanuba Premium Performance, formulated for reproduction, and all Eukanuba Puppy diets contain elevated levels of DHA. Whether your puppies become beloved members of a new family or make a career as guide dog, rescue dog or police dog, all need to learn a lot and adapt fast and easy to their new environment. Eukanuba helps you to give them the best start in life.

Dr med. vet. Waltraud Off
Scientific Communications Europe at Eukanuba

courtesy: DogDot.com

Vets vs. Breeders: Partners or Enemies?

 

 

 

 

http://www.dogchannel.com/dogsinreview/veterinarians-vs-breeders.aspx

Breeder Education Seminars - The Kennel Club

 

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/breeding/breeder-education-seminars/

Socializing Puppies to Surfaces and Sounds - clicker dog training

“Needs Training”

http://paws4udogs.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/needs-training/

Parasite Prevalence Maps

http://www.capcvet.org/parasite-prevalence-maps/

Breeding Strategies for the Management of Genetic Disorders

An update on blood typing, crossmatching, and doing no harm in transfusing dogs and cats

http://veterinarymedicine.dvm360.com/vetmed/Medicine/An-update-on-blood-typing-crossmatching-and-doing-/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/690083

Current FCI Breeds Nomenclature: who, when, how? Part 2/2

article courtesy: FCI NEWSLETTER

Current FCI Breeds Nomenclature: who, when, how? Part 2/2

The current FCI Breeds Nomenclature, thirty years later, by its author

The FCI receives numerous requests concerning the genesis of the current dog breeds nomenclature, created in 1987, called the “Jerusalem nomenclature”. The FCI first chose to publish an article I wrote in 1988 for the English Bulldog club article and another by Veterinary Doctor Surget (http://newsletter18.dogdotcom.be/fr/nomenclature.aspx)), a prominent member of the Zootechnics Commission of the SCC, for which I obviously have nothing but praise.
It has occurred to me that today’s cynophiles might like to know more about it, in plain language. The basic articles, the minutes of meetings, the correspondence and the negotiations take up a huge file. In truth, the “new nomenclature”, although it was adopted in Jerusalem on 23 June 1987, is in my eyes a little over thirty years old, because it all started in Paris during a meeting of the Zootechnics Commission of the Société Centrale Canine (French canine organisation) at the initiative of Mr Henri Lestienne, the President of the SCC and President of the General Committee of the FCI (at that time, different from the President of the FCI, who was Mr Karyabu, the President of the Japanese Kennel Club, wholly in favour of my project). The breeds had been divided into ten groups since the 1950s (11 groups before that), presented on the famous “yellow sheet”. The classification was called “utilitarian”. Henri Lestienne initially wanted simply to “put it in order”, as various additions had been made “rather haphazardly”, or to please this person or that person and even sometimes to irritate a club President. Dr Yves Surget highlighted these bizarre anomalies, or as he called them, the “heresies” of the “yellow sheet”. What initially struck me was that the Spitz breed was spread between various groups, the fact that the hounds were entitled to two groups (not surprising if one remembers that theSociété Centrale Canine was created by members of the Jockey Club and its hunters) and that they were classified in accordance with the size of the game they hunted rather than for their own size and shape. There was some disorder among the hunting dogs, where one confused the Irish, the English and the British (not counting the Americans). The ninth group was “higgledy-piggledy”. Finally, the sole criterion of “use” seemed inadequate to me. For example, was the German Shepherd still a sheepdog or was it a guard dog? Many “sheepdogs” have never seen a sheep. On the other hand, they all have a sheepdog “type”. As for choosing a single criterion, one might as well choose “company”, the dog’s love for mankind celebrated since the Middle Ages. I therefore proposed the creation of a single group: “Dogs whose purpose is to console a human for being human”. All that would remain to be done would be to divide them into small and large dogs, like Isidore of Seville (Isidorus Hispalensis) in the 7^th century. I therefore decided to organise groups and especially sub-groups for dogs which had the same type, and not merely the same use. I proposed characterising them according to a “bundle” of common characteristics, in the same way as consonants are classified in phonetics by a “bundle of features”. Hence my article: “Concerning a componential definition of groups, breeds and varieties”, which appeared in the Revue officielle de la cynophilie française no. 38, 1982.
Which distinctive characteristics should be used? I thought of two brilliant systems of Pierre Mégnin, a former army vet, in 1897 and of Raoul Baron, Professor of Zootechnics at the Alfort Veterinary School at the end of the 19th century.

