"--doodle" question - just curious

Good question. I'm anxious for an answer.

That's an interesting question.

My understanding is that a breed has to breed true for a certain amount of generations to be considered a purebred, and the "oodles" "poos", etc don't breed true.  So, I'd have to say these "breeders" don't breed their designer breed to another of that breed.  Or, if they do, they don't do it for long before going back to the original breeds.  Does that make sense?

yeah that makes sense - i think i know what you mean by "breed true" but could you clarify the phrase anyway? thanks for your response.

I believe it means that if you breed, for instance, a Puggle to a Puggle, all the offsprings will look like those Puggles..you won't have more Puggy ones and more Beagly ones..they'll look fairly uniform the way, for instance, Labs do when bred to other labs. The crossbred dogs still tend to create dogs that look more like one breed than the other

Just a little note about my special breed....

JRT don't breed true.
They are, therefore, a type of terrier, not a breed. That's why the JRTCA accepts dogs of unknown parentage into their registry, to compete (it's like an AKC limited registry, the dog must be altered). Any dog that is 50% or more white, 10"-15" tall, and has proper bone *is* a JRT, regardless of where it came from.

Two smooth JRT can throw a litter of all rough puppies. Two "regular" looking JRT can throw speckled, or "ticked", puppies, like Emma. The same "regular" looking dogs can throw black and tan pups! It happens!

how interesting...!

ORIGINAL: whinny__g
yeah that makes sense - i think i know what you mean by "breed true" but could you clarify the phrase anyway? thanks for your response.

 
Breeding true means that the off spring of two dogs of the same breed will have the same qualities as /look like the parents  (meet the breed standard), even generations later.  From what I've read, the designer breeds only breed true for maybe a generation or two.  I guess you could breed a designer breed to one of the foundation breeds, but it still isn't breeding true.  You can't even really set a breed standard for the poos and doodles.  Example- breeders (technically that's what they are) will sell them as non-shedding.  Unless both breedes making up the mix are non shedding, you have a 50/50 chance they will shed.  Labs, Goldens and Cockers shed (Cockers not as much as Labs and Goldens).  One general statement I can make about cockapoos is that they all seem to have wonderful, loving personalities. 
 

  Just a little note about my special breed....
JRT don't breed true.
They are, therefore, a type of terrier, not a breed. That's why the JRTCA accepts dogs of unknown parentage into their registry, to compete (it's like an AKC limited registry, the dog must be altered). Any dog that is 50% or more white, 10"-15" tall, and has proper bone *is* a JRT, regardless of where it came from.

Two smooth JRT can throw a litter of all rough puppies. Two "regular" looking JRT can throw speckled, or "ticked", puppies, like Emma. The same "regular" looking dogs can throw black and tan pups! It happens!    

 
LOL  That sounds like the color registries for horses. I've seen registerd Apps and Paints without "color".  My understanding (I get a lot of my horse info from my sister and mother) is that those horses had "colored" parents that were registered. 
 
 

Working dogs have performance standards and will "breed true" to that standard given that the requirements have been met to pass on those characteristics from the previous generation.  Performance characteristics are impossible to evaluate outside the performance context. 

Therefore if you are looking at a breed with working standards, look for a breeder that is active in the performance arena in question and can demonstrate an objective method of proving his breeding stock.  If you are new to the breed, competitive achievements (not just titles, but achievements within the breed) are helpful to look for.  More experienced puppy buyers can judge the level of involvement of their breeders for themselves.

JRTCA enforces this with its JR trials, though these events also include a conformation requirement.  The Border collie offers a voluntary standard - the Open sheepdog trial (or cattle trial) - but does not enforce it to register. 

However, you can register an intact dog "on merit" with the American Border Collie Association by demonstrating competance at the level of performance that is demonstrated to be an asset to the breed (usually competance at Open or Nursery trials).  In this way the breed stays healthy with the regular induction of outcross bloodlines, plus it enforces the working standard. 

Our dogs Doug the Dog and Ann both go back to an unregistered female five generations ago, who was the mother of one of the States' most influential sires.  And my little pup Rocky is himself unregistered, whelped from an unregistered farm dog.  She could be easily registered on merit and probably will be later, but if not there's no doubt he will be.

