Early Takeoff Syndrome?

[KnottyClarence]

Or maybe even like gymnasts and ice skaters, where very young bodies are required these days to excel at these sports. You see the older athletes still try and come out, but usually they have injuries, or a combination of injuries and change in body shape, which just keeps them from being as good as they once were. I have a young dog, 16 months, who's built like a whippet, can run all day, eats like a horse and looks bony. If I just had her, I might expect her to remain like a whippet for all of her days, and she might. But she has an older brother, same breeding, and though he is by no means anything but spare, he did fill out a bit, still eating like a horse. A precocious agility dog at 18 months might have a different body to contend with at 5 years. And if this precocious dog is trained to a high level of performance and asked to do that performance weekend after weekend, year round, with practices during the week as well, maybe this changed body becomes more than the muscle memory of the "younger body" can deal with. Just speculating. Agility is still pretty new and evolving. The top of performance for the canine athlete may be one of the crucial steps in this evolution.

[Root Beer]

*shrugs* So, that little sampling tells me nothing at all, basically.

 

You mean you don't know everything there is to know about it from hearing a little bit about it, watching a few vidoes, and drawing conclusions based on a fraction of the information that actually exists about the issue?

 

I think you have made the most insightful contribution to this entire discussion. And I am not being sarcastic in the least.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

But Utility? French Ring? Rally? Military dog and police dog training?

 

I'm pretty sure because that sort of thing should have been mentioned in public documentation.

 

The point is that there IS no preliminary case study available for review. We have something someone claims may be a genetic defect in Border Collies, that affects physical performance.

 

But there is no scientific data for those of us who ALSO are concerned about physical performance in our dogs, to examine.

 

Just, see this one vet (not a researcher), read this article in a sport magazine (not a study, not peer reviewed).

 

Best of all, join an email list which focuses on a subject on barely understand anymore, it's gotten so technical, and ask your questions there.

 

What if we said the answers to any questions on CEA could only be found on the cowdog forum? Go on and ask some agility related questions there.

[Pearse]

I'll admit, I find the idea that Linda Mecklenburg and her colleagues haven't done extensive work and research on any and all of the questions that people have posed here just plain odd. But if you don't know exactly what she has done and you personally believe that she hasn't explored training, detectable physical issues, handling, etc. to a great extent before proposing that the problem may be due to a genetic or undetectable physical cause, then that's what you think. There isn't really anything anybody can do to change that, regardless of the work and research that has actually been done.

 

There's a big difference between having done work and research and having done work and research that is published in a peer reviewed journal.

 

I can't judge the work Linda Mecklenburg has done on this phenomenon other than by her published writings on the subject. So far, the published writings I have been able to find, don't include the results of any scientific research on the subject matter. There are no reports of controlled experiments. No data on how many dogs were dogs were enrolled in which different training regiments and what the degree of improvement was over a similar group of dogs that were not subject to different training regimes. Granted, those writings are all in magazines intended for a lay audience but there's nothing I can find in the scientific literature either, so far.

 

Maybe those research papers exist. If so, if someone sends me the reference, I will read them.

 

In short, it has nothing to do with what I "think" or "believe". It comes down to what has been demonstrated with scientific rigor, reviewed by peers in the fields of animal behavior and veterinary medicine, and published for the rest of the veterinary, scientific, and agility communities to evaluate.

 

I'm not criticizing Linda Meckenburg. I'd never heard of the lady until a few days ago. She may indeed have done extensive and excellent research on this phenomenon that none of us is aware of and this entire thread may be completely superfluous. However, based on what I have been able to find to read on the subject, my own personal conclusion is that the jury is still out, and the underlying basis for this phenomenon is far from determined.

 

 

Edited to add: from Dr. Mecklenburg's article on her website

I do not know the cause of this problem. I do not believe it is a training issue although as I said a lack of confidence makes the problem worse.

.

A definitive cause needs to be identified before prevention is possible. Because this problem does appear in certain lines of dogs, I think breeding stock should be evaluated carefully...... In my opinion it is a performance-limiting problem no different from epilepsy or canine hip dysplasia and affected dogs should be removed from the breeding pool until more is known about the cause and treatment of ETS.