Classification of Pierre Mégnin

• Lupoid dogs (with a wolf-like appearance, head in the shape of horizontal pyramid, wedge-shaped muzzle, etc.)
• Braccoid dogs (with the appearance of a pointer, prism-shaped head, falling ears, long lips, etc.)
• Molossoid dogs (with the appearance of Molossus dogs as seen by Pierre Mégnin, massive head, “cuboid”, short and powerful muzzle, solidly built body, etc.). For this type of dog, I will invent the phrase “deterrence dogs” which “are displayed so that they do not have to be used”.
• Graioid dogs (word created by Pierre Mégnin: with the appearance of Greek dogs, “fleet-footed” dogs, head shaped like an elongated cone, narrow skull, tapered muzzle, slender body, belly well drawn up, etc.)

Baronial details

• The profile (head and body)
  • erect
  • concave
  • convex
• The proportions
  • average type
  • elongated type
  • compact type
• The conformation (combination of the size and the weight)

Add the nature, length and colour of the coat (study by Professor Bernard Denis in 1981), the attitude, bearing, shape and dimensions of the ears, the shape and position of the eyes, the attitude of the tail, etc. The use is still taken into consideration as one criterion among many. That relates to traditional work corresponding to a certain conformation. The same applies to humans; a marathon runner does not have the same build as a sprinter, who is in turn different from a weightlifter.
Historic process
We held many meetings between 1981 and 1987 as I stated in my article “The personal, but not short, account of the breeds nomenclature”. Thirty years later, we can now revisit some of these events. It is important to remember, in the first place, that when one proposes in-depth changes to any organisation, one is bound to encounter opposition in accordance with what I call the motorway principle: I am in favour provided it does not go through my garden.
Mr Edmond Defraiteur, the great Secretary General of the FCI appointed in 1983 gave me one instruction: retain the ten groups, and one piece of friendly advice (for he quickly became a friend while keeping me abreast of his confrontational relationship with Dr Paschoud, the new President of the Standards Commission, which I joined in 1981) : leave the Dachshunds alone. I would have liked to have a free group where I could put the Pinscher and Schnauzer types. I had to content myself with providing them with a sub-group within the 2^nd group, which includes guard dogs, defence dogs and deterrence dogs. I initially planned to put all sheepdogs and herders, including the Swiss cattle dogs, together in the 1^st group. It was Mr Hans Müller (who also became a friend after his election to the presidency of the FCI in 1985) who told me in Winterthur on 3 November 1987 to put the Swiss cattle dogs into the 2^nd group. He recently told me (in 2011) that he regretted this. As for the Dachshund, which means “badger dog” in German, I made two attempts at the beginning, within the Société Centrale Canine. I aroused the ire of Doctor Guillet, a renowned gynaecologist, passionate hunter and overbearing authoritarian, by proposing to put them in Group 6. It was a definite no-no. I had managed to get him to agree that hounds should have just a single group, and that was an achievement in itself. He wrote to me: “You are intelligent, and all the more dangerous for that”. He was to offer the same vehement opposition later when, led by Doctor Paschoud whom he addressed as “colleague”, we proposed creating a sub-group for scenthounds in Group 6, the group for hounds. They had already been described in the mid-14^th century by a great huntsman, Henri de Ferrieres, and in 1260 by Brunetto Latini. When Guillet was finally convinced, he defended my nomenclature with the same ardour with which he had earlier fought it.
My second attempt with the Dachshunds was to put them with the terriers. Servier had suggested this by creating the “earthdogs” (sapeurs) group. The President of the Dachshund club in France, Mr Depoux, another extravagant cynophile, would no longer say hello to me. In Germany, the presidency had passed from Mr Gendrung, who was quite in favour, to Mr Pepper, who was fiercely opposed. Mission impossible.
