Cryptorchidism and breeding

[Chrissie Gone West]

I don't want to start anything inflammatory here, but just wanted to
hear the opinions of our experienced membership, especially those of
you involved with breeding, but also the loving pet owners, as all
sides of the coin are important.

How do you feel about breeding from a stud dog that is known to
produce cryptorchid offspring?

In this case I am primarily referring to unilateral cryptorchidism,
otherwise known as an undescended testicle. For those unfamiliar with
this problem, this is considered a genetic defect and certainly
renders the affected dog unable to be shown, and it is inadvisable to
breed from such a dog. The only sensible course of action is surgery
to remove the retained testicle and neuter the dog (who is usually
otherwise fine in all respects).

So let's say you have a stud dog who is healthy in this respect, yet a
cryptorchid male turns up in his progeny. Do you continue to breed
from him? If this happens 3 times (he produces cryptorchid pups)
across several litters do you still use him at stud?

Note that everything I've read so far indicates that cryptorchidism
does not always show in every male in a litter, so if one sibling has
it, then the male and female siblings will be carrying the same
genetics although not symptomatic. If they are bred from and the
genetic environment is conducive, more cryptorchid pups will result.
Yet how often is this information shared? And if the incidence is low
overall, does it matter that it gets overlooked in that generation and
families further down the line buy a quality pup, wanting to show and
breed from it, only to discover that it retains a testicle, thus
crushing those plans? Should buyers not know that they are buying into
lines with a history of this defect? That would make it a known risk
and allow for better and fairer choices (someone only wanting a pet
dog with no interest in breeding might not care about this, yet
another wishing to show would then elect to stay away from such a
risky proposition).

Interested to hear how people see this.

Thanks for your input in advance.

Chrissie

[Ros Leighton]

Chrissie, just one thing before I think about this more, and do some
research.

I think this is quite likely incorrect - "...... so if one sibling has
it, then the male and female siblings **will** (my emphasis) be carrying the
same
genetics ......"

I'd suggest that depending on the inheritance pattern, it would be **could**
be carrying.
?
Ros

[Chrissie Diron]

Well Ros, I have searched through various articles online, trying to understand this more over the past few weeks. Many are vague, saying it's just "genetic" in nature, but not how it actually manifests. A few more detailed studies came to the conclusion that it does not necessarily always show symptomatically, but if one pup in a litter *is* symptomatic, the others are carriers. I believe it's recessive in nature, so you need the right (wrong?!) combination of genes to get it to express, but it is nevertheless far more likely to occur in lines that have seen it before. 

I am hearing that it is highly widespread in some breeds - the chances of you encountering it are very high. It seems that it has been perpetually ignored as insignificant in these breeds and now it's rampant. As it takes the affected dog out of the show circuit and, invariably, the stud scene too, we should definitely be looking at how it then gets to a point where it's widespread. 

I understand that incidence is low in Vizslas - certainly I'd never met a cryptorchid V before (or perhaps it's not being talked about and ignored, which is a worrying habit). 

From Chrissie and the Vitali Vizslas

Independent Norwex Consultant
Clean up your Life - Green up your Life!

www.vitalk9.ca
www.canine-health-concern.org.uk
www.aunaturelk9s.org

[Ros Leighton]

Thanks Chrissie, doing some more reading – I’m aware that it is a genetically linked condition, it was the ‘imperative’ of ‘will be carrying’ that I was questioning.....

 

I have heard of Vizslas with undescended testes... not many, but certainly it’s one of the things breeders always check for when assessing their 8 week old puppies.

 

Certainly agree completely that cryptorchid dogs should not be bred from – one wonders if they have a retained abdominal testis or have had that removed?

 

Cheers

Ros

[Chrissie Diron]

Snippets (no pun intended!) as I find them ... 

This one from: www.upei.ca/cidd/Diseases/urogenital%20disorders/cryptorchidism.htm

How is cryptorchidism inherited?

Although the condition is of course seen only in male dogs, both males and females can carry the gene for cryptorchidism. Heterozygous males and females, and homozygous females, will be physically normal, but can pass the gene on to their offspring. Homozygous males are cryptorchid. Thus cryptorchidism is thought to be a sex-limited autosomal recessive trait

Autosomal recessive

This is the most common mode of inheritance for genetic conditions in dogs. To be affected, the animal must inherit 2 copies of the gene (genotype pp), 1 from each parent. Dogs with the genotype PP (normal) or Pp (carrier) will be clinically normal but the carrier will pass the affected gene to approximately half the offspring. As long as carriers (Pp) are mated to normal animals (PP), the offspring will be unaffected but some will remain carriers. If 2 carriers are mated, some of the offspring (approximately 25%) will be affected.

