Hips@ for ABCA papers but nothing for eyes?

[1sheepdoggal]

About 8 months ago, I reg. a litter of BC pups with the ABCA. Both parents had been eye tested, clear, and I called to ask if there was a place on the form to put that so that it would show up on the pups papers. ( that both parents had been tested and showed clear) They told me they didnt put that kind of info on the papers. Recently, I was looking at some papers, and I saw this... @ and @@ I think that means hips and elbows OFA'd? If they can put hips on the papers, why cant they put some kind of # or the like for eyes, and why do they put for hips over eyes? I think that eye problems in BC's are a bit more prevalant than bad hips, and would think that eyes certs would be the more important of the two to allow on papers? Both would be great, but why cant they put a sign for eyes too? Just courious. Darci

[Journey]

I would think it is due to hips being done once and certified whereas until recently, with DNA, eyes have to or need to be done yearly for certification. Now, a notation for DNA clear/carrier/affected may be a good idea but the DNA certification is new.

 

Karen

[1sheepdoggal]

That makes sence to me Karen, but it looks like Im gonna have to do some home work, as I was of the understanding ( and I cant remember who told me this its been so long ago ) that if a dog was over 3 yrs old, that if they had not been effected by eye problems, that the likelyhood of them getting them later in life, (just talking about CEA and PRA?) was pracitcally nil. So with the DNA testing, would you still need to have dogs tested reguarly? More home work to do, as I had thought that the DNA testing was to assure correct parentage , didnt even know that it had anything to do with eye testing. Darci

[1sheepdoggal]

Geez, now that I think about it, even if a dog hasnt been effected by a ceretin age, it doesnt mean they cant be a carrier. Funny how things will stick with ya, and ya dont start to analize them then until ya vocalize them. Well, back to the books for me! Darci

[stockdogranch]

Yup--I think Karen is exactly right--a regular CERF means essentially not much. Now with the DNA test, it might make sense to make a notation on the papers, and it wouldn't surprise me to see one added at some point in the future. But it is still fairly new, and I think it's a case of so many things in our world--we just haven't quite caught up with our technology,

A

[Bill Fosher]

When the DNA test first came out, I argued against adding a notation to indicate eye DNA status on the pedigree. I feel that we are getting dangerously close to putting a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval on dogs based on things that have little (and indeed in the case of unaffected carriers nothing) to do with their ability to work livestock.

 

Suppose a dog is DNA normal for CEA. Does that mean he should be bred? No. Suppose a dog is a carrier. Does that mean he should not be bred? No. (A few of us out here even think that under certain circumstances, affected dogs should be bred, but I won't open that particular can of worms.) What benefit does placing that information on the pedigree provide that a simple conversation with the owner of a prospective breeding partner wouldn't? None.

 

I also oppose a hip status icon on the pedigree for the same reasons -- plus the fact that the designation is based on phenotype rather than genotype -- but that designation has been around for a lot longer and I'm sure it's not going away.

 

My feeling is that the only designations that should be on pedigrees are national champions, international champions, and perhaps nursery champions. That way when you look back in the pedigree you can quickly ascertain whether it was that Maid or some other Maid.

 

As a footnote, in the days before the DNA test for collie eye anomoly it was generally accepted that the thing to do was to have the puppies checked before they were (I think) 10 weeks old. Very little in any event. Pups that were not affected at that age were considered unaffected -- meaning either that they were genetically normal, or carried just one copy of the gene mutation that causes CEA. Dogs that were not checked when they were very little and later appeared clear could still be affected -- carriers of two copies of the CEA mutation -- but have a type of collie eye anomoly called "go normal." While this condition wouldn't affect the dog's vision, it would mean that all of its offspring would be at least carriers. If two go-normal dogs were bred, they would produce a litter of pups that was 100 percent affected with CEA. Go-normal would never show up in any annual CERF exam except that one when they are very little. So the ideas that if a dog has been okay up to age three or if annual eye exams are clear you're good to go is not accurate at all.

[Kelliwic Border Collies]

Recently, I was looking at some papers, and I saw this... @ and @@ I think that means hips and elbows OFA'd?