My creation of the Spitz group met no opposition. Mr Räber had already proposed this but, for me, the idea came from England (Margaret Osborne, “Reviewing the groups”, Kennel Gazette, September 1982). I suggested creating a sub-group of Mastiffs and Mountain dogs in Group 2 (without a problem) and another for “toy terriers” in Group 9, with the Yorkshire Terrier and the Silky Terrier, but the Zootechnics Commission in France (and particularly Dr Surget) and my friend Uwe Fischer in Germany preferred to group all of the terriers together. There were no serious problems with pointing dogs, flushing dogs, retrievers and water dogs. There was, however, a major problem with Group 10, the sighthounds. I had followed the nomenclature of Pierre Mégnin, as well as the classification of Professor Denis of Nantes Veterinary School, by creating a sub-group of sighthounds with erect ears. Sighthounds are not permitted to hunt in Europe. Mario Perricone, a prominent member (and a friend) of the FCI Standards Commission, pointed out to me, humorously, that dogs with erect ears hunted in his country of birth, Sicily. They were going to be forbidden to hunt because of me! In 1989, we therefore transferred the Cirnecos, Podencos and Podengos to Group 5, into the sub-group for primitive types, which was all the more simple as the English call them “Warren hounds”, the warrens being in former times areas where the aristocracy reserved for themselves the right to hunt. That made Edmond Defraiteur very happy.
From the beginning of this work, there were two breeds that seemed to me to be unclassifiable: the Rhodesian Ridgeback and the Dalmatian. They were both put into Group 6, with the hounds. The Rhodesian was finally accepted there, or at least tolerated, even though it did not fit the definition of a hunting hound (which pursues game while giving voice rather than barking). As for the Dalmatian, well, that is a heresy pure and simple (proposal of the Standards Commission of 30 and 31 October 1993, in spite of the opposition of Mario Perricone, the President in the absence of Paschoud). The Dalmatian is a Braque which does not hunt. It is in no way a hound, even though it used to run behind carriages. I was not present, having been dismissed at the General Assembly in Buenos Aires in June 1993 and then reinstated in Brussels in June 1995 (I can still hear the cordial telephone calls of Dr Paschoud, Uwe Fischer and Hans Müller). I did not put myself up as a candidate, but I believe it was Uwe Fischer who nominated me.
Doctor Paschoud had done a lot of work since his election as President of the Standards Commission on 21 December 1985, completing all of the groups and sub-groups, holding discussions with a large number of countries, taking care of the CACIB presentations and numbering and successfully completing the division by country, which I had not considered. It became “his” nomenclature and he defended it with determination at the Standards Commission in Paris on 8 November 1986 (we were in the dilapidated SCC premises in rue Réaumur), then again on 10 January 1987 before the FCI Committee and, finally, on 23 June 1987 at the FCI General Assembly in Jerusalem. I was there with the President, Camille Michel, and Dr Guillet. I explained once again the spirit of this new nomenclature for canine breeds. I quickly realised that many of the delegates had not read a word about this subject. They were not “up to speed”. The atmosphere was tense, and there were two women present whose opposition was fierce. Thirty years on, I believe that they were afraid of giving up their freedom. I can still hear one of them, Mrs Kincaid, with whom I later enjoyed excellent relations, imploring everyone to “Vote against!”. Well, the General Assembly voted “for”, but only by 4 votes: 17 in favour, 13 against and one abstention, from Brazil. I was relieved, having already endured a rejection in Amsterdam two years earlier (but also happy to see my “type standards” accepted without a problem), but Dr Paschoud was very disappointed. On 30 June 1987, he sent the minutes of the Jerusalem General Assembly to the members of the Standards Commission: :

New nomenclature approved by 17 votes to 13
(opposed by the Latin American and Scandinavian blocs). Quite a long and difficult discussion, opposition for political and organisational reasons. Little or no opposition on cynological grounds. Practically all of those present are agreed that the new classification put forward is much better than the old one.