So border collies are a good example of a breed that doesn't have a standardized appearance, but when you see one working you have no doubt what you are looking at. []


Julie Poudrier's Twist - Photo by Christine Coval

See now I think you guys are being too strict on what constitutes a 'standardized appearance' I've never looked at a BC and gone "what the heck IS that?"...it's always pretty apparent that it IS a BC. It doesn't HAVE to be a set cookie cutter look (same ears same coat length 100%)...just an essence of type. I have watched the various sheepdog things they show on RFC and other channels..over in the UK...the dogs look alike...like one another more than they look like...German Shepherds, Cattle dogs, or Boxers...they "have" a breed type and a "look" that sets them apart and apparently it breeds pretty true...
 
My former breed Akitas have VASTLY differing types from the slender Japanese preferred type that NEVER has a black face...to the American type that is bear like and massive...I never think twice about what they are...they are Akitas. BUT I have heard them being called Huskies or Malemutes because they might lack a mask...but very seldom have I heard a BC be mistaken for anything else by JQP...nor a JRT being called a Toy fox or a Wire Fox. Both breeds IME have looks quite easily recognizable...and that "is" a big part of what "breeding true"...not one part of the dog..but the sum...a general effect that comes thru gen after gen...

In theory, couldn't a dedicated goldendoodle breeder selectively breed for non-sheeding, and have dogs breed true after enough generations?

The difference is that no working BC breeder is going to say, Oops, this dog is too big or too small or doesn't have x ratio or too much stop or too heavy a head - and then either not breed or take that into consideration when evaluating potential mates.  That's what I mean about a standardized appearance - we don't have a conformation standard, even.  In fact, the working breed registry discourages conformation breeding to the extent that if you get an AKC championship on your dual registered dog, your dog will be dropped from the ABCA studbook (working registry).

We recognize "founder effect" in that certain sires that have been used extensively, tend to homogenize the look of the breed.  But no one is enforcing that look and there's lot of well bred dogs out there that would make JPQ go hmmmm.  If you saw the above dog in the pound (God forbid), would you really think, "Oh, look, a purebred Border collie!"?  There was another very important sire not too long ago who threw long-legged, rawboned, hound-eared, red dogs with no white on them at all - you'd swear you were looking at some kind of retriever mix if you just saw the dog walking around.

Here's a thread with some pictures of purebred Border collies - some "standard," others that would be laughed out of the ring - or excused. http://tinyurl.com/mbhkb

To the original question - an F1 cross (that is, two different strains) will produce pretty "standard" pups.  However, if those pups are then bred together - even if littermates are used - the odds of their resembling their parents are astronomically low, because of recombination - that is, they carry genomes from both parents which then recombine in random ways.  Because the parents would be dissimiliar necessarily, these genomes would represent a potpourri of characteristics - especially since many of the desireable characteristics such as temperament, soundness, coat type, and size, are polygenetic (controlled by multiple genes).

The puppies that resulted from this mish mash would represent a wide variety of characteristics inherited from their grandparents, not the parents.  So in the case of a Goldendoodle - two GDs might produce a big hairy dysplastic dog with the higher drive of a standard poodle.  Or a coat that is only retentive enough to produce some massive matting potential (as a friend's poorly bred Chinese-crested).

So to "set" a desired breed type when you start with such dissimiliar breeds, you'll have to do some heavy duty culling.  The number of pups you'd have to produce (tens of thousands) to get a few true to type in each generation, would mean euthanasia, plain and simple.  I personally don't think the world needs ANY new breed badly enough to set out on such a course.  Certainly not to produce yet another companion breed.

Based on my experiences, the majority of Doodle breeders aren't interested in creating a new breed. They usually create F1 crosses. Very few move past that and even fewer are breeding responsibly(as in having a breed standard in mind, being selective about what gets bred, utilizing health testing and breeding towards creating a new breed) because if people are willing to pay upwards of $3000 for an F1 cross that came from pet quality parents who have mediocre pedigrees with no health testing done and you aren't given a worthy health guarantee why on earth would they strive to breed for better dogs or to even create a new breed? There's no incentive in it.

ORIGINAL: brookcove

The difference is that no working BC breeder is going to say, Oops, this dog is too big or too small or doesn't have x ratio or too much stop or too heavy a head - and then either not breed or take that into consideration when evaluating potential mates.  That's what I mean about a standardized appearance - we don't have a conformation standard, even.  In fact, the working breed registry discourages conformation breeding to the extent that if you get an AKC championship on your dual registered dog, your dog will be dropped from the ABCA studbook (working registry).

 
So basically the message is that it doesn't matter how the dog looks, as long as he can do his job and do it well--as long as he doesn't look TOO good, in which case he is penalized for it?
 
That doesn't make much sense to me.