So, at this point, everything about this phenomenon is hypothesis and speculation and yet, based on nothing but speculation, she's recommending that any dog showing this phenomenon be removed from the gene pool.

Now, since I'm of the opinion that no Border Collie should be bred for Agility anyway, that doesn't bother me personally. The fewer Sport Collies in the gene pool, the better. But, I think it's a dangerous philosophy. We have no real evidence that this is a genetic disease, no definitive evidence that it's heritable other than some anecdotal reports that it may exhibit in dogs from the same lineage, but on the basis of that almost complete lack of evidence, we're going to recommend not breeding any of these dogs.

Makes little sense to me.

That $20 is still sitting on the table.

Edited July 1, 2011 by Pearse

[Mark Billadeau]

Recognizing why the ETS is important to some (not all) people involved in Agility, and having some understanding of why they consider a genetic study to be of value does not equal advocating the breeding of Border Collies for Agility.

You implied in previous posts that you are advocating doing the study to see if there is a genetic link and then developing the genetic test (which would be used for the breeding of sport dogs) because it could provide more information. By doing so are you not advocating developing tools to breed a better sports dog?

 

 

 

You tell us we should accept the reality that sports dogs are being bred (even if we don’t agree with it). You say you’re against this practice but you won’t stand up and tell those who are purchasing sports bred dogs or are breeding sport dogs that you don’t agree with the practice (because it might hurt their feelings). Then you tell us we should be okay with the sports people doing studies because more knowledge is a worthy cause for the breed as a whole. But you can’t see that this knowledge could help them breed faster, better sports dogs aid the breed of sports dogs (a practice you say you don’t agree with).

 

 

[Gloria Atwater]

Just because it's almost midnight and I think this needs to be posted here:

 

 

 

Yes.

 

 

~ G

[Root Beer]

You implied in previous posts that you are advocating doing the study to see if there is a genetic link and then developing the genetic test (which would be used for the breeding of sport dogs) because it could provide more information. By doing so are you not advocating developing tools to breed a better sports dog?

 

No, I am not. I am not advocating anything when it comes to ETS, other than getting the facts rather than making assumptions. I consider study and gaining knowledge about existing realities to be a good thing. I understand why people with these dogs don't just quit and do something else. I understand why people who wish to do Agility with a dog would refrain from purchasing puppies from lines where dogs have been known to demonstrate ETS. I understand why breeders would choose not to breed those dogs. But I am not advocating those things (other than sticking with a challenge if doing so is right for both dog and handler), nor am I advocating tools to breed a better sports dog.

 

You tell us we should accept the reality that sports dogs are being bred (even if we don’t agree with it).

 

Is there a good reason not to accept that reality? Is it untrue? In doubt?

 

You say you’re against this practice but you won’t stand up and tell those who are purchasing sports bred dogs or are breeding sport dogs that you don’t agree with the practice (because it might hurt their feelings).

 

Not quite. Convincing people not to purchase sport bred dogs is not my personal crusade. It is not my personal crusade to end the plight of the homeless, either, does that mean I advocate homelessness? Am I "for" people being homeless because I don't go around to everyone I know who has a house and tell them that they should take in a homeless person?

 

I know, it's not the same thing. For some reason, breeding Border Collies for sport is far more important than any other cause in life, so I am most certainly advocating it if I am not beating down the doors of my dog sport friends to educate them on the working bred Border Collie.

 

Then you tell us we should be okay with the sports people doing studies because more knowledge is a worthy cause for the breed as a whole.

 

I'm not telling anyone they should be "OK" with anything. I'm not OK with quite a lot of things that I personally oppose.

 

I think it is wise for anyone to recognize that people are different from one another. Different people value different things. I can recognize that someone holds something to be important that I am personally not "OK" with. I'm starting to get the impression that is not a commonly known skill.

 

But you can’t see that this knowledge could help them breed faster, better sports dogs aid the breed of sports dogs (a practice you say you don’t agree with).

 

So, I should deny that the facts as they are exist, and advocate that people remain ignorant because there are people who will use the knowledge in a way that I wouldn't want them to use it?

 

Sorry, to me that still makes absolutely no sense.

 

So, no. I still do not agree that recognizing that ETS my be caused by a genetic or currently undetectable physical condition equals support for the breeding of Border Collies for Agility. It simply doesn't add up.