In my reply, I picked out the word “difficult”: “It is difficult to constantly see some people looking at each other in order to know how to vote [ … ] it is true that cynology has less to do with this situation than “politics”, or to put it more accurately, corridor politics”.
After the (very intense) working meeting in Winterthur on 3 September 1987 between Paschoud, Defraiteur, Müller and Triquet for the “final” fine-tuning, there was another meeting of the Standards Commission in Vienna on 5 October 1987, to sort out some classification problems. Doctor Paschoud, who was harassed and wanted to please everyone, sent us a “new presentation” two days before the meeting, gave us another on the first day of the meeting and a third on the second day. I remarked that, not being an insomniac, I was unable to keep up, and Uwe Fischer made a final point: we will stay with the decisions of Jerusalem and Winterthur.
It has always been possible to transfer breeds from one group to another. This has happened at least once, and in fact this was a return journey (the American Akita moved from Group 5 to Group 2 then returned from Group 2 to Group 5). That proves the flexibility of the system. However, as I pointed out in Jerusalem on 23 June 1987, flexibility is not the same as anarchy.
There are still a few things to do with regard to dog shows: showcasing the sub-groups in the Ring of Honour and designating the best of these dogs which have “a family resemblance”, before choosing a Best of Group then a Best in Show. We can all dream, can’t we?

Raymond Triquet
29 July 2013

Concerning a componential definition of groups, breeds and varieties 
(Proposal from Mr Raymond Triquet to the Zootechnics Commission)