[Chrissie Diron]

www.bakalo.com/cryptorchidism.htm

Interesting ... the problem is being looked into. 

Note the line: 

"The use of affected dogs as breeding stock will
eventually lead to increasing numbers of unilaterally and bilaterally
cryptorchid dogs."

[Chrissie Diron]

Aha, a good explanation here: www.thedogplace.org/Reference/Fr_Bulldog/undescended.htm

For a male dog to be cryptorchid, he must inherit this abnormal gene from both his sire and his dam.  If a female dog gets two copies of this abnormal gene from her sire and her dam, she will not express it because she has no testicles, but each of her puppies will be at least a carrier. If she is bred to a male carrier,  who has both testicles in his scrotum, but who has one abnormal gene, she may have affected males. If a female with two copies of the abnormal gene is bred to an affected cryptorchid male, all male puppies will be affected.  If a cryptorchid male, likewise, is used at stud, all his puppies will be at least carriers, and if he is bred to a carrier, male puppies will be carriers or affected, and females will be carriers.

      Here are the percentages:

1)      If male and female both have all normal genes, all puppies will be normal and non- carriers or affected.

2)      If  the female is a carrier of a single abnormal gene, and the males is normal in  both of his genes, each puppy has a 50% chance of being a carrier, a 50% chance of being normal.

3)      If the female is a carrier of a single abnormal gene, and the male is a carrier of a single abnormal gene, each puppy will have a 25% chance of being totally normal, each puppy will have a 50% chance of being a carrier of a single abnormal gene, and each puppy will have a 25% chance of having  two abnormal genes. In this case females carry two abnormal genes, and the males are cryptorchid.

[Ros Leighton]

Thanks Chrissie,

I think that google must have been running hot on cryptorchidism in dogs today! J

 

So, with autosomal recessive, there is a also that other 25% of offspring that will (in modelling)  will NOT be carriers as I understand it (and really, I always say – I just don’t ‘do’ genetics! I know that I should have a better grasp, it’s just not something that computes in my head. J)

 

That was the point of my comment on your statement – not ALL puppies will necessarily be carriers IF it’s an autosomal recessive inheritance mode.

 

Still reading, and chatting to someone else about this subject...

 

Cheers

Ros

 

From: ukvi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ukvi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chrissie Diron
Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

 

Snippets (no pun intended!) as I find them ... 

[monkey]

Hi all,

Now I'm no breeding expert by any means, but when I posted on here
previously about whether to breed from my little girl or not, many
people replied that every generation of a line should be an
improvement on the last.

On those grounds I would have thought that not breeding from a stud
that produces cryptorchid progeny was the best course of action.
Having some knowledge of human genetics, could the gene not be
recessive in an individual dog, but reappear in generations to come?
Sounds like a timebomb to me.

If I bought a pup with the intention of breeding or showing, from a
breeder that turned out to have this condition, and I found out the
breeder knew, I would not be impressed.

Helen

[Chrissie Diron]

Thanks Helen. It's sort of where I'm at too. I now have knowledge of somebody who knew their stud had produced some cryptorchid dogs, yet let that dog continue to breed - 25 litters in total! This information of course was not provided freely nor in advance, so a couple generations further down the line the cryptorchidism has turned up again. I know that genetics are a complicated science and there's much we don't understand, but I do wish there was more free flow of information when these things happen, because we all know that breeding is an imprecise business and things do happen, often out of the blue, and it's the risk you take as a breeder. I am just trying to get a handle on why anyone would just ignore it or downplay it - perhaps I'm uprating it too much? But it does leave people down the line, who get affected dogs, feeling very conned, not to mention disappointed and confused, because it was a "surprise". Yet it wasn't really - if you'd known about the earlier generations of crypt dogs in that line, you could have made an educated decision and risk assessment of whether to buy a dog from that line or not. Then there's the subject of compensation ... should a buyer expect some sort of compensation from a breeder when this happens? 