[rushdoggie]

You say you’re against this practice but you won’t stand up and tell those who are purchasing sports bred dogs or are breeding sport dogs that you don’t agree with the practice (because it might hurt their feelings).

 

Wow. Just, wow.

[Root Beer]

But Utility? French Ring? Rally? Military dog and police dog training?

 

Where in Utility does a dog do a series of jumps set up in a random (to the dog) pattern at full speed with twists and turns and other pieces of equipment interspersed between and the handler changing sides?

 

Where in Rally does a dog do a series of jumps set up in a random (to the dog) pattern at full speed with twists and turns and other pieces of equipment interspersed between and the handler changing sides?

 

That leaves French Ring, Military dogs, and Police dog training. I know police dogs and military dogs do train on Agility-style courses, but to my knowledge, the focus is more actual agility and building strength and skill to transfer over into other work than speed, which is a key part of the sport of Agility. To my knowledge it is still not exactly the same.

 

I'm pretty sure because that sort of thing should have been mentioned in public documentation.

 

If the issue has not shown up because it is specific to the jumping skill set needed for Agility, it would not have been.

 

The point is that there IS no preliminary case study available for review. We have something someone claims may be a genetic defect in Border Collies, that affects physical performance.

 

So, because the studies are not available for review, they haven't been done?

 

But there is no scientific data for those of us who ALSO are concerned about physical performance in our dogs, to examine.

 

It seems to me that a request for that data would a great place to start.

 

Just, see this one vet (not a researcher), read this article in a sport magazine (not a study, not peer reviewed).

 

She's just in the trenches, so to speak, working one on one with these teams, trying every known training approach known to the sport of Agility, getting every physical test possible, and trying every handling approach known to the sport of Agility.

 

But she's not a researcher, so her observations and conclusions couldn't possibly have any credence. She only knows the sport of Agility better than all of us in this discussion put together. And she chose to publish information to make it known to the actual people involved in the sport of Agility, not the scientific community. So, she couldn't possibly know anything about this.

 

Best of all, join an email list which focuses on a subject on barely understand anymore, it's gotten so technical, and ask your questions there.

 

Yes, an email list where the person who knows this issue best of all answered many of the same questions that people asked here herself. Why get the information straight from the person who knows it best? Maybe a bunch of people who don't actually participate in the sport that this effects might come up with better answers.

 

What if we said the answers to any questions on CEA could only be found on the cowdog forum? Go on and ask some agility related questions there.

 

If there were someone who was doing work with CEA on that forum and that person had actually answered the questions that people are asking here over there, then that would be an excellent suggestion.

[Root Beer]

Wow. Just, wow.

 

Hey, did you know that I'm advocating 20 inch spacing in weave poles even though 24 inch spacing has been demonstrated to be safer? I must be because I haven't spoken out against 20 inch spacing among my fellow Agility competitors. Apparently the fact that I had my weave poles made with 24 inch spacing has no bearing on that.

[brndlbc]

7-1-11

Root Beer Wrote:

 

"The interesting thing here is that I haven't seen anyone here rally strongly in support of the study of ETS, but even keeping an open mind toward the possibility that there is validity (from a factual standpoint..........."

 

 

 

In the last 10 months I have undergone two surgeries for retina issues. I am currently dealing with some vision loss and some depth perception issues down towards my feet. The farther things are away from me, the easier it is to judge. Driving is no problem. When looking down at stairs, I can not tell if it is a 6 inch drop or 16 inch drop. I am that cat that moves it's head around to judge distance. This has had an extreme effect on my handling in agility. I have a hard time judging the jumps depending on their location. In the event that what ever is going on with the dogs to cause them to hesitate, stutter and misjudge the jumps, is related to an eye issue, I can relate to what they are going through.

 

I have a cairn terrier in one of my classes that exhibits the classic "symptoms" of ETS. I will be, now that this subject has come up here, playing around with said dog and his jump height/distances etc, just to see what happens. I am sure that my conclusions, if any, will have absolutely no relevance to anyone (scientific or layperson) but me and that is fine. One dog means nothing.