The definition of the word “breed” given in my dictionary of cynophilia is short and to the point, as is traditional in this type of work: “a group within a species, generally maintained by humans and having distinctive transmissible common characteristics”. So as not to confuse breeds with the “groups” of breeds known to cynophiles within the framework of the FCI and the SCC, let us specify that the breed forms a sub-class included in the class represented by the species.
The excellent study presented by Professor Theret in the Revue officielle de la Cynophilie Française provides a definition of the extended breed, as it refers to the morphological, physiological and psychological characteristics which are included in the hereditary type. My definition is made with this in mind. It relates to the entirety of distinctive transmissible common characteristics. These characteristics are common to members of the same breed and they are distinctive within the meaning given to this word in phonology, i.e. that they are opposable to the distinctive characteristics of other breeds.
In this definition I have included “maintained by humans” because I was thinking of breeds of dog or other domestic animals and not the human races [translator’s note: this explanation is necessary in French, because the French word for “breed” is “race”]. While the species is derived from nature, the breed is derived from culture, at least within the context of cynophilia.
Now let us look at the principle of phonological analysis. /k/ is an occlusive consonant, but it is distinct from other occlusives such as /p/, for example, in that it is velar and not bilabial. /k/ is distinct from /s/ by at least two traits; /s/ is neither a velar nor an occlusive. /k/ and /s/ are nevertheless both consonants.
/p/ and /b/ are consonants. Both are occlusive, oral and bilabial. They can be distinguished by a single trait: the former is unvoiced, while the latter is voiced. It could be said that /p/ and /b/ are two “varieties” of a single “breed” of bilabial oral occlusive consonants. /k/ and /s/ belong to different “breeds” and different “groups” because they differ by too many traits. However, they belong to the same “species” of consonants.
In the same way, the chihuahua is different from the mastiff by more than one trait. They are, however, both dogs because they have traits common to all dogs: "mammals, carnivores, domestic, members of the species canis familiaris, genus canis, and the family Canidae (digitigrade, non-retractable claws, 42 teeth, etc.)". They belong to two different breeds and different groups.
The mastiff and the dogue de Bordeaux are different, but they have more traits in common than the mastiff and the chihuahua. We can say that they belong to the same group of Molossoids. All of the breeds which have the same series of traits in common belong to the group. It is necessary to identify these traits in order to provide each group with a definition. Any dog which lacks one or more of these pertinent traits does not belong to the group.
Hence the definition of group which I will suggest: “a class of breeds with a certain number of distinctive transmissible characteristics in common”.
If we use the same componential method for the definition of the breed, we will identify the traits of each breed distinguishing it from other breeds within a single group and/or a single species. A breed will be different if one or more pertinent traits are different. As long as the distinctive transmissible common traits are present, we are talking about the same breed.
Let us take a breed for which we have identified a specific number of distinctive traits. Any animal which does not possess these traits belongs to another breed (or even to another group or species). Any animal which possesses these traits belongs to the breed. Any animal which possesses these traits plus one more which is only common to a sub-class included in the class of the breed belongs to a variety. The variety, which has a narrower range of traits, has a linguistically richer understanding than the breed, which is more extended.
For this reason, I suggest as a definition of variety: “a subdivision within a breed whose members (possessing the distinctive characteristics of this breed) all also possess a common transmissible characteristic which distinguishes them from other members of the breed (size, colour or texture of coat, carriage of the ears, etc.)
For example, the long-haired St. Bernard and the short-haired St. Bernard have all the traits (characteristics) of the St. Bernard, but each has an additional pertinent trait, i.e. one has long hair and the other short, thus representing two varieties of the same breed.
Any member of the sub-class “variety” included in the class that is a “breed” belongs to this class. All long-haired St. Bernards and all short-haired St. Bernards belong to the “St. Bernard” class.
This method should allow the establishment of a more scientific nomenclature and enable some breeds to be reclassified in the group to which they belong, no longer using the word “breed” to describe what is actually no more than a variety and avoiding groups which are more or less whimsical, even though they have proved useful in administrative terms.

Revue Officielle de la Cynophilie Française no. 38, 2nd quarter 1982, Société Centrale Canine.

Open Belgian Championships for Farm Dogs

HIGH DRIVE DOGS

http://paws4udogs.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/high-drive-dogs/

FCI BASIC STATEMENT FOR SHOW JUDGES DOGS FIT FOR THEIR ORIGINAL FUNCTION

http://www.fci.be/circulaires/14-2014-annex-en.pdf

The Canine Genome

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full

“It’s all in how they’re raised.”

http://paws4udogs.wordpress.com/2012/12/10/its-all-in-how-theyre-raised/?relatedposts_exclude=1600

Anatomy Muscles are Crucial

Muscles are crucial in locomotion

I have been reading the discussion regarding angulation and bone frame in relation to locomotion and speed, with great interest. The main emphasis in this discussion seems to be the skeletal portion of the motor apparatus in dogs and other species. From courses in biomechanics and kinesiology, I always understood that the skeleton has a supportive function to enable an animal to move, but that the muscles with attached tendons, ligaments, aponeuroses, etc. are the actual producers of force, thus speed!!

In the muscle, the muscle fibers are functionally organized into motor units. A motor unit is one nerve fiber attached to multiple muscle fibers. Upon an electrical stimulus of the nerve fiber, all the muscle fibers of the motor unit contract simultaneously. The type of nerve fiber is important in electrical stimulus (myelinated vs unmyelinated), but the bottle neck in speed of transfer of electrical stimulus to the muscle fibers would be the synaptic attachment of nerve fiber to the muscle fibers (=motor endplate). It takes time for the neurotransmitter (usually acetylcholine) to release and be reabsorbed into the presynaptic vesicles. Neuronal feedback about the length of the muscle occurs via proprioceptors in the muscle (muscle spindles) and tendons (Golgi tendon organs). The connection is established in the brain stem. This neuronal feed back system also takes some time, but should generally be similarly fast in similarly sized mammals.