Interestingly I am running this thread with my AuNaturalK9 list too and quite a few of the breeders there are tending towards this being an epigenetic problem and as such resolvable by removing environmental triggers. Some of them feel they have actually done this across a few generations. It is certainly something very hopeful for the future, as we wade about in the quagmire of genetics and the things that can happen to the best breeders and dogs. 

[Pam Joyce]

Hi Chrissie

In O level Biology I was taught that if you mated a carrier to a carrier, for each offspring affected, two would be carriers and one would be free of the gene. I know this is very basic genetics but it it does mean that not all are carriers because one has symptoms. The problem is that you can't tell which ones are carriers and which aren't.

Hope this helps

Pam

----- Original Message -----

From: Chrissie Diron

To: ukvi...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:47 PM

Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ukvizsla" group.
To post to this group, send email to ukvi...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ukvizsla+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ukvizsla?hl=en.

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3119 - Release Date: 09/07/10 07:34:00

[Chrissie Diron]

Precisely Pam. My wording was woolly and I agree that not every single sibling will be affected, but you can have males with no symptoms that are carriers and females who are 100% affected and/or carriers and there's no way of knowing which pups these are, as they appear normal outwardly (until such a time as they perhaps find the genetic marker for this defect). 

In the scenario I illustrated the stud has produced 3 crypt pups across 25 litters. I believe these were different dams each time, so although outwardly normal he is a confirmed carrier (or he couldn't have produced it) and on 3 occasions the female was a carrier or homozygous for this defect. So what we *do* know is that this stud can throw crypt pups and so can those 3 dams. That gives us data on the parents of those dogs and their progeny and allows you to calculate risk, to a certain degree. Perhaps enough data to help you make breeding and buying decisions? 

[monkey]

Hi all,

As my understanding (which could be wrong) of genetics has it, some
offspring will carry the gene and some will not. Some will show the
symptoms and some will just be carriers. It depends how the gene
expresses itself as to whether you need two carriers to come together
to make the gene show itself. Some genes are recessive and so need two
matching recessive genes to make the symptom show. This seems to be
the same for dogs: http://www.canine-genetics.com/primer.htm

So in any mating, there is the chance that none, some or all will
carry the gene and that none, some or all will show the symptom. But
as long as the affected dog continues to be bred, there is a risk that
the gene will be passed on and that the offspring will be affected. I
would have said that the only course of action to protect the breed as
a whole is to allow the affected line to die out naturally (ie not to
breed from it). My apologies if readers are already aware of all this,
but it sounded like there was some confusion about how genetic
disorders work. There is a genetic disorder in my human family so I
this is my specialist subject (to some extent lol!)

Of course, not knowing this disorder in detail, I don't know how it is
transferred, but I struggle to see how this could be influenced by the
environment! Seems unlikely to me on the face of it.

Does the kennel club keep any kind of record of these sort of
disorders? Or the breed club? It strikes me that unless the breeder
tells you that the gene is in their line, then you have no way of
knowing when buying a pup. If I told a breeder I wanted to breed or
show, and the dog ended up to have cryptorchidism, I would be less
than impressed at the least. If I found out that the breeder was aware
of it beforehand, I would be furious. Trading standards? If this
disorder precludes dogs from breeding or showing, then it should be
controlled in the same way as hip scores, IMHO.

Best to you,

Helen

[Strassenbahnhaltestelle]

hi, i would love if most things could be treated as seriously as the
hips in the Vizsla community...if indeed any new generation of pups
would be an improvement of the parents, then it is always far sighted,
future bound, and truly concerned with not only the immediate but
future generations. Sadly, looks seem to matter more than sound health
at times, maybe money plays a role, or reputation...this may sound
bleak, but thanks Chrissie for asking that question for it is only by
a wider debate that people start to think about these things rather
than push them aside for someone else to think about. Andrea

[Ros Leighton]

Yes, I agree Andrea - in a perfect world it would be wonderful. Ah... for
that perfect world. :-) Which I'm sure is totally dependent on point of
view.. different for all of us.. :-)

My thought on this was -
But... do people *really* take hips seriously? I sometimes wonder when I see
the BRS reports with hip scores in the UK club journal... there are a
significant number of litters that appear to be born to parents scores WELL
above breed average... I find it very disappointing.

And it's interesting... the dog that Chrissie mentioned had produced 3
cryptorchid puppies in 25 litters. 25!! Gosh, not many dogs produce that
many litters, and so one wonders if the dog that produces only 5 litters
also carries the same gene, with the same potential to produce cryptorchid
puppies, but just doesn't produce enough puppies for people to see it
happen?