 

On the flip side of this, in 12 years of agility, competing with 26 different dogs in nearly every jump height that there is, I have never personally handled a dog with ETS like symptoms. In all the classes that I have taught and the near 300 dogs that have gone through them, I can only think of 2 off the top of my head that showed these type of issues. Not really a huge number to worry about....unless of course it is your dog we are talking about.

[Journey]

 

So, because the studies are not available for review, they haven't been done?

 

It seems to me that a request for that data would a great place to start.

 

Yes, exactly.

 

Since many of your responses and various answers seemed as though you new more than what could be found on the web, I went ahead and sent an email to LM asking if she could and would explain all the tests, studies and other work she did prior to determining, or how she determined, that this is a generic issue and therefore warrants finding the DNA marker.

 

We'll see if I get an answer.

[Pearse]

I am sure this question is going to be viewed as pot stirring but that is not the intent. Why is it that ETS is any less worthy of genetic exploration than say looking for a genetic split between working and conformation lines? Using criteria mentioned prior in this thread, neither is really "life threatening".

 

 

Actually not pot stirring at all and some of this research has already been done. Several cross-breeding studies (breeding Border Collies with another breed) have shown that elements of herding behavior can disappear in a single generation. Those studies also showed that the set of behaviors which we group together as "herding behavior" are each controlled by one or more genes. The researchers categorized those as things like "eye", "crouch", "stalking". We would probably add "cast", endurance, "power" and "presence". To anyone who has bred working dogs, those findings are somewhat obvious as we can see "plain working" vs "strong eyed" dogs, dogs with imense presence vs dogs who can work close to sheep etc. The key thing to note is that what makes a Border Collie is a significant number of genes, spread around the genome. To keep a Border Collie as a dog capable of controlling stock, you need to move those genes as a package to the next generation. The minute you start selecting primarily for other traits (coat color, ear set, coat length, forehead stock, non-ETS), you are going to lose that.

 

Why all the interest in Border Collies?

 

It's an interest in dogs in General as a genetic platform to explore biology. Dogs have unique aspects that no other model system has. Huge phenotypic variation. We call a Chihuahua and a Great Dane the same species, but were one to categorize them on morphology, or on the ability to interbreed naturally, they are so different that most would declare them separate species. Second, inbreeding, and more particularly the type of inbreeding using limited sires that pervades Kennel Club breeding has produced dog breeds with high incidences of genetic diseases that can be used as models for human conditions in a population with a high degree of genetic homogeneity. Third, breed specific behavior. No one knows how much of behavior is inate but it's clear from dog breeds that some behaviors are heritable.

 

So, the general answer is that the interest in non-life threatening conditions to scientists is because scientists just want to know how things come to be, and dogs offer some unique advantages in answering those questions.

 

One thing that I think is going to hinder their efforts in the area of behavioral research is that the AKC is the gold standard for a lot of those scientists and a lot of the AKC breeds have been bred away from their defining behaviors by selection for a physical phenotype rather than a behavioral one. Anyone interested in studying behavioral genetics had better steer clear of Kennel Club dogs and seek out working dog populations.

 

Two good articles on the current state of genetic research in dogs.

 

1) Dog Star Rising: The Canine Genetic System by Drs. Sutter and Ostrander (a pioneer in this field)

 

2) "Genetics and the Shape of Dogs" American Scientist by Elaine Ostrander which is accessible for a lay audience.

[Pearse]

So the objection to the study of ETS really is that this is specifically a sport issue and that there is no potential benefit to the breeding of working dogs.

 

No. The main objection is to making a statement that ETS is a genetic condition and advising people to stop breeding based on that when there is no evidence from any real study indicating that this is even a real condition and not a behavioral anomaly in some high performance Agility dogs.

 

Again, if it were just up to me, I'd tell Agility people that breeding Border Collies for any Agility trait would produce defective dogs that will be no good for agility. But, that would be wrong of me because I have no empirical evidence that it is true.

 

There is NO empirical evidence that removing dogs with "ETS" (quotes are deliberate) will prevent future dogs from developing ETS.

 

Study it all you want. Set up the ETS Foundation to fund it. Don't tell people to spay and neuter their affected dogs until actual studies are done showing it's a heritable condition.