The division of muscles, based on gross anatomy in poulty, into 'white' and 'red' muscles has been obsolete for a large number of years. In 1930, Eccles and Sherrington were one of the first to study motor unit contraction properties, but it is Burke and coworkers in the 70s who connected these contraction properties with histochemical profiles of the muscle fibers in cat motor units. With the crude histochemical methods (enzyme-histochemistry), muscle fibers are already divided generally into:
 type I  -  slow contracting, fatigue-resistant, oxidative fibers
 type IIA - fast contracting, fatiguable, oxidative-glycolytic
 type IIB - very fast contracting, easily fatigued, glycolytic

The part, which is considered of primary importance for the contraction of a muscle  fiber is myosin (actually the heavy chain). Myosin filaments slide over actin filaments (remember your biology classes?). The faster the myosin is able to slide, the faster the muscle fiber is able to contract. With the development of immuno-histochemistry staining methods, more and more different types of myosins are recognized in striated muscles. E.g., Motor units of masticatory muscles contain a myosin, which is  previously found only in the heart: cardiac-alpha. This myosin is not found in any  other skeletal muscle in the body but the chewing muscles, and not in all species!

Motor units containing this myosin are fast-contracting, but do not easily get fatigued. Guess that's why we -humans- can BS for hours and hours without getting  tired (sorry, couldn't resist <G>). Moreover, superfast contracting myosin has been found in feline chewing muscles (not in canids) and with the development of more antibodies for staining, more types of myosin have been found (fetal myosin, embryonic myosin).

In the 80s and 90s, studies have elucidated that -dependent on the task of the muscle (maintaining body posture vs locomotion)- a muscle could consist of predominantly one type of muscle fiber, but most skeletal muscles of the body  contain more than one fiber type. E.g. the soleus in mammals (main purpose is to  maintain leg position) has predominantly type I fiber. Gastrocnemius is mixed type IIA and IIB. The muscle fibers in muscles are not static. It has been speculated that in addition to a genetic predisposition toward a specific type, many external and internal factors determine the muscle fiber type. Electrical stimuli (via central nervous system), hormones (gonadal, thyroid), day/night rythms (melatonin production), old age (whatever that is) are a few factors that may induce a change of muscle fiber type.

Estrogen triggers the change of muscle fibers into the slower types. Artificially altered conditions such as stretching the muscle also created a change in muscle fiber type (shift toward the slower fibers).

In other words, in my opinion, more important factors in the production of speed have been overlooked when only discussing the angulations and bone frame of animals. One of the crucial factors is the muscles and the type of muscle fibers. The speed of contraction of the muscles determines the force-velocity curve, therefore the speed of motion of an animal. In addition to muscle fibers and their contractile properties, the organization of a muscle into motor units contribute to the production of force. The larger the motor units, the faster and stronger the muscle. Small motor units are necessary in fine motor control (like hand muscles) for coordination of movement. Large motor units are generally found in leg muscles. Lastly, the anatomy (architecture) of a muscle with tendons and aponeuroses is believed to be important in force production as well. Serial organization of muscle fibers (in parallel muscles) can make the fullest use of the distance between origin and insertion of the muscle. Pennate-fibered muscles have the greatest number of muscle fibers placed parallel between origin and insertion of the muscle. During contraction these muscles shorten less and develop higher forces than parallel-fibered muscles.

This is merely a summary of the complexity of muscles, which may explain the endless discussion regarding the influence of skeletal angulations on locomotion speed......

by Siawn Kwai

Understanding Fronts

by Richard G.Beauchamp________________________________________
This article was published in the February 2008 issue of Dogs in Review.