Karyn O made this comment in a conversation we had about the subject -
"That is, if a line or breeder seems to have no incidence of a certain
defect in their dogs, do you assume the genes for the defect are not present
in their line? If you were worried about cryptorchidism in the breed and
excluded breeding from the stud dog and from litters he sired, what else
might you lose from the breed; are there health traits such as longevity or
reduced incidence of cancer in his lines compared with other lines?"

I hope she won't mind me passing on a few more of her words of wisdom. I
really enjoy discussions with Karyn - she brings a very practical and broad
spectrum point of view generally... And my thoughts are it's worthy of more
than just my eyes... :-)

Quote: " Similarly, a dog or bitch could produce 3 litters together, with
all 25 pups being fine specimens. Then they have a fourth litter. Everyone
tut tuts about a fourth litter for the poor girl... that final litter
produces 2 longhaired puppies. Now we have lines that had been considered
"free" of this which are not. "So what!" I hear you say, "it's only
cosmetic." What happens if you substitute epilepsy, polymyositis or
cryptorchidism for longhair? Do you consider that all problems are equal,
or do you mentally separate them into boxes such as this condition "may
seriously impair or shorten life" and this "does not materially affect the
function of the dog"? Something like clinical hip dysplasia and epilepsy
might be in the first "disease box", and longhair and cryptorchidism in the
second. Some breeders would choose to possibly breed from dogs in the
second box but never from those in the first, whilst others would choose to
breed from neither.


In the past, in order to "eradicate genetic disease" purging all carriers of
a problem from the gene pool has been encouraged, if not practiced. Some
people extend this to all potential carriers such as litter mates of
affected dogs and/or litter mates of the parents - any of whom may or may
not be carriers, depending on how the condition is inherited. Some of these
purged dogs carried health defects, others cosmetic faults such as producing
or having too much white. To breed from carrier or faulty dogs was usually
seen as nothing more than poor, or backyard breeding. The result is we have
people not wanting to be open about problems in their dogs, and in doing so,
propagating the myth they are breeding from perfect dogs. Some people may
even have decided not to breed from their dogs because they were obviously
not 100% perfect, and decided to use one of the stud dogs who everyone else
was using because obviously, he was. For those who would consider using
probable or known carriers to breed with clears in their breeding plans, it
can be difficult to not double up on 'bad genes' if you cannot find out what
'bad genes' already exist in your own dogs, let alone in other lines. All
of which if it doesn't diminish the gene pool, compounds the problem of a
small gene pool.


I am not saying that one should breed from carrier dogs as a matter of
course and a badge of honour for "genetic diversity", but one needs to
consider the whole. IMHO;
It's not so much that you produce a dog with a problem, it's what you do
about the problem that is important, and has wider impact.
Just because a condition isn't seen in any puppies does not mean that it is
not in the lines.
Every breeder must make their own decision, but it will not change the fact
that no dog is perfect.
It can be difficult to make informed breeding decisions in a climate where
open-ness is not embraced by all, and there is a stigma attached to having
anything less than a perfect dog to breed with.


I think the discussion around breeding from known or potential carriers is
not a simple yes/no problem. I think it's great that people want to discuss
these sorts of problems, as I think it the answers are not necessarily easy,
and often we'd rather not talk about difficult things."

Cheers
ros

-----Original Message-----
From: ukvi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ukvi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf

Of Strassenbahnhaltestelle
Sent: Saturday, 11 September 2010 8:19 AM
To: ukvizsla
Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

--

[Strassenbahnhaltestelle]

well put Ross.

Andreax

[Ros Leighton]

Not me Andrea - thank Karyn O for this insightful post.
Ros

[Londonfieldsboys]

Wow, this makes a lot of sense Ros and shows just how complex the
issue of breeding really is. It does raise a few questions for me
though.

Largely, due to the cautionary responses of this group (yourself
included) to those 'newbies' (myself included) who have happened to
mention in passing a desire to breed from their beloved Viz, I have
long ago ruled out the possibility of Hamish's suitability for
improving the breed. This makes me quite sad, as I would love nothing
better than my second Viz to be related to Hamish as he is (to me at
least) in many ways the most wonderful example of a Vizsla. He is in
fact quite unique. In fact many people local to me have encouraged me
to think again and, to do as I wish rather than listening to 'group
wisdom' but I have remained convinced that with the temperament
'flaws' that he has that I would be making a heinous mistake on behalf
of the breed if I were to allow him to stud.