[Root Beer]

Study it all you want. Set up the ETS Foundation to fund it. Don't tell people to spay and neuter their affected dogs until actual studies are done showing it's a heritable condition.

 

Surprising as it may seem, we are in complete agreement on that.

[Pearse]

Surprising as it may seem, we are in complete agreement on that.

 

Not surprising to me at all. There's usually common ground in the middle.

[Diana A]

No. The main objection is to making a statement that ETS is a genetic condition and advising people to stop breeding based on that when there is no evidence from any real study indicating that this is even a real condition and not a behavioral anomaly in some high performance Agility dogs.

 

Again, if it were just up to me, I'd tell Agility people that breeding Border Collies for any Agility trait would produce defective dogs that will be no good for agility. But, that would be wrong of me because I have no empirical evidence that it is true.

 

There is NO empirical evidence that removing dogs with "ETS" (quotes are deliberate) will prevent future dogs from developing ETS.

 

Study it all you want. Set up the ETS Foundation to fund it. Don't tell people to spay and neuter their affected dogs until actual studies are done showing it's a heritable condition.

 

 

If the agility community follows the principle of 'breed for the work' (and I'm using agility as the 'work' in this case) then these affected dogs are probably weeded out anyway. Not necesarily purposefully eliminated, and not necessarily with any judgement of it being genetic or not. But if you have a good working agility bitch you want to breed, who are you going to breed to? The good working national/world team champion who has proven again and again he can 'do the job', or the dog at the local trials who 'might' be good, but gee, we really can't know for sure because he has that horrible jumping problem? Is it all that different in working border collies - if you have one dog out there trialing successfully or demonstrating outstanding work on the farm, and another who always runs up the middle and chases the sheep, which dog would you breed to? You may say the sheep chaser should be really good based on pedigree or whatever and blame his trainer, but since he never has actually proven himself through his work, how many would take that chance when there are so many other good breeding prospects out there? If they can't do the work, they can't do the work - does it really matter in the end if it's a mental thing, a physical thing, or even a training thing? If a trainer trains 10 dogs and one has some problem that is based on training and the others don't, that might still point to something in the dog not quite right (less talent, less biddable, less physically capable of doing as requested easily, not as smart, etc).

 

From my persective, far too few people actually systematically train jumping, and jumping problems are very hard to fix. Taking off early is a typical manifestation of a dog who is very excited and doesn't want to slow down or shorten stride so as to adjust striding for a closer more apropriate take off. So the fact that there are dogs who take off early and who may appear to be 'unfixable' does not in itself convince me it's a genetic thing (unless you count over-excitement as the genetic issue), any more than the large number of dogs I see how won't hit contacts or hold a startline at a trial convince me lack of a startline stay is a genetic issue (the owners of many of these dogs would say they have tried EVERYTHING and these problems are unfixable). I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just that I think it's hard to prove it exists in any given case. So I was really surprised to hear of a genetic study. I think unless someone is spending a lot of money to put all these affected dogs through a rigourous professional jump re-training program to determine if it really is unfixable by training, there is no good way to diagnose the problem and therefore any genetic test results would be unreliable. That being said, if I was out to buy an agility dog, I would be unlikely to take a puppy from parents with a bad jumping problem. I have seen families of dogs with similar jumping issues, also families of dogs who were very fluid jumpers. I have no idea if they're good or bad due to eye sight, or some special 'jumping' gene, or if it's just a different personality or different structure. I really wouldn't care. If a line tend to produce something I don't like I steer clear, even if I don't fully understand the exact mechanism behind the bad effect.

[juliepoudrier]

If they can't do the work, they can't do the work - does it really matter in the end if it's a mental thing, a physical thing, or even a training thing?

 

 

I think you're right that it doesn't matter from a breeding POV if a dog can't do the work because the dog won't generally be bred from. But choosing not to breed based on performance is different than choosing not to breed based on genetics, because for the former, you actually have to train the dog to some degree to determine if it has what it takes and in the latter you can automatically dismiss the dog based on its genes (or presence of a particular gene marker). And in the latter case, you could then eliminate a whole lot of good stuff, because one gene or gene marker does not make the whole organism, and there's too great a risk of losing something important if one takes genetic testing to its logical conclusion (at least as I understand it in the case of ETS, which is to ID and remove dogs that carry the genetic marker). JMO.

