Knock out the color, and you also knock out the vision, hearing, and sometimes the entire dog.
Our friends the Merle Australian Shepherds are not the only dogs who are an intersection of two different lethal semi-dominant alleles; Harlequin Great Danes share this problematic status as both the merle gene and the harlequin gene are lethal in the homozygous state.
The result of a Harlequin x Harlequin breeding is 7 lethal : 5 undesirable : 4 Harlequin. Unlike our non-bobtail Aussies, the Danes’ coats can’t be corrected at birth, so you can’t mask the just slightly undesirable outcomes (like docking a natural tail that didn’t get the bobtail gene). That means that if we really really want Harlequins, the best we’re going to get is 25% of potential puppies and less than half of the otherwise healthy ones that are born matching their parents in phenotype.
Great Dane graphics provided courtesy of Cartoonize My Pet.
The red dogs in the upper left are knocked out due to the lethality of the Harlequin gene in the homozygous state. In addition to the upper left dog, the three pink dogs are double merles and that is also a lethal situation but apparently not as fatal as Harlequin. We wouldn’t expect these dogs to be born in the theoretical numbers as some will be prenatal lethal and some of those that are born will have problems with vision and hearing.
The yellow backed dogs are simply undesirable phenotypes that necessarily occur when trying to breed Harlequin as neither Harlequin nor Merle breed true being lethal in the homozygous form. We will always have mantle (no merle, no harlequin); merle (merle, no harlequin); merlequin (double merle, no harlequin); and white (double merle, harlequin) dogs in any breeding program that breeds phenotypically harlequin dogs together. Pheotypically Harlequin dogs are HhMm, a double heterozygote.
This Merlequin was deaf and died before the age of 2 from seizures.
The dogs referred to as Merlequin are actually hhMM, meaning they don’t carry the harlequin allele at all and are in fact double merles. The name is a misnomer and the dogs themselves are subject the the same genetic challenges as double merles in other breeds.
Merlequin dogs can suffer from blindess, deafness, neurological problems, skin disorders, and other autoimmune problems.
Merlequin dogs can be completely avoided by breeding Harlequin (HhMm) to Mantle (*hmm), and not breeding Harlequin to any merle dog or another Harley.
A deaf Dane from a Harlequin x Merle litter with additional eye problems.
The dogs referred to as White are HhMM, double merle harlequins. The addition of one copy of the Harlequin allele has been shown to increase both the prenatal lethality and increase impairment in viable puppies. Despite making the double merle puppies even less likely to reach term, there are still plenty of these White dogs born; so much so that numerous rescue groups exist to rehome the blind, deaf, and otherwise diseased white Danes.
In addition to the bleaching effects of the Harlequin and Merle genes, Danes also carry the genes for Irish spotting and piebald. This full platter of genes can combine to create dogs with very little color on them and a host of color related issues:
Congential cataracts, micropthalmia, persistant pupullary membrane, tapetal hypoplasia, convergent stabismus, entropthalmia, medical canthal syndrome, heterochromia iridis, hyperchromia iridis, colomboma, merle deafness, piebald deafness, demodicosis, atopic dermatitis, skin cancer, follicular dysplasia, photo-induced epilepsy, sterilty, reduced fertility, smaller litter sizes, failure to thrive, and social instability.
Unlike my fictional scenario for the “wild” Australian Shepherd were I assumed that the majority of breeders were carefully selecting against doubling up on two lethal traits and that left to their own devices the dogs would seek to maximize the expression of merle and bobtail on their own, the Great Dane Club of America not only permits the breeding of Harlequin to Harlequin, they don’t find this practice a breach of their Code of Ethics and virtually guarantee more of it given their enforcement of color families within the Dane breed.
The GDCA Code of Ethics states:
ALL BREEDERS AND OWNERS OF GREAT DANES (BITCHES AND STUD DOGS ALIKE) SHALL:
- Breed Great Danes which are temperamentally and structurally sound.
- Be familiar with the Breed Standard and breed only those dogs and bitches which most closely conform to it.
- Keep well informed in the field of genetics and work to eliminate hereditary defects from the breed.
- Refrain from further use of a Great Dane for breeding if the dog or bitch has produced any offspring with serious inherited defects detrimental to an animal’s well being (physically or mentally), and has produced like results with a different mating partner.
One of these Danes is not like the other.
Notice that the first ethic fails to address physical soundness entirely, which would include breeding blind and deaf dogs. Blindness, deafness, and especially neurological problems only exacerbate issues of temperament, and yet Great Dane breeders regularly breed against this ethic.
The third ethic demands that breeders both know about genetics and also eliminate hereditary defects from the breed. Blindness is a hereditary defect. Deafness is a hereditary defect. Every single color related complication in that massive list above is a hereditary defect. And yet the breeding schemes which produce and exacerbate these hereditary defects are not outlawed in specific by the GDCA. Apparently there’s an unwritten rule that you can violate the Code of Ethics as long as it’s for aesthetic reasons.
The fourth ethic is even more harsh. It demands that breeders should abandon breeding stock that has produced physically or mentally defective offspring. Any sane human would agree that this must include the production of dogs that are blind, deaf, or have neurological defects. Do we have any evidence that the club has forced any dog into retirement over creating blind, deaf, and otherwise diseased offspring?
The GDCA even endorses a “Breeder’s Color Code” which on the outside one might guess would ban the breeding of Harlequin to Harlequin like the parent club of the breed in the country of origin did, the German Deutscher Doggen Club. No, in fact, their Color Code essentially breaks the breed up into four individual breeds that should not be crossbred.
Color Classifications being well founded, the Great Dane Club of America, Inc. considers it an inadvisable practice to mix color strains and it is the club’s policy to be cognizant of the following breedings:
| Color of Dane | Approved Breedings | Desired Pedigrees |
|---|---|---|
| 1. FAWN1. BRINDLE | 1. FAWN bred to FAWN or BRINDLE only. 1. BRINDLE bred to BRINDLE or FAWN only. |
Pedigrees of FAWN or BRINDLE Danes should not carry BLACK, HARLEQUIN or BLUE upon them. |
| 2. HARLEQUIN2. MANTLE2. BLACK (HARLEQUIN BRED) | 2. HARLEQUIN bred to HARLEQUIN, BLACK from HARLEQUIN BREEDING or BLACK from BLACK BREEDING only. 2. MANTLE bred to HARLEQUIN, MANTLE, BLACK from HARLEQUIN breeding or BLACK from BLACK breeding only. 2. BLACK from HARLEQUIN BREEDING bred to HARLEQUIN, BLACK from HARLEQUIN BREEDING or BLACK from BLACK BREEDING only. |
Pedigrees of HARLEQUIN, MANTLE or HARLEQUIN BRED BLACK Danes should not carry FAWN, BRINDLE or BLUE upon them. |
| 3. BLUE3. BLACK (BLUE BRED) | 3. BLUE bred to BLUE, BLACK from BLUE BREEDING or BLACK from BLACK BREEDING only. 3. BLACK from BLUE BREEDING bred to BLUE, BLACK from BLUE BREEDING or BLACK from BLACK BREEDING ONLY. |
Pedigrees of BLUE or BLUE BRED BLACK Danes should notcarry FAWN, BRINDLE, or HARLEQUIN upon them. |
| 4. BLACK (BLACK BRED) | 4. BLACK from BLACK BREEDING bred to BLACK, BLUE or HARLEQUIN and MANTLE. (See note below) | Pedigrees of BLACK BRED Danes should not carry FAWN, BRINDLE, HARLEQUIN, MANTLE or BLUE upon them. |
Since the claim is often made that it’s only the “Backyard Breeder” or “puppymill” that creates intentionally bred double merles or white dogs, let us investigate the pedigree of the highest ranking Harlequin Great Dane show dog in the country right now.
There’s only one Harlequin Great Dane in the top 10 show dogs, and his name is GCH CH Drd’s The Revelation. This is his advertisement.
This dog does not appear to be a double merle or have anything wrong with his eyes. In fact, he’s not the product of a Harlequin x Harlequin or Harlequin x Merle mating. A good start, for sure. But let’s look at his pedigree and see how this dog came to be:
Pedigree of the #1 show Harlequin Great Dane
Out of the most recent 15 breedings that produced our Harlequin, 6 of them were Harlequin to Harlequin. There is no test, no magic technique that could have been used in any of those breedings to prevent the creation of lethal double harls, double merles, and whites; all of which could be severely incapacitated with inbred disease.
Some of the dogs used in this pedigree might have even been HhMM Whites. Judge for yourself.
BWM Snow Flurry, a very white dog.
BMW Avalanche. I guess "Avalanche" is the name of choice for homozygous merle stud dogs.
Perhaps the most famous Harlequin Great Dane in recent memory is “Rumpus” who starred with his mother “Lava” in several Lady Gaga music videos including Poker Face, Love Game, and Paparazzi. Rumpus was only 5 years old when he died after a hike in the Hollywood Hills.
Rumpus the Great Dane was a product of a Harlequin x Harlequin breeding.
Rumpus (Ch. PCH Start The Commotion) is actually a cousin to the #1 Harlequin Great Dane, as his grand sire is Sasdania’s Passion Tristan. His mother is the Harlequin on the left of the photo above, Am Int’l Nat’l Ch. PCH It’s What’s Shakin, AOM, OA, AXJ, OJP, OAP, HOF, GDCA-VA CGC TDI TT, and his father is a Harlequin named BIS, BISS Ch. GMJ’s the Five Card Studd pictured below.
GMJ's the Five Card Studd, a very successful show dog.
So don’t let it be said that Harlequin to Harlequin litters are rare or only the product of ignorant puppy millers or backyard breeders. This dangerous and unnecessary practice is done in the open and at the highest level of the sport. While some of these breeders might choose to kill and dispose of any defective white puppies born from such matings, removing the trace of these dogs from public scrutiny, clearly there are enough breeders who still breed Harlequin to Harlequin and Harlequin to Merle and then farm their defective puppies out into the rescue system.