My question is this though? What if the temperament flaws, i.e.
separation anxiety and wariness of strangers, have been caused my my
ignorance as a new owner, and terrible advice in the early days (for
example about how to get a dog used to being alone) from our
'experienced' breeder? This then is not a genetic problem is it, it is
surely a behavioural one? I have checked with the breeder, and even
though she admits that Hamish's mum is bit strange (she likes to go
off on her own and sit in her, i.e. owners car, for hours at a time)
that she has never had these issues in her own dogs and never had any
reports from anyone that she's sold pups to.

In comparison to some other, well respected breeders progeny I find
Hamish otherwise very sound in conformation and health. He is still
young, at four years, but is extremely robust and is never ill (I'm
touching wood now), I hear of so many health and behavioural problems,
and difficulties with weight in the breed. I also meet many Viz that
are (IMHO) very snipey looking and way too skinny, or hyper-active
and stressed out. I have been on a huge learning curve about dogs in
general since getting my boy and as he is soon to be booked in for the
irreversible 'snip'. I just wondered reading this thread if I might be
throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't know enough about breeding so I'd love to hear from the group
what steps you would take to breed out temperament 'flaws'. Would you
just not breed from that dog whatsoever? Is it possible to breed out
these things? What does happen when you breed a nervous dog with a
'bomb proof' dog? Do you just get some nervous and some 'bomb proof'
offspring or do you get a more 'balanced' temperament. I know this is
crude but I'm curious to know about breeding from the perspective of
temperament.

Maybe, I'm still a default naive romanticist, leading with my heart
but that will never change I hope and I am always willing to see the
other, more intellectual point of view.

regards to all,
Ross

[Ros Leighton]

Hi Ross, nice to hear talk to you.

Some thoughts -

Only you - and the owner of the bitch who would choose to use Hamish - could
really answer your questions.

My belief is that though *actual* manifestation of temperament may not be
inherited, I do believe that *tendency* for those behaviours can be passed
on... As most people know, I don't breed. However, last year I did lease my
bitch for a litter. I think she has the MOST laid back easy going,
uncomplicated temperament of almost any Vizsla I've ever known. But she has
many more qualities that I also considered to be desirable that could be
passed on.

I (we - the registered breeder and I )*specifically* chose a dog to use
that has equally great temperament, but perhaps a little more 'up' and
bouncy. I would NOT have chosen a dog who has trouble coping with things in
day to day life, lacks bounce-back, etc, regardless of whether it may be due
to his environment, or his upbringing. I simply would not want to take the
risk.

So, Ross - it's a matter of the usual things - who will use Hamish? Is their
bitch the best possible combination for using with Hamish? What do they
carry in their pedigree? Will the owner be experienced enough to raise the
litter to the best possible standards of socialisation, etc? Will they have
the best options of perfect new owners, or will they compete with breeders
who have a 'reputation' for great Vizslas? Will they be experienced enough
to give good/great info to the new owners should *they* have similar needs
for assistance as you did with Hamish? Etc etc etc ... we've been down this
track before, you know the drill <VBG> there are many more questions on the
list..

I really respect romanticism.. :-) Goodness knows we need it in this world.

But I'm not sure it makes the best dog breeding choices.

Oh, and I didn't breed from the most wonderful dog I've ever owned.. she may
have had some traits I'd not necessarily want to pass on.. including some
issues of temperament which were in all likelihood from my inexperience as
a Vizsla owner... but I do see some of her in the puppy I have kept from
last year's litter.. in a more laid back persona. (The sire I used was a
nephew of my first Vizsla, so I do believe that it's possible to gain the
things you desire in a puppy in a more indirect way. I don't necessarily
think we need 'son of ...' to get those much loved traits.)

You asked - "I don't know enough about breeding so I'd love to hear from the

group
what steps you would take to breed out temperament 'flaws'. Would you
just not breed from that dog whatsoever? Is it possible to breed out
these things? What does happen when you breed a nervous dog with a
'bomb proof' dog? Do you just get some nervous and some 'bomb proof'
offspring or do you get a more 'balanced' temperament. I know this is
crude but I'm curious to know about breeding from the perspective of
temperament."