 

Darci, a while back I asked Patty Rogers about the @ vs. @@. When the ABCA switched databases, the dogs that were in the previous database with @ had another @ added by the new database for some reason. Either it wasn't possible, or certainly it wasn't practical, to manually fix all the @@ to make them @. But one or two @ means the same; hips are considered "non-dysplastic" or "normal" by a veterinary radiologist. (This does not have to be an OFA rating.)

[Pipedream Farm]

How many test results should be allowed on the papers? So far we could have hips and CEA; soon we could have epilepsy and early onset deafness, and the future will bring 10-100 more DNA tests. There isn't much room on the pedigrees for all this information. Remember that for this information to be truly useful it must be carried on all generations listed on the papers.

 

If you're breeding you should find out the health status (hips & DNA tests) and working characteristics in the dogs (and their lines) you are mating. No piece of paper will ever suffice for the latter.

 

The hip status is fraught with problems. OFA is very subjective and can lead to inaccurate classification of hips; OFA does too little to educate owners on what the classifications mean leading to people only wanting to breed "good" and "excellent" dogs. Hip status should be known prior to breeding; it should be discussed as part of the selection process not the first selection criteria which it has become in some circles.

 

Mark

[Bo Peep]

I would think it is due to hips being done once and certified whereas until recently, with DNA, eyes have to or need to be done yearly for certification. Now, a notation for DNA clear/carrier/affected may be a good idea but the DNA certification is new.

 

Karen

I did this same thing. Once the dog is over 2 the hips are in the socket and given a fair, good or excellent. My male had a good and my female had an excellent. The eyes, way back then tested for CEA and PRA had to be done every year. I only did it right before I bred. Now, if they have to test every year, what kind of certainty can that give you? What if you bred 10 years ago and the male turns up bad? What happens to those pups that you tried so hard to prove for good eyes and your old Male's eyes went bad. Guess it's a hit and miss situation. I like the hips being done. Why waste money and time training a dog that's going to go lame? IMO.

[bexie]

I have a really stupid question. If you are getting a pup from good working lines on both sides, are you really needing to worry that much about hip tests? Aren't the hips tested better by the work than by x-rays?

[Bill Fosher]

Bo Peep,

 

In my estimation, CERF exams have been made obsolete by the DNA test. PRA is not a real concern in the Border collie. Collie eye anomaly is. At any point in a dog's life, you can have its DNA tested and know its status for sure. With the CERF exam, the only sure result is one that finds an affected dog. An clinically-unaffected dog could be normal, or it could be an unaffected carrier or an affected, go-normal dog.

 

Since a dog's genotype doesn't change through the course of its life, there's no reason to repeat the test. Moreover, you know the dog's genetic status, and you can predict the disease status of its offspring. Rather than eliminating whole lines from consideration for breeding because of CEA, we can now genotype dogs and select breeding partners that will allow working traits to be preserved while eliminating disease from the breed.

 

The genetics of hip dysplasia is much more complex and the environment plays a role as well. We do not have a genotype test for CHD -- the best we can do is look at the conformation of the hip joints. Basing breeding decisions on the way hips are constructed -- particularly if it is used as an excluder -- will narrow the gene pool needlessly and potentially harmfully. OFA excellent hips are not proof against lameness. Furthermore, breeding excellent to excellent doesn't guarantee no CHD in the offspring. Nor does breeding dogs with @ on their pedigree -- that's one of the reasons I dislike the symbol. It implies, as does the # that denotes national or ## for international champions, that this dog is particularly noteworthy and it and its offspring are particularly valuable to the breed. Perhaps that's not the intent of the ABCA, but it is a fact that it's interpreted that way.

[Bill Fosher]

Hi Bexie,

 

Because so many things contribute to CHD, including the parents' genetic contributions, there are two main schools of thought within the working community about your question.

 

One says that if your dog is coming from lines of dogs that have been sound themselves until ripe old ages, and that have produced sound dogs, hip tests are probably not needed. As I mention in my post above, hip tests are not necessarily even predictive of the status of the offspring.

 

The other school says that hip status should be known and should be one of many factors weighed in decided whether a pair should be bred.

 

On the fringe there are those who say that only OFA good or excellent dogs should be bred (or similarly high scoring on other tests) and the other extreme says that hip disease shouldn't even be a consideration.