The frightening thing is that this doesn’t appear to be a rare or even questioned practice within the breeding elite. Rather it seems to be routine, accepted, approved, and even encouraged.
Correction: The GDCA does not approve of Harlequin x Merle breedings as they don’t recognize Merle as an approved color at all.
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Anton
Christopher
Lawrence Dillard
Lech
Stephanie
Essere
Was Rumpus born this way?
Retrieverman recently posted..Prize Dogs at the International Dog Show at Hanover
No way is this true!
The Great Dane breeders only breed the best dogs to each other. They do breed harls to harls and merls to merls because they are good dogs.
Only ignorant people who don’t know what they have breed merls to merls and get deformed dogs.
Reputable breeders know what’s behind there dogs and won’t let this happen.
Don’t believe the hype.
This blog is to biased.
Pekingeseman recently posted..Save the pekingese!
What does a rat breeder knows about a dog that can easily gulp it in one face-lick?
Dave recently posted..Ultimate Breed Myth
Who said anything about rats?
Pekingese aren’t rats. They are the oldest breed ever to have existed and they haven’t changed in 10,000 years.
Please check up on your breed history.
Pekingeseman recently posted..Sensationalist proppaganda against basset hounds!
Still doesn’t change the fact Great Danes eat Pekingeses for breakfast.
Dave recently posted..Ultimate Breed Myth
The oldest breed, in other words, the most inbred of all breeds, no wonder you are so biased toward responsible breeding. The genetics speaks for themselves, any high chooler who listen in biology knows the meaning of recessive genes and its consequences when they are defective and inherited from both parents.
Well, Mr. Pekingeseman you should now see the Merlekin, and recognize the Harlequin Champion Collies if you think Chris is bias.
Pekes aren’t rats, they’re walking Ottomans. =P
You’d have to be a four-foot-nothing concubine with bound feet to make do with a Peke for a foot stool.
Pekingese, unlike Great Danes or Border collies or that wolf hybrid you have, Dave, lived for thousands of years in the wild before anyone took the trouble to domesticate and worship them.
Jack Lunden should have written Call of the Wild about a Pekingese not a collie/St. Bernard, two dogs that would never survive in the Gobie Dessert without the assistance of man.
Pekingeseman recently posted..Sensationalist proppaganda against basset hounds!
Pekes in the WILD??????
Well if they haven’t changed in 10K years and lived in the wild, by all means, set some free. I’d love to see how well they do.
So much rubbish – I’m thinking this is a troll :S
This is not rubbish since the harlequin modifier of the merle gene has been found in a number of pastoral breeds. It is not about Coat of Many Colors but Coats of Many shades of Color caused by patterns of modifiers. When one adds the the piebald gene called for decades White factoring this gets very promlematic to the informed breeder for keeping their bloodlines free of mutations. The Australian Shepard doing extensive studies might be helpful to their early studies of the merle ocular issues.http://ic.upei.ca/cidd/disorder/microphthalmia-ocular-dysgenesis Likewise recognize both the merle gene and white factoring is SINE/MITF . Now recognize how do you tell the difference between the white created by the merle and harlequin with white factoring. Here is another responsible breeder test that should be performed.https://www.vgl.ucdavis.edu/services/dog/Piebald-Parti.php Now read (no trolling here) “The genetic determination of white spotting in dogs is complex. In breeds such as Collie, Great Dane, Italian Greyhound, Shetland Sheepdog, Boxer and Bull Terrier, piebald behaves as a dosage-dependent trait. ” Now look up what Genetics of dosage-dependent trait for yourself.
You clearly misunderstood me – I was posting in reponse to Pekingeseman.
I meant the drivel posted by Pekingeseman is a troll post (the “Pekes in the wild” bit should have alerted everyone if the previous stuff didn’t). If he’s not a troll he’s totally deluded and no one should be humouring him by replying as nothing logical is going to come out of him no matter how hard you beat your heads against that brick wall….
As for Harlequin danes I’m quite against the breeding of merles in the first place let alone merle x merle breedings. If merle can cause such serious problems when crossed with other merles it is a genetic defect and should be treated as such (rather than making people pay more for it). With cryptic merles being not uncommon it becomes difficult to ensure you aren’t unintentionally doing a merle x merle cross and the consequences are cruel indeed for the offspring. Why are people so besotted with the patchy colouring of merle anyway? It can look quite ugly imo.
By your same logic, why does a border collie breeder get a pass that he somehow understands the intricacies of breeding Harlequins? Because he posts the harl genome? LMAO. He doesn’t understand “Lethal.” Lethal means they never see the light of day. These ‘puppies’ never get past embryo stage and are absorbed by the bitch long before whelp. Rumpus passing away early has NOTHING to do with whites or the Double Lethal Gene. Every breed, including Border Collies, has dogs that pass away too early. Completely rediculous statements. Yes, Harl x Harl can and does produce whites, which are often deaf, and sometimes sight impaired. However, they are NOT lethal. Many go on to be adopted and live healthy, long lives. The dogs do not understand they are deaf. Only people thinking of them as deaf. The dogs flourish. Some whites are even used in a breeding programs if the conformation is there. Nearly every litter from every dog has a puppy that did not get the best of the gene pool. Runts, deformities, and many other calamities befall statistically one puppy of every litter ever born., even border collies. Sad but true. So should we just stop having dogs as pets? LOL
What a clown. I am not a fan of Rumpus’ owner by any means, but Rumpus has left a decent legacy within the breed. Ryker is a beautiful dog.
I am not sure who pissed in this guy’s corn flakes, but his perception is hardly reality. He surely has an ax to grind somewhere along the lines.
Sorry James as in previous post the Harlequin lethal modifier has been found in a number of pastoral breeds. Who did the dirty in your corn flakes? I certainly do not agree the public deserves these mutations in their Pets and it is a lack of breeder education. The code of silence is corrosive to morality and ethics.
Pekingeseman, you are quite the little troll, aren’t you?
Retrieverman recently posted..Prize Dogs at the International Dog Show at Hanover
reputable show breeders would never breed merle to merle. merle is not an accepted color in AKC conformation, and would only produce 25% showable pups (blacks) anyway. incidentally a merle to merle breeding is actually unlikely to produce dogs with sensory defects, as many merlequins (if not the majority) are unaffected by sensory defects and merles and blacks are always free of color-related sensory defects.
also, “knowing what you have” in the pedigree of two dogs (which is what i assume you were referring to) does not matter as far as producing pups with sensory defects. you can have the best two harlequins in the world – healthy, wonderful pedigrees, perfect conformation, and ideal temperaments – and if you breed them together, you will still theoretically produce an average of 33.33% of live puppies at risk of sensory defects.
reputable breeder often breed harl to harl anyway and do occasionally end up with deaf or blind dogs.
Wait, reputable breeders knowingly breed Harlequin to Harlequin even though they know the results of a 33% disastrous litter?
Dave recently posted..Spotted Dwarf
yes they do. not all breeders, but many.
i have a 2 year old male merle, both his father and mother are black and his siblings are all fawn with black faces (i don’t know how he ended up merle) both of his parent are sound, very healthy, even tho they are about 8 years old
anyway, i want to breed the 2 year old male merle with a harlequin female, both of her parents are harlequins, very healthly, sound, she is healthy and sound too.
should i not?
I personally would not attempt the breeding as you’ve described it.
You will be breeding merle to merle and you should expect that 25% of the puppies will be double merles. They might be healthy or they might be blind and/or deaf and possibly have neurological problems. The robust health of the parents and the grandparents of your litter will play no role in changing these chances. The blindness, deafness, and brain issues stem from the color gene itself and are unavoidable by other good animal husbandry practices or otherwise robust health of the parents or even the dog itself.
If you find the risk worth the chance you should go into this with full knowledge that you will likely produce one or more of the puppies or burden your bitch with carrying a fetus that will fail at some point in gestation. If you end up with live double merle puppies, you should consider now, during a time of less emotion, what you think the best plan is for them.
Will you be able to put them down at birth and not burden yourself or some future owner with a dog that could have one or more disabilities? Consider my recent post on the Blind Great Dane that has failed to maintain a stable home despite multiple chances. People might think they can raise or keep a disabled dog, but often this ability fades with time and the unpleasant realities and daily needs of the dogs.
If you decide to keep them alive, do you feel this is an improvement to your breed and do you think you are sending the right message to the world about what your goals are in breeding and what you’re willing to do to get there?
Is what you want out of this pairing worth all this mess? Is there not another breeding option that would avoid this problem entirely?
Thank you for your comments. 🙂 I wish more people would consider the dogs when breeding, and not the end result.
By definition, breeders who do that aren’t reputable.
breeders who are, by general consensus, considered reputable and ethical in every other way still participate in this sort of breeding. that is what i meant to convey.
“By general consensus” is not the best way to do ethics.
Within dog cultures at large, there is tendency to accept things as banal or even meritorious that are pretty hard to justify.
Any merle to merle breeding is one of them.
How can anyone justify breeding a certain number of blind or deaf dogs– that will be produced by these breedings, it’s not an if, it’s a when– just produce dogs that are stunning in the show ring?
It’s true that other types of blindness and deafness exist in other breeds, but none are as likely to be produced as through merle to merle breeding.
It is simply not acceptable to say that this has been done for years and years, and that one must have done it to be able to say anything. People can do the wrong thing for years and years and gain lots of experience doing that. And usually, lots of experience making the same excuses that don’t survive even modest scrutiny.
retrieverman recently posted..chat room
If ‘general consensus’ was the rule in ethics regarding the breeding of dogs, my entire breeding program would be illegal. Because I don’t show, and I don’t breed to produce ‘show dogs.’
‘Everybody does it’ doesn’t mean that it’s okay.