If ONLY genetics and inheritance were that simple. And if only there was not
the 'nature vs nurture' complication. But with all the quick criticism of
breeders' choices that occurs and appears to have overtaken us... I think as
always some caution and critical thinking is required.

And yep, I think sometimes we try to oversimplify breeding to 'good' and
'bad' breeders (gosh I think that we've become a 'blame' society!)... it's
just not that easy

Hugs to Hamish the Handsome. :-)

Cheers
Ros

-----Original Message-----
From: ukvi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ukvi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Londonfieldsboys
Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

[Ros Leighton]

One of mine disappeared once, and had pads that were raw, and nails that
were broken. I think there was some sort of car incident, but I never found
out what...
Some of his nails never grew properly again.

Some thoughts -

Cheers
Ros

--

[Ros Leighton]

Ooops,,, hit reply button on wrong message - should have been to a friend
about a cat

Apologies to the list

Ros

[Pam Joyce]

Ross
You have lived with an entire male for four years (I assume without any
issues) so why are you considering having him castrated?
I have previously owned two entire male Irish Setters which were not used at
stud. One lived to 13 years and the other to 12 years despite having
prostate gland trouble as a puppy but he did not develop prostate cancer.
Pam

----- Original Message -----
From: "Londonfieldsboys" <ROS...@sky.com>
To: "ukvizsla" <ukvi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ukvizsla" group.
> To post to this group, send email to ukvi...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> ukvizsla+u...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/ukvizsla?hl=en.
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3132 - Release Date: 09/13/10
07:35:00

[monkey]

Dear all,

What I think should also be considered is whether there is any data
about incidence of cryptorchisism in the entire breed or in dogs in
general? If 3 pups out of 25 litters is a typical level this may be
random or spontaneous mutation of the gene?

I feel rather that my comments have been taken and criticised as a
knee-jerk reaction, or an attitude that limits the potential of the
breed in suggesting exclusion of these dogs.

This was not my intention. What I was saying was that if an owner
wants to breed or show, then offspring from a confirmed cryptorchidism
carrier is not an optimal choice. If crypt is not good for showing
then that's a problem. As a pet Vizsla owner, it would make no
difference to me.

I'm probably not going to bother posting on here in future, I find
being flamed too upsetting.

Helen

[Chrissie Diron]

Helen, your points are valid. Everyone is adding their experience or comments if they know anything about this condition, but I am not sure why you feel that anyone has flamed you? 

I am getting useful information on cryptorchidism both here and on other lists I frequent, as I have a cryptorchid dog, who was meant to be my next stud dog, but I will not breed from him as the likelihood of us passing on this problem is high. With the knowledge that this is most likely an autosomal recessive trait and now discovering that my boy's maternal grandfather had cases of crypt boys amongst the many he sired, I do feel that it is a problem that is being perpetuated behind the scenes and is unlikely to be a random mutation. 

All this I have learnt through discussions on lists like this one. Not only that, I also have other breeders now thinking that they need to be sure that their boys have 2 fully descended testicles before they place them, or at least have a compensation system in place with the puppy buyer, should the problem manifest. This makes for good breeder/buyer relations - we can all do better! 

In some breeds crypt boys are expected in almost every litter - how sad is that? The problem seems relatively rare in Vizslas, as far as I can ascertain, but openness in discussion is very important or it will get swept under the carpet and more affected dogs may result, until it becomes a problem that is prevalent in every bloodline. 

Is it really as terrible as PM or epilepsy? I think not as far as quality of life goes, but if (like me) you also consider Eastern medicine's understanding of this, you will acknowledge that a reproductive defect such as this is a sign of much more than just one dog's isolated problem. It's a symptom of reproductive disarray and weakness in inherited chi and with time the affected lines will just dry up, either through sterility, or breeding complications or ever smaller litters. Nature has a way of sorting these things out and we need to work with her to achieve the best chances of success. Anyhow, this is likely far over the heads of most of us here, but all things I am forced to consider and work through right now. 

I do hope that all these things can be openly discussed and wish for more clarity and information sharing amongst breeders and buyers, so that everyone gets a fairer deal and fewer animals ultimately get to suffer. 