 

Unless you know a lot about the dogs, their ancestry, and their offspring (including half-sibs, cousins, etc.) and they're all working hard and staying sound it's a little tough to say that the hill proves the dog. And indeed, most breeders in the US don't have the kind of work that would show up any minor joint problems. Chances are very good that in order to have enough information about a potential breeding pair to be really confident in hip status of the offspring, you're going to have to rely on second- and third-hand accounts of the dogs working ability and soundness -- how good is the judgment of the people whose opinions you're including in your calculus? A lot of stars have to align correctly for the hill to prove the dog.

 

On the other hand, OFA is no box of chocolates itself. Radiology is an art, and the radiologists who are reading films for OFA have no knowledge of anything about the dog other than what is seen on the films. They have to presume that the images were taken correctly. I've seen such widely varying techniques used to shoot films to check hips that I can't have very much faith in any marginal call by the OFA radiologists. Then too, we must decide if we buy the OFA premise that a tighter hip is necessarily better.

 

My sense is that probably the most sensible approach is a combination of family history and radiology, but not with a lot of emphasis on scoring the films.

[Pipedream Farm]

FYI

 

The dog with the worst hips (evaluated by radiographs) I've seen was an imported fully trained dog with no signs of lameness. He would not jump up into a truck. This dog had no sockets.

 

My personal recommendation would be to have radiographs taken of the hips; have them evaluated by Cornell (so you get a full report); and use this as one more piece of information when choosing a cross. If the hips are not within normal limits I personally would not breed the dog.

 

Mark

[kelpiegirl]

Mark

I assume the radiographs were done after he arrived? Was he okay working sheep? This is interesting...

[Pipedream Farm]

Yes, the radiographs were taken here and he was a good working dog. Would he have lasted a lifetime of work, who knows.

Mark

[bexie]

My personal recommendation would be to have radiographs taken of the hips; have them evaluated by Cornell (so you get a full report); and use this as one more piece of information when choosing a cross. If the hips are not within normal limits I personally would not breed the dog.

 

And for those of us not in the US where dragging a potential dam and sire to Cornell is out of the budget and not particularly fair to the dogs?

 

I'm not planning to breed, just talking theory here. We may have found a trainer for Molly and are eager to get her started on stock work and may some day be looking to acquire a second dog. Also just for the archives.

[Liz P]

And for those of us not in the US where dragging a potential dam and sire to Cornell is out of the budget and not particularly fair to the dogs?

 

I'm not planning to breed, just talking theory here. We may have found a trainer for Molly and are eager to get her started on stock work and may some day be looking to acquire a second dog. Also just for the archives.

 

In an ideal situation the sire and dam of your future pup have had several litters of pups who have proven to be sound. The hips of the parents, past puppies and all close relatives have been read excellent on radiographic examination. The parents are past middle aged and have been working hard their whole lives yet are still very much sound. The problem is, ideal situations never happen. If you really do your research you will find closely related dysplastic dogs in every pedigree. The other option is to buy a teenager or young adult and have the hips checked before the sale is final, making you much more likely to have a sound dog. Of course, even that is no guarantee according to radiologists who have seen dogs score OFA Excellent then develop bad arthritis in their hips. (Why though? Is the test too subjective? Is is missing some important information? Do we really have a good understanding of what sound hips are?)

[Pipedream Farm]

And for those of us not in the US where dragging a potential dam and sire to Cornell is out of the budget and not particularly fair to the dogs?

 

Radiographic evaluations of hips are highly dependent upon the quality of the radiographs (position and contrast) and the bias of the person reading them (are they in the process of reading many radiographs and then ranking the batch vs. reading each on their own merit). OFA only returns an average score from 3 subjective readings of the radiographs. An OFA "fair" can occur when one hip is better than the other even though both hips are within normal limits; this information is lost in the scoring system. Cornell returns a full report (description) of the hips in that radiograph. The report can be reviewed by other vets and translated into layman's terms for you to understand. So find a vet. radiologist who can read the radiographs and provide a report on the hips vs. a single score.

 

 

Mark

[juliepoudrier]

And for those of us not in the US where dragging a potential dam and sire to Cornell is out of the budget and not particularly fair to the dogs?