Jess recently posted..Zora Will Have the Steak. Or Perhaps the Baby Food.
Same here. 🙂
There should be more breeders like you Jess. Hard to find people who don’t breed for show. Or at least, the show folks are so far in the foreground, publicizing themselves, that a lot of layfolks would not even know there were other sorts of breeders; other options.
There are a goodly number of breeders who don’t show. Some even do the relevant health tests in their breeds. But you are right, the ‘responsible breeders compete with their dogs’ gong that gets beaten all the time tends to remove ‘other’ breeders from the equation when potential puppy buyers start looking for advice on finding a puppy.
It is also quite obvious that the number of puppies produced by competition breeders is miniscule compared to the ‘just pets’ breeders. The market for puppies is huge and competition breeders could not hope to fill it.
In the end, it comes down to how much research and waiting a buyer is willing to do, and who they are ultimately comfortable buying from.
Jess recently posted..Random Dogage: Squatchy Pretends to be a White Dog
I have bred and shown harlequin Danes and mine were at least 5 gen color pure for harl, harl bred black and Boston, now called mantle. I loved my Boston bitches and never bred my harls to anything else. The harl x mantle cross produced a better ratio of show marked dogs anyway. Unless you have a really darkly marked harl and they normally don’t show as well. I was taught years before genetic testing, you don’t breed harl to harl. I so seldom ever saw a merly puppy. Now I see them selling all color messed up Merl and the so called merliquins for $1000. Glad I don’t breed or show anymore!
There are plenty of people who don’t show, but they’re definitely not as visible. And there are different levels of showing – some just do a few local shows, some spend ten grand to send a dog out with a pro handler.
Then again, the big-time show people do a lot of advertising in trade journals, so they aren’t as visible to the laypeople as the more casual breeder who puts ads in the paper.
How is breeding Harlequin to Harlequin any different than breeding merle to merle? It isn’t. HxH is breeding MxM.
it is actually worse than breeding merle to merle as you end up (theoretically) with reduced litter size and 25% of pups at risk of sensory defects. since merlequins are usually less likely to suffer defects than whites, one could argue that harlequin breeding would produce more pups with sensory defects than a merleXmerle breeding, which does not produce whites. neither are good, but they are not exactly the same either.
I agree 100 percent. I wasn’t sure why a “responsible” breeder would never breed merle to merle, but could breed Harl to Harl and still be responsible. Harl x Harl is worse. I wouldn’t put the breed standard above health.
really?? Wow I didn’t know genetics worked that way! If you breed a dog that is a merle to another merle or Harlequin or a Harlequin to a Harlequin or Merle your chances are high you will have one or more pups that will get TWO merle genes which causes the white pups….. PERIOD! It has nothing to do with “good” dogs… it has to do with the MERLE GENE! Maybe you just don’t understand how genes work…. maybe you should read up on it.
This is probably one of the most ridiculous comments on here. You are ignorant. It does not matter what is in the Pedigree, it matters the genes in the COLOR. Certain color Danes carry different genes. Same to same always creates problems. I know this because i bred Aussies, and they are the same. I owned fantastic blood lines, but if bred incorrectly, can still potentially produce diseased pups. It’s a FACT, regardless of the Pedigree. Oh, but I’m sure you are certified and well educated in this field, because I’m sure you practiced veterinary medicine and studied pedigree code…right? Oh wait, i did. Thank you.
C.H. It is equally ridiculous comment to state it does not matter what is in a Pedigree. We all here have understood that the coat coat consist of combination of genes. Likewise, a piebald with a double merle and then you add the lethal dominant harlequin gene. Please we are not aware that most Vets study Genetics or reproduction these days. Collies, Border Collies, Aussie, Great Danes we are finding through scientific study the hardlequin dominant lethal modifier is not soley the property of the Great Dane. Most certainly most of us are fully away that the Aussie did an enormous number of merle to merle breedings with same results.
A pedigree such as Avalance for example is not only that he was used for breeding from a sable merle dam whose complaint reports if factual produced colobomas with great regularility. I do not know what you consider a good pedigree but inbreeding on eye health issues of Champions does not wash in my knowledge of animal husbandry.
C.H. probably Sue Bowling’s site was one of my favorites since it first hit the internet. Indeed there are some very highly educated people on this site in varies areas. The true sign of an educated person…they know that they do not know it all and never will.
Boy, this person was certainly surprised to read that the Coat Color Genetics of a Great Dane held very few differences for example Sable/Fawn same gene. No one expects their Vet to know all the Genetics of every breed or every genetic disease of specific breeds. Thank goodness for Marmaduke and the public outcry for the Sable/fawn Danes. This was one movie that most definite helped a pure breed dog. Trying to solve the breeding issues of my own herding breed the Dane site gave great insight to specifically Blindness. Example as one studies you learn ..horses that are piebald often are night blind…double piebald hamsters …born with no eyes…the list goes on in our mammals. Animal husbandry studies opens one eyes to reality.
C,H, I should correct that the gene responsible for the Harlequin Pattern in Great Danes is different according to Genetic Marker testing in other breeds such as the Collie, Shetland Sheepdog. It is the pattern not the color is what you might have meant to say?
The Harlequin needs Irish Pattern or the s^i gene. Therefore it’s pattern, not color, that should be the focus in Harlequin breedings for example.
Control the pattern and seeminly the Breeder can create and maximize good pigmentation markings. .
The white patterning or white spotting in Dogs remains under study. The basic difference visually of the extreme piebald in which spotting is quite different from the lacy spotting of color in harlequin where the base color is white. The harlequin modifier gets rid of the gray pigmentation to white most commonly. We remain with much yet to discover and learn. Over 50 percent white certainly does not compute in my studies be it Herding Breed, Hunting, Terrior …
Not true! The hype is that they magically know how to avoid DM puppies from a spot to spot breeding. This practice is wrong and selfish! All about breeding 1 winning dog and too bad for the other pups that are born to suffer because of it.
I know of several breeders that breed Harl to Harl– SHOW breeders that are “reputable”. The point is that breeding these pairings together can cause problems- no matter how “safe” you try to be.
Of course it is true. I have a deaf, Blind double Merle. She also has a littler mate that was born deaf as well. Anyone who is involved in Great Dane rescues knows these poor pups are everywhere. So many top breeders have no care as long as they get a few with the colour they want. We call them greeders.
I wonder if the collie people stole the idea of breeding double-merles from the Great Dane people. A double “Avalanche” is too much of a coincidence.
Dave recently posted..Sagacity
Avalanches are ultimately a destructive force with very little benefit. They are beautiful only in so much as you avoid coming into contact with them and you care little for what they destroy.
I believe the preferred type of Harlequin Dane in the show ring is a white-mantled one, as well. I don’t know if having that requirement reduces the number of ‘acceptable’ show-quality pups even more (I don’t know how that color pattern gene works).
Yes, they really prefer the Irish white markings (socks, tail tip, underbelly, and full neck in white) on their mantle and harley dogs. If you look at the visual standard that the breed club publishes, they like A LOT of white on the neck, all the way up to the jawline. I don’t know if Irish White has been shown to cause deafness, but it’s certainly possible with excessive white caused by that gene compounding the white from other genes and the associated dysfunction.
From looking at the other dogs in the top 25 as well as the specials in the final round at the breed club national, I think Fawn is the top show color. There was a whole lineup of fawn dogs and one Harley. Fawns also dominate the top 25. On that Lady Gaga GD breeder’s page, her BISS “Brando” is a fawn. I wonder why this is. Is Harley a silly party coloring in the view of the fancy? Are Harleys otherwise deficient in conformation?
I would guess that it’s just so difficult to get the coloring right on a harlequin, most breeders don’t want to even try? And most of the puppies in each harlequin litter will be disqualified from the show ring at birth due to their color, leaving the breeder with far fewer potential winning show dogs. What if the puppy with the best conformation in the litter is a boston or a merle?
Wasn’t there some talk at some point of allowing those colors to be shown also? And why the heck wouldn’t they?!
It may be that the desire for the esoteric coloring in mantle and harlequin Danes is because they are so hard to breed.
I’m reminded of the preferred color in boxers (a breed I know a little better).
The standard strictly limits white to 1/3 of the coat. However, the preferred color for the ring is for the dog to have about 1/3 of its coat white– almost always Irish marked.
However, really flashy boxers don’t breed true. If you breed two flashies together, you will get 1/4 flashy, 1/4 “solid” brindle or fawn, and 1/4 mostly white. Dogs that are mostly white are not acceptable for boxers, because of deafness issues. However, you can get flashies by breeding mostly white dogs to solid colored dogs. But there is some evidence that even allowing the extreme white dogs or their genetics in the bloodlines also is associated with deafness and even flashy marked dogs can be deaf or partially deaf.
The evidence isn’t conclusive, but it has been suggested as a potential problem in the boxer.
And it’s all because the solid colors don’t show well.
Also,if the dogs are flashy but have a lot of white on their faces, that’s not wanted at all. They want a blaze or no blaze.
Retrieverman recently posted..Strawberry
fawns are most common in the show ring. they breed true, so any puppy with great conformation is a potential show dog as they will all be fawn colored and therefore allowed in the ring. on the other hand, in harlequin breeding, all the pups with great conformation may be disallowed colors, disqualifying them from becoming a potential show dog. harlequins are not deficient in conformation and they are not looked down upon. they are simply more difficult to produce.
Irish white does not contribute to deafness. deafness is caused by lack of pigment in the inner ear and Irish white dogs always have color on the head. the piebald gene, on the other hand, is more “unstable” as far as the consistency of pigment placement and thus can contribute to deafness, though the combination of harlequin and double merle is almost always the culprit for deafness.
“bostons” are called mantles in the Dane breed since their acceptance into AKC conformation in the mid 90’s.
Mantles (formerly known as Boston-marked) have been accepted in the show ring here for some time. Merles are accepted in parts of Europe (including Germany, I believe) but not yet in the U.S.