[Strassenbahnhaltestelle]

hi Helen, gosh, if anything, you added to a big debate that needs more
debating...I am not sure you know that a few people on this list have
PM dogs (polymyositis) and for us this has been a really bumpy ride
until a wonderful woman and Vizsla lover set up research group and we
felt heard. Some people still say that PM is caused by fleabites,
regardless of all information, or increasingly strong evidence to the
contrary....most of the Vizsla breeders have taken this seriously, but
there are the odd ones who just do it the old fashioned way, and this
results in people breeding from dogs that have PM in their family or
sired PM pups, sometimes without the puppy owners' knowledge. We need
to give enough info for people to be able to make the choice that is
best for the breed, and i don't mean simply what individuals think is
best, but in a far more progressive and open way (like the german
shepherd and their hips/legs...it is a bit skewered as now the promise
by their club is to keep breeding them smaller instead of more
upright....where is the animal's welfare in there to be found?)....

i would say to you please post more, not less!!!!

Andrea

[Ros Leighton]

Hi Chrissie,

This paragraph interested me..

 

…..

All this I have learnt through discussions on lists like this one. Not only that, I also have other breeders now thinking that they need to be sure that their boys have 2 fully descended testicles before they place them, or at least have a compensation system in place with the puppy buyer, should the problem manifest. This makes for good breeder/buyer relations - we can all do better! 

 

....

I’m not a breeder, but have been privileged enough to be invited to look at quite a few litters at 8 weeks when they are being ‘sorted’ for show, work, etc. On all of those occasions – without exception – the males have been checked for two descended testicles, and if not in the scrotum, then checked to see that they are in the inguinal canal. I know also that vets check for those testes at their 6 week vaccinations... Pat Hastings discusses checking in her Puppy Puzzle lecture/DVD. She also mentions – and I’d have to go and check which way it is! J - but she suggests that in her (pretty extensive!) experience that if one particular side is not down in the scrotum or canal, it will never come down and if it’s the other side, it’s quite likely to come down a little later. (related to embryonic development from memory)

 

So I’m really surprised that breeders are not already checking and are considering that a puppy even with a unilateral lack of descent is suitable to sell as a show/breeding prospect until such times as both testes are descended.

 

 

Helen, I’m sorry you thought that you’d been flamed. I think you did add to the conversation, as have all the other posts on the subject. It’s an interesting one which went on to discuss other breeding dilemmas – all good open discussion I think... just what we should be encouraging.

 

Regards

Ros

[Chrissie Diron]

My own personal experience was that 2 of my litter did not have fully descended testicles at 9 weeks, however they dropped soon after. I was therefore not particularly concerned when my current pup arrived at 8 weeks of age and I could only detect one testicle. Alarm bells began to ring when we crossed the 12 week mark (although asking around it seems that there is much variation in the date of final arrival across the breeds) and so I went to my vet, thinking I was too ham-fisted to palpate properly. She thought she could feel the second testicle just under the skin, but right up near the inguinal canal and so we added some Chinese herbal support in the hopes that it would bring it down more rapidly. He was rechecked at 20 weeks and she was sorry to declare him cryptorchid after all :-( What she had felt earlier was likely just fatty tissue attached to the cord. The testicle he does have is underdeveloped too. That was already apparent at the 20 week mark, so there has been a distinct reproductive hiccup here. My vet felt that it wasn't a coincidence that he came from a litter of just two! Had he have produced that second testicle and we were considering breeding from him later, she also commented that we should never forget that rocky start and the history of coming from a small litter, as these are all symptoms of chi deficiency in Eastern medicine, which when left unaddressed compound and eventually lead to no further offspring. They can be corrected and rebalanced most of the time, but you have to be proactive about it to ensure that the weakness is not perpetuated. This is a very positive way to move forward with our dogs, as it doesn't preach doom, gloom and despondency - we are not just victims, we can make improvements and do better in the future. I am all for that! However an undeniably unilaterally cryptorchid dog is a very big challenge to breed around - some apparently have had success - if I were into experimenting I might attempt it, but I am not. What I take from it all are lessons and that's why I share it here. You express surprise that anyone would sell a stud prospect who has a possible defect, yet it happens, and I fell into the trap of buying a dog and trusting that all would be well! When it wasn't "well" I did secretly hope for compensation as my disappointment was huge and my plans scuppered. But with no "contract" in place to address this situation I have no power to demand anything. Caveat emptor, as they say. I would do things different in the future and so would my dog's breeder I am sure. What exactly we would do differently depends on the degree of risk we are prepared to accept. I think the most important thing is for this stuff to be openly discussed and the risks fully disclosed, because the success of any relationship is based on good communication. I hope it helps others in their decision making in the future too. 