Bexie,

As far as I know, the dog doesn't have to go to Cornell. The dog needs to be radiographed by someone competent enough to get the appropriate view for evaluation and then the radiographs need to be sent to Cornell. (AFAIK, there are some vets working with Cornell at satellite locations to take the appropriate views of the dog. Even someone overseas might be able to get a local vet to work with the folks at Cornell to be able to take the appropriate radiographs and send them in.) Am I correct Mark?

 

Personally, when I wanted to breed my dog, I had her hips X-rayed by an orthopedic specialist at a specialty hospital here. This particular vet had come highly recommended to me. He read the radiographs and made his recommendations based on what he saw. He also explained everything to me in person with the radiograph in front of us. I was satisfied that my dog had hips that were acceptable (within normal limits). Since I was planning to keep a pup (and kept two), there would be no incentive for me to not make sure my bitch had the best hips possible since I certainly wouldn't want to be stuck with a dysplastic pup.

 

As others have said, if you know the relatives of the dog(s) in question and have done your homework, a mark on a pedigree doesn't really make a lot of difference, IMO.

 

FWIW, I have a dysplastic dog, a successful retired open trial dog. She never took a lame step that I know of, except when the experienced an injury to one hip. So apparent soundness is no guarantee of good hips. But I also don't think you have to have a particular group's "stamp of approval" either. Get the dog checked out in a way that satisfies you (and any potential buyers of the pups) and move forward.

 

J.

[Pipedream Farm]

Bexie,

As far as I know, the dog doesn't have to go to Cornell. The dog needs to be radiographed by someone competent enough to get the appropriate view for evaluation and then the radiographs need to be sent to Cornell. (AFAIK, there are some vets working with Cornell at satellite locations to take the appropriate views of the dog. Even someone overseas might be able to get a local vet to work with the folks at Cornell to be able to take the appropriate radiographs and send them in.) Am I correct Mark?

J.

 

The ABCA has 2 hip programs with Cornell. One is a study looking at a new radiographic position and measurement of angles within the joints produced in the radiograph by this new position. The other is the ABCA is accepting readings (within normal limits) of radiographs sent to Cornell for notation on the papers. Cornell will read radiographs from anywhere for a fee; however, I'd expect there are vet schools in EU that will read radiographs and send your vet and/or you a report.

 

Mark

[Journey]

The other is the ABCA is accepting readings (within normal limits) of radiographs sent to Cornell for notation on the papers. Cornell will read radiographs from anywhere for a fee; however, I'd expect there are vet schools in EU that will read radiographs and send your vet and/or you a report.

 

Mark

 

Thanks Mark. I was unaware of the "other" option of going through Cornell for readings instead of OFA. Our vet school down here is one that won't deal with OFA or readings. They said there was too much controversy with the readings - what they saw vs what OFA said, so they stopped doing them.

 

Karen

[Liz P]

Thanks Mark. I was unaware of the "other" option of going through Cornell for readings instead of OFA. Our vet school down here is one that won't deal with OFA or readings. They said there was too much controversy with the readings - what they saw vs what OFA said, so they stopped doing them.

 

Karen

 

I know a lot of vets who say the exact same thing, many of them are board certified orthopedic vets.

[bexie]

Thanks for all the explanations.

 

Do A and B ratings for hips mean anything to you guys?

 

Now I'm feeling so informed that I'm trying to make sense out of Danish BC puppy listings. I'm not confident with many of the breeders, because they seem very color and sports oriented. But at least now I have some ideas so if I stumble over someone with a little more working sense, I can understand what they're talking about if they do test. There has to be a good strong working core somewhere. I just haven't found them yet. Maybe they aren't Internet savy.

[Liz P]

Thanks for all the explanations.

 

Do A and B ratings for hips mean anything to you guys?

 

Now I'm feeling so informed that I'm trying to make sense out of Danish BC puppy listings. I'm not confident with many of the breeders, because they seem very color and sports oriented. But at least now I have some ideas so if I stumble over someone with a little more working sense, I can understand what they're talking about if they do test. There has to be a good strong working core somewhere. I just haven't found them yet. Maybe they aren't Internet savy.

 

 

http://members.aol.com/LeoClubGB/HIPS.html