I was shocked to learn there are still a few breeders breeding Great Danes for hog hunting! They don’t much care what color the dogs are, though.
Anna recently posted..RokGallery Template Integration
One wonders why Harlequins are even allowed in Danes. It’s not a “breed identification” color as it is with merle Aussies. And following the “don’t breed this with that” rule tends to result with completely different bloodlines as you mention in your article. The splotchy color is striking, but Retrieverman’s article indicates that a true Dalmation color may have once occurred and this would be a safer gambit than playing with two semilethals. I know in some countries crossing HH or MM is now illegal, but I suspect that one may find that this merely results in false pedigrees rather than actually reducing the problem. I expect that as the technology becomes better, we’ll see true tiger striped and zebra striped dogs as well as an attempt to get the “African painted dog” colors into show dogs. Anything to look different from the “other breed” in the next ring.
Peggy Richter
I think Scottie’s post here does an admirable job of surmising just how this breed came to be and why there are “color families.”
http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/2011/07/09/german-mastiffs-and-danish-dogs/
I think it likely that it wasn’t so much allowing the color in Danes but in redefining what the breed was to include dogs with the trait established. I wonder what came first, the color family rules segregating a landrace, or perhaps the rules simply reflect the breed history and the relatedness outside of the families was limited already.
I find it very unusual that the breed club would be so adamant not only that you can’t mix colors and show the dogs, but that the entire pedigree must be free of such mixing. That the pedigree, more so than the resulting dog, has importance. Crazy thinking that.
Christopher recently posted..The Collie and The Provost
white danes often suffer from sensory defects, which are generally simplified to “blindness and deafness”. getting more technical, vision impairment can be caused by a range of eye anomalies and defects associated with the merle gene. in the list you posted, congenital cataracts through colomboma are all conditions relating to the eyes. deafness is caused by a lack of pigmentation in the inner ear, so the interaction of merle, harlequin, and piebald genes contribute to deafness but the combination of harlequin and double merle is the biggest culprit.
lack of pigment in the skin also puts white dogs at a higher risk for skin cancer and dermatitis. however, i am unsure about the claim that white danes suffer from follicular dysplasia, which i have always seen associated with the “blue” dilute gene.
photo-induced epilepsy has been associated with the eye defects mentioned above.
i have also heard that fertility is effected by the double merle gene but don’t know enough about it to comment. as far as social instability goes, i tend to disagree that white Danes are any less temperamentally sound than a pigmented counterpart of similar breeding. i have interacted with several white danes, many with sensory defects and have not noticed any “social instability” in well-trained animals.
i also wanted to point out some flaws with the article so no misconceptions are spread here. many times whites are born completely normal with no defects. this is not the norm and does not justify producing them, in my mind, but whites are also not always riddled with defect. some have normal eyes and vision but cannot hear, others are blind but have perfect hearing, occasionally there are whites with severely deformed eyes, skin, and neurological problems, and sometimes they are no different than a black Dane, for example, other than their susceptibility to sunburn. there is definitely a range.
also, merlequins (double merles without the harlequin gene) suffer much less frequently from sensory defects than whites because they retain more pigment. merlequins (and whites for that matter) are no more likely to suffer from autoimmune or neurological problems because of their color. those issues have more to do with whether the breeder is “reputable” and focusing on health and genetic diversity.
the article blurs the lines in this manner as well, so i will clear things up – inbreeding causes immune problems (and other genetic issues to be sure) but inbreeding does not have anything to do with the production of white or merlequin great danes. two totally unrelated harlequins bred to one another will still produce puppies with sensory defects. they are just less likely to produce dogs with weak immune systems because of the lack of inbreeding.
the article alludes to the fact that the harlequin Dane Rumpus died an early death has something to do with his coloring. this has nothing to do with the fact that he is a harlequin great dane, nor that he was produced from a harlequin to harlequin breeding. harlequins do not suffer from any color-related ailments. normally pigmented dogs from harlXharl breeding do not suffer from any ailmets related to the color of their parents either.
also, you listed mantles as an undesirable phenotype, yet they are an accepted color in AKC conformation and have been for decades.
> follicular dysplasia
That list of conditions is a quote from the linked Chromadane website.
> fertility
Harlequin is prenatal fatal lethal in the doubled up state, Merle is sometimes so, sometimes the pups survive.
> social instability
Again, not my original research. Blindness and deafness come with their own challenges in creating a well adapted dog, but I think Chromadane is discussing actual inbred personality changes. This would not be unprecedented. Remember that these color genes are actually BREAKING the creation and/or expression of fundamental proteins that are often used for multiple purposes in the body.
There are many examples in the literature both scientific and anecdotal regarding a relationship between knocking out pigment and personality disorders in multiple species.
> whites are not always riddled with defect
I didn’t state anything of the sort. Nowhere did I claim that there’s some magic guarantee and that all double merles are going to have the same level of defect. I’d caution you against claiming that any of them are “completely normal with no defects.” That’s likewise a statement that you can’t support. If we define normal as the ability to produce and use melanocytes like other wildtype animals, then no, no Merle dogs and especially no Double Merle and Harlequin dogs are “normal” and with “no defects.”
The degree to which melanocyte dysfunction leads to severe disease is obviously variable, but just like all Dalmatians had high uric acid levels but not every single dog was crippled with kidney stones, etc., white Danes are not “normal” and the white is a genetic defect, whether or not you want to accept it or like it or what have you.
> there is a range
Yes, absolutely. I don’t disagree and I didn’t state any differently. Merle is a prime example of variable penetrance, variable expression, variable placement, and there are known and unknown genes that modify this.
> merlequins suffer much less frequently
Yes, that’s true. I have another post on Harlequin in the works that details this from scientific studies. Basically the more white genes you combined (Irish spotting, Piebald, Harlequin) with Merle, the more likely you are to have negative outcomes. Harlequin plus MM has been shown to have more prenatal fatal results than MM alone.
> merlequins are no more likely to suffer
This is not true. Merlequins are double merles and they are not as healthy as the wildtype. It’s not just the addition of Harlequin that causes problems, Merle is problematic all by itself.
> inbreeding … white / merlequin great danes
I don’t know where I made the claim that this article is about inbreeding. It’s about homozygosity, sure, but I don’t really see where I’m talking about inbreeding per se. I’m talking about mating Harlequin to Harlequin, regardless of other relation.
> Rumpus died due to his coloring
No, I’m using Rumpus as an example of a well known dog that is the product of a Harl to Harl mating. This is simply used to established that Harl to Harl is not rare or only done by “backyard breeders” or “disreputable breeders.” The same is true of the top winning Harl dane where I show his pedigree.
Rumpus’ death might be related to his color, who knows. Harlequin Danes are not noted for their health and longevity as it is. That’s not exactly what the point of this article is. I’m talking about intentionally breeding Harlequin to Harlequin which is known to create dogs with genetic defects.
The other issues are more complicated, like bloat or poor immune systems, etc.
> mantle as an undesirable phenotype
Read my wording carefully, I did NOT say that it was not an accepted color in AKC conformation, although it WAS in the past. Jess who comments here can confirm that when she was in Danes, you could not show Mantles in the breed ring. But this is not at all the point I made in the article.
I said that it’s an undesirable outcome when one wants to breed Harlequins. This article is not concerned with the conformation fads of the AKC… if it were, I would criticize their lack of acceptance of Merle. Merles are going to be created when you’re breeding Harlequins and to not be able to show these dogs and use them in breeding programs is rather silly.
Christopher recently posted..£10,000 Pounds Sterling
not every element of my comment was meant to address something you were lacking in your article. it was mostly my experience and take on things combined with a few clarifications on points i felt may be misleading to people not as familiar with danes.
>social instability
in my personal experience, i have not noticed social instability in white great danes. i do not speak for other species, which i am sure have their own subtleties and intricacies at play. being involved in rescue, i have had personal experience with multiple white danes, some blind, some deaf, some both and some neither. i have never noticed any behavioral problems that could not be attributed back to training flaws caused by previous owners. perhaps social instability exists in whites, my experience is not wide enough for me to claim otherwise, but i would argue that it is not particularly common.
> whites are not always riddled with defect
when i referred to some whites being “normal” i meant they were free of sensory defects, neurological issues and behavioral problems. obviously a lack of pigment is not normal. i do not agree with the practice that produces them but i also do not like to see a bad picture painted of the individual dogs that may scare off a qualified home for one of these special-needs dogs in rescues.
> merlequins are no more likely to suffer
i said that merlequins are no more like to suffer immune and neurological problems. they are more prone to sensory defects and, as a result, certain eye defects could predispose them to photo-induced epilepsy, so i retract the second half of my statement, that is not entirely correct. however, i do maintain that photo-induced epilepsy would be very rare in a merlequin.
> inbreeding … white / merlequin great danes
you did not claim the article was about inbreeding. i simply mentioned that things such as neurological problems (other than photo-induced epilepsy) and immune disorders are more related to inbreeding and have very little, if anything, to do with color by itself.
> Rumpus died due to his coloring
great danes are not noted for their longevity in general. however, with responsible breeding practices, we are seeing their longevity increasing to the point where dogs living into their early teens are not longer particularly rare. longevity is not related to color. in general, harlequins do not live shorter lives than any other color.
i do not agree with the practice of breeding harl to harl. i do, however, think it is important that the issues involved with this type of breeding are not made out to be worse than they are. to be sure, i do not want to see them swept under the rug either.
1996 they added ‘Mantle’ to the standard and they could be shown. We were showing in ’94-95, no mantles.
Jess recently posted..Zora Will Have the Steak. Or Perhaps the Baby Food.
I think you shouldn’t quit your day job. You are a terrible researcher.
Yet you provide no counter examples and no published evidence to cross examine even one thing I’ve posted.
Chris I think your research is just fine.