And I did read somewhere about the delay in left/right testicle descending and its significance as a defect (Pat Hastings?), but also cannot recall the details, so if you find that I would LOVE to hear what she has to say. Some people believe that cryptorchidism is a spontaneous event, no insidious genetic cause, and it could be that if one side gets retained this is truly so, i.e. there was a developmental hiccup at a critical moment and the window of descending opportunity was missed, whereas if the other side is retained it is a true crypt situation that couldn't be remedied, no matter what you did. Monorchidism obviously falls under the latter. And until the crypt boy is opened up to have the retained gonad removed, you don't have proper answers to that.

[Ros Leighton]

Hi Chrissie,

Just found a quick reference to the Pat Hastings comments – can’t completely validate it, as I haven’t looked at my notes/dvd yet. But the mention I found is that if the left is descended, the right may still come down, but if the right is descended and not the left,  it’s unlikely that the left will descend.

 

Cheers

Ros

 

[Ros Leighton]

Also found this reference in the ANKC (Australian National Kennel Control) regulations

 

SECTION 9

Disqualification from Conformation Exhibition

.......

9.3 For Conformation purposes, a dog six months of age or over shall not be accepted as

physically entire unless both testicles have fully descended and are in the scrotum.

Any dog disqualified for this reason at a Conformation Show will have its registration

suspended until it can be proved to the satisfaction of the Member body that it is

physically entire. (05/00)

9.4 Any dog suspended in accordance with 9.3 shall not be accepted for stud purposes

and any litter sired by the dog will not be accepted for registration. (05/00)

9.5 Any dog over the age of twelve months which is proven to be non entire shall be

deregistered or transferred to the Limited Register. (05/00)

 

 

Ros

[Anna Nussey]

Hi Ross,

You wrote:
I have checked with the breeder, and even
though she admits that Hamish's mum is bit strange (she likes to go
off on her own and sit in her,  i.e. owners car, for hours at a time)
that she has never had these issues in her own dogs and never had any
reports from anyone that she's sold pups to.

I think you might have forgotten that Ziggi is from the same breeder with very similar breeding. She exhibits a slightly lower degree of Separation anxiety but many of the other same traits. So when you asked her whether she had sold any other pups with these problems I think she may have not told you the whole truth considering Ziggi's problems were made clear to her several times.

Just a little thing to remember - you didn't cause all Hamish's problems.

Anna

[Radar Red Dog]

Well said Andrea...exactly what I had in mind if I could've found the
right words!

Helen...keep those posting...your input has been extremely valuable &,
if nothing else, has made people sit up & think!!

Juliet

On Sep 15, 8:22 am, Strassenbahnhaltestelle <andreala...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > Helen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Londonfieldsboys]

Hi Anna,
I've replied to you in a new thread...'Breeding for temperament'. Just
so you don't think that I've ignored your post.
Ross x

[tavasz]

This is interesting - my own experience is that in two of my five
litters I have had one dog who was a 'late descender', the first one
having the second testicle descend by 14 weeks and the second one by
16 weeks (I admit to being quite worried about the latter one - I was
ringing the owner every week). I am afraid I cannot say whether it was
the left or right one that was descended first, it is not a difference
that I was aware was relevant. As I said before there is always
something to learn from this forum. None of my ltters have been less
than 6 pups, one of the 'affected' litters (if that's the right
expression) was five dogs and one bitch

In both cases they were sold first and foremost as pets. If it had
been for stud or show, I think I would have had to agree some sort
of'comeback clause, but that is with hindsight and fortunately I have
not been in that position.

Rosemary

On Sep 16, 11:03 am, "Ros Leighton" <rosleigh...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Hi Chrissie,
>

> Just found a quick reference to the Pat Hastings comments - can't completely

[Susie Zarpanely]

Interesting Ros,
I had one puppy in my ;last litter who I am sure had both early on but the left retracted at about 4 weeks. I know it was the left because I worked hard on bringing it down. He left me to go to a pet home at 12 weeks with both down but not reliably so, there was still some work to do in keeping it down. Bless them they did all the work and then castrated him for convenience at 15 months both clearly down!!!!!!!!
 
Susie
 
> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 08:13:02 -0700

> Subject: Re: Cryptorchidism and breeding

> From: tava...@btinternet.com
> To: ukvi...@googlegroups.com