 

If a line tend to produce something I don't like I steer clear, even if I don't fully understand the exact mechanism behind the bad effect.

 

This is the approach that makes absolute sense. But ISTM that people are looking for a way to identify an issue before they ever put time into a dog, without actually being 100% sure that the issue is genetic.

 

J.

[Mark Billadeau]

Is there a good reason not to accept that reality? Is it untrue? In doubt?

Just because something IS doesn't mean I should ignore (implicitly condone it) it if I feel it will do harm.

In this case (breeding for something other than livestock work) it's more than just I "feel" it will do harm; it has been demonstrated across multiple working breeds.

[Root Beer]

Just because something IS doesn't mean I should ignore (implicitly condone it) it if I feel it will do harm.

In this case (breeding for something other than livestock work) it's more than just I "feel" it will do harm; it has been demonstrated across multiple working breeds.

 

Regardless, it is a reality. It exists. It is happening and will happen, regardless of whether ETS is studied or not. There are people for whom it makes sense to do so and to support it.

 

That doesn't mean that one has to condone it, but taking into account the fact that it happens seems like a logical thing to me. And that is not "advocating" it.

[C Crocker]

Regardless, it is a reality. It exists. It is happening and will happen, regardless of whether ETS is studied or not. There are people for whom it makes sense to do so and to support it.

 

That doesn't mean that one has to condone it, but taking into account the fact that it happens seems like a logical thing to me. And that is not "advocating" it.

 

 

Border collies are Border Collies because they have been bred for generation after generation to be stock dogs. All the admirable traits the agility people like comes from the working Border Collie . It will ( and in those dogs bred for more than a few generations it already has) change the breed to be less than a working Border Collie if bred for any other purpose than working stock. That does not mean one cannot enjoy the good traits of a Border Collie in other venues, just do not breed for those venues. The show collie has almost nothing in common with the working Border Collie, as they have bred out what makes up a working Border Collie.

 

The fact that "it happens " is not logical--don't condone , don't advocate it, --strictly from a working Border Collie owner's viewpoint. Let's keep the breed as it is and what it was meant to be so many many generations ago. Enjoy your dog in many ways, just don't breed out the traits that make a working dog.

[Root Beer]

The fact that "it happens " is not logical

 

I'm starting to see that the difference between the working folks and the sport folks has far less to do with dogs than I ever would have thought.

 

Whether the topic is dogs or anything else in life, denial of an existing reality, to me, is not logical. Whether it is a reality that I consider to be good, or a reality that I personally don't condone. But my eyes have been opened and I am seeing clearly now that there are many to whom that makes sense. I can't say I understand it.

[Rave]

I'm starting to see that the difference between the working folks and the sport folks has far less to do with dogs than I ever would have thought.

 

And it only took 24 pages.

[Root Beer]

From my persective, far too few people actually systematically train jumping, and jumping problems are very hard to fix. Taking off early is a typical manifestation of a dog who is very excited and doesn't want to slow down or shorten stride so as to adjust striding for a closer more apropriate take off. So the fact that there are dogs who take off early and who may appear to be 'unfixable' does not in itself convince me it's a genetic thing (unless you count over-excitement as the genetic issue), any more than the large number of dogs I see how won't hit contacts or hold a startline at a trial convince me lack of a startline stay is a genetic issue (the owners of many of these dogs would say they have tried EVERYTHING and these problems are unfixable). I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just that I think it's hard to prove it exists in any given case.

 

Hi Diana,

 

If you are interested in more information, Linda Mecklenburg posted a response to the exact thoughts that you are expressing, on the Clean Run yahoo list.

 

I can't copy her post here because that is against the rules of that forum, but if are interested in what she has to say on this, check out Post #46461 on that list.

 

Based on your comments, I think you would find that particular post informative. It does contain information that is not included in the magazine article.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

All the answers to our questions are on a forum, from which we cannot even copy information. Apologies to Dr. Mecklenburg, but when the information is out of the silo where I can sort through it at my own brain damaged pace, I'll consider ETS from a scientific standpoint.

 

Until then, I'm just seeing a lot of US Cleanrun people saying, "What a marvelous new outfit the emperor is wearing today!"