Lack of pigmentation certainly has to have its affects on every organ of the body due to known biological and molecular evidence.
Harlequins, Double Merles, Irish Spotting, and Piebald all are dilution factors. How many dilution mutations can you put into one dog’s genetic makeup safely.
The Harlequin gene now identified being a modifer forming a co-dominant relationship with the merle gene is scientific fact.
I cringed to read some collie breeder are waiting for the collie genome mapping. Some actually believe it works different in collies. They also find it unacceptable that a color headed white is actually a double merle, and more likely a double piebald.
Now let us consider the postulation of a double piebald with harlequin. Indeed could not a double piebald modify in a co-dominant fashion as well? Could merle gene have more than this one harlequin Dominant modifier?
Now let us consider a double piebald with a double merle. Mismarks in collies seemingly come likewise from double piebald. Piebald white in mismarks phenotypically expresses in random patterning much as even a single merle gene does not produce a predictable pattern.
I think you should quit breeding Danes, your pedigrees are filled with Harlequin x Harlequin breedings! Tell me, what did you do with all those diseased puppies? Why don’t you feature photos of those puppies on your webpage? Do you put them in the freezer? Take them to the Vet for a shot? Dump them at the shelter? How exactly are you improving the breed by crippling a significant percent of the puppies you produce with congenital disease?
Chris as I understand the genetics of the modifer of the Harlequin on the merle gene the failue to comprehend the mobility/ jumping gene and that all harlequins are merles. See the UC Davis site as the Great Dane breeders search for the harlequin gene in thier mantles. by copies of
SINE/MITF
the mixing of colors is not banned. dogs from a mixed color breeding can be shown, as can dogs with cross-color breeding in their pedigrees. go back far enough and virtually all pedigrees will include a cross-color breeding. reputable breeders will sometimes cross color families to improve their lines and this is generally viewed as okay, if not ideal by most in the breed.
however, the GDCA does discourage the practice of cross color breeding. when crossing color families, the potential for producing unshowable colors increases. for example, crossing a fawn with a blue introduces the dilute gene to fawn lines. in future breedings, if two fawns carrying the dilute gene are bred together, blue fawns will be produced, which cannot be shown. since great danes are not a breed which allows all colors to be shown, crossing color families can reduce the percentage of showable dogs in future breedings, which most breeders find undesirable.
> the mixing of colors is not banned
I never said it was. I can read the GDCA page as well as you can. It says “Desired Pedigrees” and “Pedigrees of HARLEQUIN, MANTLE or HARLEQUIN BRED BLACK Danes should not carry FAWN, BRINDLE or BLUE upon them.” etc. etc. etc.
This is, in itself, a rather ridiculous policy. They are not satisfied with dogs themselves being the “right” color, they also want perfect PEDIGREES behind those dogs? This is one of many criticisms I’d make against the GDCA, but again, it’s not the point of this post which is to highlight the defective puppies which are being produced when they don’t have to be.
Again with this comment you have not researched genetics enough to even understand why colors are kept seperate. Maybe you should actually talk to JP (chromadane) and then you can write a well researched article with accurate facts because it is clear to anyone who actually understands genetics that you either A. just skimmed the information or B. don’t quite understand what you are reading and need someone to explain it to you. This has nothing to due with perfect pedigrees and everything to do with maintaining genetics in coat color.
The information in the yellow box on this post is taken word for word from JP (chromadane)’s website. There’s even a link for you to figure this out.
“crossing color families can reduce the percentage of showable dogs in future breedings, which most breeders find undesirable.”
Because, you know, *showing* is THE thing, not preserving genetic diversity, especially in the case of the MHC. Producing healthy dogs comes naturally after producing showable ones, in the Grand Order of Dog Breeding Things.
Jess recently posted..Zora Will Have the Steak. Or Perhaps the Baby Food.
i am not saying i agree with the practices at all. i am simply relaying the state of things in the breed for those who may not be aware.
I don’t suppose there are any DANE breeders out there who don’t breed with the show ring n mind, are there? Because when “cool” colors become such an issue in and of themselves, that takes energy away from concentrating on other more important things, like health and temperament. Claim you can do Harlequins and still get the other stuff if you will, but as long as you keep trying for that color, you will always be willing to sacrifice just a little bit of something else.
Momma always said, you can’t have it all. You may think you can have that big career, perfect house, the kids, the dog, but even if you get it and try to hold on, something always suffers. YOU, if nothing else.
I find this bizarre. So don’t show the off color dogs. But why unnecessarily restrict your gene pool? Does the GDCA really think hog hunters CARED what color their dogs were? This is the sort of thinking popularized by people who breed in order to show, not who show in order to display their breeding.
Anna recently posted..RokGallery Template Integration
breeding harlequin danes (or any dane with the merle gene for that matter) with non-merle danes (mantles and blacks for example) is completely safe. this type of combination would never produce a pup with sensory defects due to color. there is no reason to call for the elimination of harlequins when they can be produced perfectly safely.
That’s factually incorrect. Even a single copy of Merle has been shown to cause deafness and other problems. So stating “completely safe” and “never produce a pup with sensory defects due to color” is just a lie.
Of course it’s less common than with double merles, but it’s not zero. I don’t make some-all fallacy statements, I don’t promise guarantees, yet you criticize my post incorrectly for doing so and then you make blanket statements and offer guarantees which are false.
Be more careful with language.
Christopher recently posted..If thy Collie Eye offends thee
i am not criticizing, i am merely clarifying some unclear statements in the comments.
merles with one copy of the merle gene will not suffer from deafness related to their color. merle-related deafness is caused by a lack of pigment in the inner-ear. merles have some areas of reduced pigment (the grey base coat) but they are not lacking in pigment which would cause deafness. if it has occurred sometime throughout history, the incidence would still be so low as to effectively be zero.
obviously nothing in the world is a 100% guarantee. but if i say elephants are not pink, that does not make it an incorrect statement just because it has the potential to be true.
> merles with one copy of the merle gene will not suffer form deafness related to their color.
Again, this is not a true statement. Please consult “Prevalence of Deafness in Dogs Heterozygous or Homozygous for the Merle Allele” by G.M. Strain, et al.
There are problems with the study (not a huge N, dominated by Catahoulas which can be MM and appear like M, etc.) but they did show that even a single copy of the Merle gene is correlated with deafness.
Your analysis that deafness is only the result of complete lack of pigment is incorrect. Not only can a single copy of merle produce cells with very little pigment, complete lack of pigment is not required to damage or destroy hearing. Even partial pigment may not be sufficient to supply enough blood to the hearing organs.
> Copyright. You’s better watch out cuz they gonna get you!
Please refer to my recent post £10,000 Pounds Sterling for why I have nothing to worry about my Fair Use of the images.
this is the last i will say on the matter, as i believe we agree on the most important points in the harl to harl issue and i do not wish to become tedious by nitpicking over details:
merle does seem to differ in expression from breed to breed, and you will be hard pressed to find a single merle (Mm) great dane that suffers from hearing issues due to its coloration.
The Strain study which I mentioned had 6 Great Danes in it. 5 where single merle and one of those was unilterally deaf. That’s 20% deafness in single merle. There was 1 double merle and it was bilaterally deaf. That’s 100%.
Sure, small N. But please show me a published study that has a large N for Great Danes and tested their hearing, and I’ll be happy to do a post on it.
The Strain test was [All Deaf] or [Not Deaf] too. They didn’t test partial hearing loss… if the dog had hearing in any range it was listed as “bilaterally hearing.”
Christopher recently posted..Dunning-Kruger thy name is Terrierman
i would be willing to bet that the single merle included in that study had other whitening genes at play. technically a piebald merle would still be considered “single merle,” but asymmetrical head markings on a piebald may result in lack of pigment in one ear and unilateral deafness. that does not mean hearing loss was caused by the merle gene. i did not see a mention of the dane in question, so this is only my guess but i would be willing to bet on it.
also from Reetz (and quoted in one of your other blog posts):
“70 merle dogs from five breeds (Shetland sheepdog, Australian shepherd, collie, Great Dane, and Catahoula leopard dog) had BAER hearing tests performed and merle genotype determined by DNA tests. Of 22 double merles, 8 were bilaterally deaf (36%) and 2 were unilaterally deaf (9%). Of 48 single merles only one was unilaterally deaf (2%), a Great Dane that also carried the piebald gene, raising a questions as to the cause for the deafness, and none was bilaterally deaf.”
sorry, my mistake – from Strain, not Reetz.
http://www.lemmikkipalstat.net/foorumit/Forum20/HTML/363328-2.html
http://www.subguns.com/boards/sword.cgi?read=1552758
http://www.dolforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64287
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/general-dog-discussion/9780-harlequin-dane-breeding.html
http://lifewithbigdogs.blogspot.com/2011/08/read-critically.html
Some of these links did not go through for me but I just read THIS one. Ms. Research assistant does not seem to get it. Sure, realities of litter outcomes do not always match up to theory but what diff does that make, when in the end, you are talking about taking that RISK?
Why even take the RISK? Also love the justification by mentioning breeders not wanting threats to their profit margin. Not saying no one has the right to have a little money, but never nice to hear that as a bottom line motivator for gambling with innocent lives.
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/GDBE/message/213454
(closed list)
Unfortunately what we have here is a failure to do ALL of the research required to understand merle and harlequin genetics. Reputable breeders breed for the betterment of the breed. They understand pedigrees AND genetics and yes sometimes harl to harl breedings are done. This is because it was the best match and because the breeder knows the genetics of their pedigree. It is clear that the author does not. There is just a general assumption that any harl to harl breeding is wrong. Did you actually read anything on genetics or learn anything about pedigrees? Did you contact a canine genetists and gather information from them? The one pedigree that you actually STOLE off another website shows a black line (not a black out of harl) and a harl line bred together in the sire’s side of the pedigree. There is not as much white factoring in the pedigree as the author would like you to believe. The author either didn’t take the time to actually learn what they were writing about OR KNEW that they were full of it and left that bit of information off in the article. AND don’t get me started on how much trouble the author will be in when these breeders and photographers wee that their photos have been swiped and used without permission. Most all of these are copywrited. You’s better watch out because they’ll get you.