Just recently a friend of mine and I were sitting at ringside watching a breed we are both very interested in. After watching a bit I remarked (quietly, I though) that the dogs in the breed we were watching were certainly uniform - if not quality, certainly in their faults. There wasn't a dog in the ring that had a decent front - all poker straight, and this was a Sporting breed!

The young lady sitting on my left leaned over and said, "I hope you don't mind me intruding but I've just started in this breed and I've heard other people make the same remark, about fronts that is, and I don't think I understand what they're talking about." I assured her I didn't mind at all and asked her just what it was that she wasn't clear on.

"Well," she went on, "I hear people say a dog is 'straight as a stick' in front and that seems to be a criticism. But other times someone will say the dog has a beautiful straight front. Obviously this is a compliment. And then it seems that a Terrier front can be both good and bad. I want to breed for the right thing, but I am not at all sure what the right thing is."

Her questions really made me stop and think. Quite frankly, she hit upon two universal problems we deal with in the dog game today. It is amazing how few people have bothered with that first important step in breeding, judging or just showing dogs. It's "Purebred Dogs 101 - Basic Canine Anatomy."

Her confusion also cast the light on just how ambiguous common dog terminology can be. What seems perfectly clear to some of us may well be an unfathomable mystery to others, particularly so when everything we talk about has two or three different names and several different meanings.

Perhaps our newer dog fanciers' reading habits have a bit to do with it. My contemporaries and I cut our teeth on McDowell Lyon's The Dog in Action, Burns and Fraser's Genetics of the Dog and Rachel Page Elliott's Dogsteps. I think we are more apt to find copies of "How to Win Westminster" or "how to Become an All-breed Judge: on the bookshelves of a good many of today's novices. Perhaps I'm way off base, but I'm inclined to believe that's starting at the wrong end; few journeys I know of begin at the destination. I guess that wouldn't be here or there except for the fact that there are probably  more litters born in the homes of the new people than there are in homes of people we will politely refer to as "veterans" of the dog game. These new people shape the dog breeds of tomorrow.

But back to our lady at the dog show and her questions of fronts. My friend and I did our best to give her a quick primer on fronts and I told her not to feel alone in her confusion in this area, in that I find fronts to be the least understood and most underestimated portion of a dog's anatomy here in America. I promised the young lady I would put some constructive thoughts down on paper and mail them off to her. I dutifully jotted down her address on the back of my catalog and then promptly proceeded to lose my catalog!

Nevertheless, the whole thing got me thinking. Judging by the manner in which some breeders have neglected fronts in order to achieve some other characteristic makes it obvious they have no idea how important front construction is to correct conformation and proper movement.

I did put some of my ideas regarding fronts to paper in hopes that some kind soul would find my catalog and return it to me. At this point, however, I have lost all hope of ever finding Concerned Young Lady again. All the same, I thought perhaps there might be others who will read this (or someone you know who should) and my time would not be for naught.

 
HOW IT'S MADE
I am neither an engineer nor an anatomist. Most of what I know about anatomy I learned from laymen and in laymen's terms. I consider myself quite fortunate to have received my education in dogs from what was probably the last wave of the great dog men and women of the old school. Things were much simpler then. We had fewer technicians but there were more people who just imply knew dogs. A dog was either a good one or it was not and their judgment had little to do with much else.

But then as now, there were certain basics that had to be understood before one could ever hope to breed or recognize a well-made animal. This knowledge is also important so that we can all have a common point of reference from which to proceed.

Every breed of dog, whether it is a Bulldog, Fox Terrier or Great Dane, has two bones in its forehand assembly the size, shape and angulation of which determine not only how the dog looks but alos how it moves. These two bones are the shoulder blade (scapula) and the upper are (humerus).

THE SCAPULA
Let's take a look at the shoulder blade (scapula) first. Most (but not all) breeds are in need of what we refer to as either "well laid back" or "well angulated" shoulders. The degree to which the shoulders are angulated depends upon the breed's purpose and function, but even at that the variance is not great. A well laid back shoulder that is attached to an upper arm of similar length permits a breed to move with easy, ground-covering reach. It is usually matched by a fairly well angulated rear. This is typically found in our Sporting dogs, among others. I've always thought the Sporting breeds were an ideal place to begin studying dogs in that the other breeds or Groups are simply more than or less than these dogs who work in the field.