Sometimes I think it would behoove commenters if they read other related posts.
It’s not the first time he commented on merles or harlequins.
Dave recently posted..Spotted Dwarf
They never do. I had to stick my comment policy in the comment form because they wouldn’t read that either.
Jess recently posted..Zora Will Have the Steak. Or Perhaps the Baby Food.
> Reputable breeders
Reputation and ethics are two different things. I’ve profiled breeders at the opposite extremes of reputation (top winning show breeder vs. a breeder who fails all of the “reputable breeder” litmus tests) both doing the exact same thing, intentionally breeding merle to merle with little regard to the defective puppies they create.
> sometimes harl to harl breedings are done
Like in your “Rex” for example? Out of the 7 breedings on his 3 generation pedigree, 5 of them are Harl x Harl. Now are you going to tell us that no deaf or blind puppies were produced in any of those 5 breedings? I count at least 3 Harl x Harl matings in the pedigree of your Lincoln. Another 4 on the pedigree of Shine. Nikko has 3 Harl x Harl plus a Merle x Harl plus a White x Mantle breeding on her 3 gen pedigree. Spirit has 4 Harlequin x Harlequin matings on her short pedigree too.
Sometimes is clearly an understatement!
> the breeder knows the genetics
So what’s your secret to not producing deaf and blind otherwise compromised dogs? Why haven’t you published your amazing ability to breed so many Harlequins to Harlequins and Harlequins to Merle and yet never have a deaf or blind puppy?
How many puppies had to be put to sleep at birth or farmed out to Dane rescue to produce your show dogs? Do you know their pedigrees THAT well?
> copyright
Read up on Fair Use. You clearly know less about copyright law than you do about genetics, which is precious little.
Let’s see if I’ve got this correctly. A Harl x Harl breeding means that each pup has a 25% chance of having some kind of sensory defect, yes?
Well, I have Afghans, and they can get juvenile cataracts. It’s a simple recessive, and they will go blind young, plus cataract surgery is quite expensive. There’s no dna test for it. Luckily it’s quite rare now due to the efforts of responsible breeders. However, just as a for instance, let’s say that I have two dogs that are carriers. That means that each pup would have 25% chance of being affected.
If I bred such a litter, I would be vilified. Even if the bitch and dog were a perfect match, and would produce the Best Puppies Evah! it would still be wrong to do such a breeding, because of the rather large chance the puppies could be affected.
Perhaps someone can explain to me again how Harl x Harl or Merle x Merle breedings on purpose are different and ‘better the breed?’
Jess recently posted..Zora Will Have the Steak. Or Perhaps the Baby Food.
There is NO excuse for breeding harlequin to harlequin, knowingly creating blind and deaf puppies. For the “betterment” of the breed? Where is the betterment? “It was the best match”? I would postulate that the best match is the one that doesn’t create 25% blind and deaf puppies!!
I understand that when you’re involved in the dog show world you lose your perspective on ethics, but to outsiders it’s very clear that doing such breedings is far from ethical. No truly “reputable breeder” would do such a breeding. Period.
Some Grade-A moron on PDE, said that it was very uncommon for people to breed Harl to Harl.
LOL
I guess these pedigrees are all just made up.
Retrieverman recently posted..Why bigfoot cannot be Gigantopithecus
I don’t wonder, if maybe the ‘color tribes’ are so insular within the breed that people who don’t specialize in Harlequins really are under that impression? Willful ignorance, since the topic doesn’t really apply to their personal breeding program.
I have been trying to educate myself on proper breeding practices that will produce healthy and show quality pups. I am very new to all this and really just want to find the right way to do things. I recently breed my harliquin male to my female mantle and produced a litter of 9 pups 8 blacks and one Merle. All pups were healthy and beautiful however there was not one show mark puppy in the litter. I personally did not mind that because all the pups were healthy and went to great homes. However I can see the pressure that show marking can put on some people. I had people laugh and judge my litter as well. It did not hinder my pride in them however I could see how a more sensitive person would feel bad.
From what I’m reading show marked harl’s are ones with real white necks and alot of white. Yet I have seen litters that have a sire with all proper harl to mantle and harl to black breedings in their five year pedigree and the female with the same proper pedigree. But the harks from the litter were very heavy marked and there were Bo show marks because of the heavy markings. In my eyes pups were gorgeous just not show marked. So I can see how one could be pressured to do a harl to harl breeding to try to get that preferred white neck.
It seems when following the proper rules your percentage of show quality harl’s is hard to meet with the AKC show standards when it comes to harl’s. If heavy marks and spotted necks are the higher percentage produced following Thier preferred breeding standard then why is the more rare clean neck less spotted harl the preferred show mark? It seems a failure destined to push breeders to breed harl to harl. Similar to the modeling industries. 90 lb cover girls when the average women is around 125 lbs. So it’s been my choice to produce pet quality healthy pups beaches of this request.
The above is just my observation and personal experience so far not a proven scientific fact so please no one rip me apart for my observation.
My question given the above is there a time when harl to harl is a safe breeding? If both harls to be breed have black parents or certain backgrounds is there a possibility of good healthy pups with no risk? Or is every harl to harl breeding ambad idea in general?
I am trying to produce good healthy sound pups so I am trying to learn everything involved in doing so. AKC show color standards is not my main purpose. Health is. AKC standards have me questioning alot of things. I have noticed most winning Danes have cropped ears. Seems judges prefer it. If everything is indeed in the best interest of the puppy then why is the natural look not standard or preffered? It’s surley a cosmetic unneccisarry surgery that gives no purpose to today’s Dane. So AKC show standards are not my prime goal health is. But back to the question is Thier q way to meet thief standards while following thief guidelines and is there ever a proper time to breed harl to harl.?
“Why is the more rare clean neck less spotted harl the preferred show mark?”
Judges put up certain markings more than others. That’s the only reason. Is that superficial as hell? You betcha. Welcome to dog showing. =P
The preferred harl pattern is also based on no understanding of how the genetics works, as well. The addition of ‘mantle’ (geez, can’t we call it Irish marked like the rest of the dog world?) is helpful but of limited use if you don’t understand that for a show marked harl you need merle, harlequin and Irish marking.
Jess recently posted..The Evolution of the Teshie Nose
Jess, I totally agree the terminology needs a serious update within the entire canine vocabulary. making the novice believe the color or pattern is something different in different breeds.
As counter-intuitive as it sounds, breeding Merle x Merle will NOT produce any more Merle puppies than Merle x Mantle (this includes Harl x Mantle vs. Harl x Harl). Your litter wasn’t an “average” litter, but the result would not have been any more statistically likely or unlikely if you bred Harl x Harl.
If you get two copies of the Harlequin allele, the fetal puppy dies, so you’re going to get smaller litter sizes. If you get two copies of the Merle gene, you have a range of effects from fetal death, normal, blind, deaf, or both blind and deaf.
Getting a show marked Harlequin is hard and nothing makes it easier. You need one copy of the Harlequin gene and one copy of the Merle gene, so on average only 1 in 4 puppies from a Harlequin x ___ breeding will be a Harlequin. There are no known living double Harl gene carriers, and living and healthy double merles are very rare as you can read elsewhere on this blog. Having one parent be a double is really the only way to produce more than 50% of a litter being Merle or Harlequin (and thus 25% being both and thus “show marked”).
Ideal show markings also seem to favor dogs that are also piebald. While Piebald is not a lethal semi-dominant like Harl and Merle, it DOES increase deafness and perhaps eye problems (not sure this has been studied well). Throwing it in the mix just makes disability more common.
Harl x Harl will never be “safe.” The Harl gene itself will kill 25% of your fetal puppies by itself. This is up for you to decide on the ethics. There is not really an elaborate knowledge of when this happens, say at the 8 cell stage or when the puppies are more robust and must be reabsorbed by the dam or expelled. Merle x Merle (which is part of Harlequin phenotype x Harlequin phenotype breeding) will likewise produce about ~25% double merle puppies with varying degrees of disability. There’s no way to avoid this if you breed merle to merle.
I think you have to ask yourself, is the color pattern worth the risks? The AKC color standards work against the goals of health and they also work against genetic diversity and for many people, they work against ethics and things they are willing to do in their breeding programs knowing what actually happens. A quick google search shows that there is no shortage of blind and deaf Great Danes in rescue, and the breed is not that popular. It’s easier to find images and listings for disabled Danes than Aussies which are MUCH more popular, but they are not limited to color family breeding which promotes merle x merle. I personally think this sort of breeding is unethical and given that I have examined what the breeding ethics are in the show community for my own breed and found them lacking and worth forgetting about, I would certainly not breed within the prescribed color families in Danes if they were my breed.
I wish you luck in your breeding program, I think you’ll find that it’s more rewarding to produce good dogs than to play the show game. The show people might consider themselves elite and better, but look what they are doing! The emperor has no clothes.
Producing good, healthy, sound dogs is a laudable goal, but not always an easy one. I’d suggest that you read, read, and read some more (not just breed-specific – health, history, genetics, behavior). Don’t get caught up in the silly fads and politics; keep things in perspective.
Be specific in your goals – what does “healthy” mean to you? How will you know when you get there? Also be objective (not easy when you love your dogs a lot). What is good and bad about your dogs? What do they have to offer? What about them could be improved upon in the next generation? Keep tabs on the pups from your first litter too – how are they growing and developing? Are they what you want to produce?
If you’re feeling competitive, there are other venues besides conformation. Danes are a rarity in performance.
general question~~ i have a blue merle female born 7~11~11. Born from a harl. and a harl parents. She was fixed at a later date of around 9 to 10 months old. She has now gotten aggressive with her 2 housemates which are a mutt~shep mix and a black german shepard. e.r run for both humans and dogs resulted. She was raised with these 2 other females and was absolutly fine. Could it be the “blue” gene and its just a genetically unsound dog like in the case with blue pits according to Tia, the Pit~bull and Parolees lady. Looking for answers so i can better this hostile situation. Thankyou for ur knowledge in this matter
There are many anecdotal stories in numerous breeds which link coat color to behavioral traits. This is also seen in other species, like mice and even humans. Just think of the “fiery redhead” and “ginger rage” stereotypes.
Unfortunately I can not point you to robust science done on dogs which would illuminate specific behavioral traits associated with Merle. There are studies which document neurological problems with pigment limiting genes, but finer measurements of personality and temperament are usually not documentable easily.
Many observations about temperament and color might be local in nature or due to ad colors where breeders turn them out regardless of temperament, so there is a strong correlation but not causation between color and behavior.
Early spay is problematic though and there is more reading for you on that topic here:
http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/bitch-bitch-bitch-now-with-extra-snark/
Many great links at the bottom.
Best of luck in working out your dogs’ turf issues.
I have been hearing alot of complaints regarding temperament as the harlequin patterning appears to have gone epidemic viral among numbers of dog breeds? I just read about harlequin min pins? Could this be due to a complex of inbreeding or due to a type of retardation caused by this mixture necessary of two semi lethal genes in combination for phenotype expression?
Good day Christopher, I am reaching out to you because I feel you have a lot of knowledge surrounding breeding of Great Danes. I do not show but am the owner of 2 wonderful Great Danes and love the breed. I have an 8 year old female merle dane that is just wonderful I also have 1 year old piebald female that is also just as wonderful. I have recently been thinking about breeding my piebald when she comes of age but after reading all of these post I am not so sure it is recommended. I love both of my danes and they both have great personalities and are a true definition of the breed by calling them gentle giants. I do not want to pass on traits that could harm future litters. Any advise would be very helpful. Like I said before I am not a breeder. My 1 year old just went into heat and I have been going back and forth wither I should get her fixed or not to? Her mother was a harlequin and her father was black. she came from a litter or 12 she lost 1 there was 1 nicely marked harlequin, 2 black, 4 all white with a little black spot here and there. 1 blue 1 blue merle as what she called it the spots were very small almost like a dapple effect. 1 piebald I choose the piebald she is mostly white and has the merle markings around her ears and eyes with the white stripe down the middle and one spot right at the top of her tail.
Breeding Merle to Merle is the problem, and you seem to indicate that your Piebald dog also has Merle, so you would be breeding Merle to Merle. If your piebald dog is not also Merle, breeding to a Merle is not particularly dangerous. Both Merle and piebald can cause hearing loss and deafness, having both would obviously increase a deaf outcome, but it’s not clear that having both is even worse than the individual sum of having each alone. This is different with Merle, being double Merle is more likely to lead to serious impairment. So, if you are unsure if your Piebald has Merle too, I would suggest a genetic test to clarify.
In Danes merle dogs are not ‘blue.’ They are black dogs with their appearance being modified by the merle gene. Danes are typically bred along color lines and if your dog comes from Harl/Black breeding she will not be ‘blue’, which in Danes and many other breeds is a simple recessive which dilutes black pigment. Black/Blue bred Danes are generally kept separate from Black/Harl bred Danes.
Regarding temperament, check into the parents and grandparents. Ask around. You may find that the breeder of your dog was not truthful about the parents or grandparents temperaments. The temperaments of the parents and grandparents will have FAR more impact on your dog than her color.
First order of business is a complete vet check. Second order of business is a consultation with a behaviorist or trainer who specializes in dogs that are dog aggressive. In the meantime you need to manage your situation so that you do not have a repeat, which usually means keeping your dogs separated.
Good luck.
Jess recently posted..Bitch, Bitch, Bitch! (Now with Extra Snark)
I agree with Jess if you do not bred for a trait you will lose it. I did find this link that one might find helpful. A blue merle and a blue gene (D locus known as blue gene/maltese) being present are two different subjects. I found a interesting post that might be helpful?
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Great-Danes-2275/2009/11/Harlequin-Blue-Breeding.htm
Tia the pits and parolees chick is full of it and she always has been. I recall seeing her on some day time TV show (the host was Charles something, he was Spanish) the early-mid 90s spouting ridiculous nonsense, and she continues to do it this day.
Blue pit bulls are not any more “genetically unsound” than any other color (aside from merle). The fact is, there is a contingent of idiot breeders that are breeding blue pits and some of them cross bred for big bucks, with money and color being the only objective.
These dogs have fun bloodline names like Gotti, Razor’s Edge and Greyline. A number of these breeders are crossing into American Bulldog, English Bulldog and Cane Corso to increase the size (with some of these dogs hitting 120-14o lbs) and have started calling their dogs American Bullies all the while registering their dogs with fake papers.
Other idiots see the money the morons are raking in and think to get in on the action, so they start breeding a bunch of blue dogs together to get the color and try to sell for the big bucks.
Because these dogs are bred for color only, and bred by idiots that don’t know how to raise and train these dogs, YES, the strays and surrenders she gets are of course going to have a lot of behavioral problems, but it’s NOT based on their color, it’s based on being the product of a moron breeder.
20 years ago, the same issue was found in the breed with red nose dogs, as people had it in their heads that red noses are rare, therefor more valuable, and idiots started breeding them for color, and these idiot bred red noses were more aggressive than others, but again, NOT because of their color, but because they were idiot bred.
We almost had the same issue in the breed with merle, since there was this one moron that cross bred to a dane to get the color and then started selling massive numbers of merle pit/dane with faked papers. The issue came when he started doubling up on the merle, and selling blind/deaf dogs and would not return phone calls from the buyers of his defective fake papered crossbreds. Before these one breeder ruined things for everyone (and possibly saved the breed by forcing the registry to ban merles), that color pattern was fast rising, and they would have been the “blue pit” of today.
Honestly, I like Tia, I admire what she does, but sometimes she’s full of it. As a pit bull person, I can’t understand why she thinks that positive reinforcement is the only way to train these animals. You HAVE to tell a dog no and correct bad behavior, so the dog has a balance of this is what I do, and this is what I don’t do, but she doesn’t and won’t. Discipline doesn’t mean abuse, it means setting boundaries, and I cringe inside every time I see her and her staff being walked by a dog that should have been trained better.
Another thing that makes me cringe is when people come to look at a dog to adopt it, and the dog is jumping all over the people like a maniac, and she just LETS the dog. Maybe it’s just me, but one of the first things a puppy learns in my house learns is to not jump up on people. I know that I would never be able to adopt a dog from her, because the second the dog jumped on me, I would correct the dog, and let it know that jumping on me and in my face is unacceptable.
She does know a lot, but I also think she’s a bit off her rocker, so you want to listen to what she says and then do your research.
tias job is to save them not train them ,doesnt she have enough to do with no monetary help from the gov,spca ect,and take dogs tthat are mistreated,tortured and starved when she gets them.if someone wants to adopt its their responsibility to train them as well as keeping them safe
Without reading every last comment/discussion/argument/name calling on this page I would just like to make one point. If instead we were discussing OUR offspring would we even consider for a second….taking a chance of debilitating a child with any of these defects that are discussed with respect to our beloved pets?????? If anyone answered yes (that they would risk it?) they should consider themselves less than so called human!
p.s. Thanks Christopher 🙂 Nice to know someone cares!
Interesting article and dialogue. Thanks for posting it. We had a merle mantle that boated twice (gastic and colon) and then died at the age of 5 of a possibly neurological disease that curled his paws in and left him unable to walk and in pain. My husband was skittish about a future purebred dane so we were able after much searching to find a dane mix to rehome- 3/4 dane 1/4 saine bernard. She has been a lovely and robust dog, now 5 years old. We are ready to have a puppy and I have a harlequin on hold, mostly black spots but a few merle like patches. She is from a Harly X Blue cross. Is there are any reason to suspect she will be more likely to develop medical problems? If so, I’d rather lose the deposit than go through the heart break. She wasthe runt and an omega- supposedly very sweet in disposition- that and longevity is all we care for. Any advice would be appreciated.
You might learn more by referring to this link. http://www.gdca.org/great-dane-health-welfare.html
Fads in breeding and showing move at a very different pace from fads in the genetic /scientific culture. A key distinction between the two types of fads lies in the definition of the word. In popular culture, fads are essentially fashions, and fashions can turn on a dime. In genetic science, fads are a belief system – often very intricate ones – shared by a large number of researchers.
Genetic science & research speaks to the underlying reason for the differing paces of both culture and scientific change. Fashionable fads can rapidly shift because they are grounded more in personal preference. Scientific fads are rooted in ideas, expressed in theories, which then must be tested against the evidence. It can take a long time to make the case that turns an old theory toward a new one.
Since the Harlequin Great Dane burst into the U.S. public consciousness in the early 1950’s they have been synonymous with the Apollo of dogs and the distinctive body paint which only the Harlequin carries in our domesticated canine breeds.
A dozen years ago the heavily marked harlequins were the greatest thing in the show ring and litter box. Today it’s harder and harder to see them or find them and they tend to provoke responses that it is too much color and not aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
In keeping with the stately pace of genetic changes, I am laying out the challenges that have been shimmering at the surface for the last few decades and more recently this past decade.