At any rate, dogs who aren't required to traverse the woodlands all day long or whose duties revolve around hauling really don't need as much angulation. But only where a breed is required to have short, stilted movement would upright shoulders be desirable. A perfect example of this restricted gait can be seen in the properly moving Chow Cho.

One can only assume that if a breed standard calls for movement as far removed from the norm as the Chow Chow's, it is a critical point and should receive great consideration from the breeder, exhibitor and judge. As important as short, stilted movement is to a breed like the Chow Chow, or the rolling gait is to the Bulldog, so should we demand most other breeds to get about easily and naturally with a minimum of effort and little strain. For the purpose of this article, we will confine ourselves primarily to breeds in which ease of movement is both a natural entitlement and a requirement of the respective breed standard.

So then, how does the layman go about determining the degree of shoulder angulation? If can easily be determined by putting the thumb and index fingers of the right hand at the uppermost points of the shoulder blades and the same fingers of the left hand at the point of shoulder (where the shoulder blade joins the upper arm). The imaginary line that runs down the center of the blade between these two points, and hot it deviates from the vertical determines the degree of angulation. If you extend that line to the ground in front of the dog, it will, in most cases, mark the extent of the forward reach of that dog. We will look at how this forward teach can be restricted as we go along.



Anatomical perfection would have the shoulder blade slope back from the vertical at a 45-degree angle to allow maximum reach. Please note that I say "anatomical perfection" would have this be so. Nature,  however, is not so compliant and if you speak to most judges and experienced breeders they will tell you one seldom if ever encounters true 45-degreed shoulder layback.

But please, because this degree of angulation is so seldom achieved, don't misconstrue the fact to mean should scrap the whole idea. Failing to reach the North Pole on our early explorers' first try didn't eliminate the North Pole! Perhaps all this yapping about how seldom you find the ideal shoulder angulation is responsible for so many exhibitors treating it with utter disregard. Something has set us off in the wrong directions and we have need to get back on track.

The result of being negligent in our demand for ideal shoulder angulation is not confined to movement alone. Upright shoulders make the neck shorted than it should be and the back longer, thus destroying the dog's correct balance. These badly articulated shoulders are often connected to short upper arms which are also poorly angulated, thus moving the entire front end assembly too far forward on the ribcage. This results in a lack of forechest and a nearly straight line from throat to fee. This construction is frequently accompanied by a hollowed out cavity in the chest area between the legs. Construction of this nature indicates lack of endurance due to restricted heart and lung room.

The correct front for most of the long-legged Terriers, much to the surprise of many Terrier breeders themselves, also requires a long, sloping shoulder blade. The straight front line of the "Terrier font" is actually created by a short, nearly upright humerus (upper are) - not by upright shoulders! Some authors believe that the short upper arrm evolved because it was advantageous in "going to ground;" the dog could work on its keel (lower chest) with its legs free to dig. Here this straight line front is a virtue.





A long shoulder blade and a short upper arm is not as easy a combination to achieve as one might think in that the upper arm and shoulder blade, like all bones in the canine skeleton, seem to have a natural inclination to approximate the length of their adjacent neighbor. In other words, if the "the toe bone's connected to the foot bone," like the old song tells us, the bones in the toes will attempt to approximate the length of the bones in the foot proper. Or another example: a man with a long forearm is invariably going to have longs hands, etc.

Thus, what we are more apt to get in dogs (even in Terriers) is the unhappy combination of a short, upright shoulder and a similarly proportioned and placed upper arm. Therefore, in order to breed the well-angulated, ground covering front, one must pay attention to both the length and angulation of the shoulder blade and the upper arm.