I think most of us are “baffled” by the researchers and how in-depth the written research can be. The stride in which new information is being published is at historic speeds. When I started reading the research on genetics years ago I had the leisure of being able to study the text for months. The language in most cases takes a dictionary and a willingness to learn how genetics, DNA, alleles, loci etc… function. Months soon turned into years and my ability to discern the information has increased to the point that I have started to do some research based on breeding trends I have documented to better my own understanding. I started a database 7 years ago. The information in it is for my personal use and documents lineage, longevity, traits, color, size, litters, and health of the Harlequin Great Dane. In many cases I can document a line back to the 1800’s. Last year Mrs. Pratt gave me a huge amount of her personal documents which covers the harlequin lines back to the 1920’s and also gave me a keen insight into her breeding program and what other big breeders where also doing at the time. To my delight it all fit squarely into history and everything else I had read, documented or learned about the harlequin Great Dane. Decade by decade, I can pull all the sources of information from theory to fact and present it on its own merit. Breeding fads of the past still influence what we see today, as will every breeding Dane we use today impact our breed for decades to come. In this respect we need to realize that each and every one of us have a great responsibility.
If we really want to understand the basics of harlequin breeding we must also look for explanations that do not dismiss the near-at-hand. What we see in the offspring of a particular mating, what ancestors contributed, what colors are used in the assembly of the offspring and without question the historic map of our breed. Looking to the past is the best way we can learn the purpose, the traits, and the breeding philosophy behind their development. How did we get from there to here? One thing we should be careful of is theories that require the existence of things that cannot be disproved. These theories tend to focus on pushing a particular agenda. Examples of this are statements that “all harlequins are piebald” “all mantles are piebald”. “Excessive whites are harlequins if they have a merle patch”, which should not be confused with “all harlequins have a merle patch“. “That you just have to be experienced enough to breed healthy piebald’s” and so on. Our merle colored dogs in my opinion fall into this category also. We have yet to really discover their contribution but we are learning much more about the role it plays and why we still get them in our litters after years of trying to extinguish them from existence. The response to the merle has been a heated one. Breeding one has generated many a hate email and condemnation from the Great Dane Community. Yet, based on recent findings I have to ask the question could we have also eliminated our prized harlequin with our bias of the merle? Just how closely are these two things related? I am not saying go out and breed merles but that we need to have evidence that not breeding them is really in the best interest of the Harlequin Danes future.
We tend to set “rules” of breeding ethics that are not always based on good science. Not just in color but also in size, angulations and headgear. I’ve yet to hear of breeder brag on a smaller lip when in truth we should be striving for balance and a more overall “square” structure in our Danes. The spoken and unspoken rules only serve to box us in to a mindset that might not always be the best we can do as breeders. We have only to look at other breeds to realize that we have in some cases crippled our dogs or reduced them to animals no longer able to breed, whelp, run or live a healthy, happy dog’s life. Many breeders are now scrambling to undo the fads of the last several generations in their breeds. And, I question if we might also be at this precipice with our harlequins and mantles? If we are, do we have the ability to even agree that we might be? Or, can we change our imposing rules to reverse our fads?
The most serious issue we face in my opinion is one that most breeders are not open to discussing at all. We don’t like the word “mutation” and we flat out do not want it brought up in conversation. PERIOD! The word itself is a description of what every breeding human or canine (all living things) happens from conception through assembly at the genetic level. In this instance the issue we face with mutations could really be considered more on the lines of the word “hybrid”. It is a transmutation, alteration or crossing of genes that produces something like or similar too, but not exactly the same thing as the original. It changes from being one thing to being something else that will never again be the same as the original. In the case of the piebald Great Dane we can no longer distinguish our normal colored dogs from the piebald except through DNA testing in many instances. The last decade has brought with it an increasing amount of piebald’s in our litters. The ratio of piebald’s or broken blankets (an indication that at least one parent contributed a pie gene) is alarming and the problem is accelerating now that (by my observations) more than half our breeding stock carry for it. When two carriers are mated the result is piebald’s and the adored flashy mantles that we tend to use in our breedings. It also means that our nicely marked harlequins, mantles and merles can carry the gene to their offspring. Inevitably, these dogs are bred to other pie carriers because we don’t recognize that we even have a genetic problem. I have debated this issue with many breeders and been told that piebald’s are merely mismarks in our litters or that piebald’s make for nice harlequins in our litters. This prompted me to look to science and our researchers for answers. The response is quoted below in a personal email back from the researcher.
“Of course any piebald Dane is homozygous for piebald, meaning they have two of the undesirable piebald gene and so cannot, on their own, ever again produce normal Mantles and normal Harlequins. And it takes two piebald carriers to produce a piebald ( anytime a piebald is produced BOTH parents are what are called “obligate” carriers and all the siblings to a piebald are at high risk for also being piebald carriers so should be tested to ascertain their true genotype (the risk for siblings is higher than 50% BTW). If this was done routinely, the problem you speak of (production of dogs without normal body pigment) could be completely controlled. There are also piebald merles (once called merle-heads, and sometimes mistakenly referred to as “merlikins”) and piebald Harlequins. They all, as piebalds, share the same distinct traits. You cannot start with a piebald and end up with a correctly show marked Harlequin, as you didn’t begin with a normal Mantle. And for all, to some, a piebald (a color that is actually genetically like a Pointer or a Dalmatian, NOT a Harlequin) looks to the uneducated eye “like” a harl” we all know they are worlds apart? So while Harlequins and Mantles (and merles) can produce piebalds (and merle-heads & harl-heads), the reverse cannot occur. So as with all simple recessives, here you can breed a carrier to a clear and eventually reduce the number of affected dogs. And you are aided by the fact there is a gene level test for piebald available. So simply test potential breeding stock and avoid breeding carrier to carrier. One of the hallmarks visually of a piebald carrier is a break in the blanket. This is actually an easy problem to solve. We could completely clear the breed of piebald, make all our Mantles “pure” for “true breeding” “irish” genes if we simply put our mind to it. Since piebaldism is associated with both defects and loss of show markings it seems worth solving.”
From a scientific point of view “this is a simple problem to resolve”. So why haven’t we? Why would we not do this simple thing to produce better marked dogs and more harlequins in our litters? I think the challenges are threefold. First, we don’t really understand the impact or how to resolve it and secondly, we would have to make breeding choices on genetics and not necessarily just show careers, champions and bloodlines we want to incorporate into our breeding programs. Deciding what we should breed is and has been for a very long time based on the number of titles a dog has received and not on what we see being produced. The near-at-hand may be too near for us to clearly see? The third problem is that many breeders do not want to take a beautiful dog out of the breeding program. We invest so much of our time and expense in showing that this is what has developed into the criteria for breeding. The resolution does not require we do so and I believe this is the most significant reason we have for closing the door on piebaldism and how it affects our Great Dane breed.
Inaction will inevitably result in the loss of many of our breeding dogs. By not seizing the moment how many lines will become hybrids? That beautiful champion we see today can very quickly produce only hybrids in the future. Five or ten years from now our choices will be even more limited and I fear that our very best dogs will no longer be genetically correct Harlequins. When does it become the “point of concern for us” or, is popular culture of fads going to win the day?
Hopefully you realize that you will NEVER extinguish the Merle dog from your litters. It’s impossible. You cannot breed a Harlequin without producing plain old just-Merles. The chart above should make it clear that by breeding a Harlequin x Harlequin you will produce plain old Merles and Mantles and double-Merles, and Harlequins. You’ll also produce but probably not see born double Harls.
“In genetic science, fads are a belief system – often very intricate ones – shared by a large number of researchers.”
Somebody doesn’t know how to science.
I lost my harlequin on mothers day, she would of been 2 the following day. She had chronic Uti’s and suddenly came down with a bad virus. Long story short, died from liver failure and went septic. She was my love, my little pony. I would of done anything for her but it wasn’t in my control due to her breeding. It’s such a tragedy “breeders” do this to such an extraordinary animal and a life no less. There needs to be something formed. Some kind of regulation. This isn’t right!!!! Forever in my heart, my sweet good girl. Isis.
How insane is this. A dog is born with beautiful expressive neatly folded ears and they are then cut with a knife and taped up to make them stand up turning the head into a hideous parody.
http://www.greatdanelady.com/articles/how_to_tape_ears_text.htm
Besides the discomfort to puppies to have to endure this, the sores the itch the insanity it plainly just looks ridiculous.
Anyone have a clue why this is still sanctioned in America? I just love the tips on taping up a puppy ears, ” keep looking for sores”
I’ve never seen a healthy great dane. I don’t hang around dog shows so I mean in public places generally. There always seems to be some serious problem with their movement, joints.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQPyAiiDvPE
OMG just look how this dog walks, variations on this seems to be the norm from what I’ve seen, its worse when they run. It makes me feel uncomfortable to see this as it looks painful.
This disappoints me as I grew up as child with a remarkably athletic brindle dane who lived to be fifteen, this was in the late sixties. He could keep up with horses no problems for a whole days riding. He didn’t have big heavy flews that shake with every movement and strange dish shaped nose and huge ears but a lovely expressive smaller head and neater smaller (natural of course) ears his body was hard muscled square and tall and he had a very strong back and back end with proper natural drive, less of the grey hound more of the substance. He wasn’t extremely big just big everything in proportion but especially the head was in proportion.
What went wrong I ask myself? When I look at photos of him and compare to modern danes they look so strange to me. They appear a little dippy too i.e. neurotic or uncomfortable somehow, what’s with all the trembling?
Well, to be fair, the people who try to breed the ‘world’s tallest’ Danes are mostly going for height above anything else, and it shows. The last couple of the dogs with that title that I’ve seen have all had really bad structure.
Aah I didn’t know people were breeding for “worlds tallest”, size alone. I know this was (sadly) one of the tallest. However he was just a typical example I found to show of how they all seem to end up moving.
Its rather sad no one mentions somethings up with it, instead all they are seeing is the worlds tallest dog!
Its always I must say still with some excitement I see a Great Dane but without fail Im disappointed when I see it move with that truly horrible back-end wide shuffle, pelvis oddly tipped under back roached front end paddling high in the air to no avail. To the point I try not look at them when I notice one. I feel embarrassed for the animal and strangely unimpressed by the owner like it’s all their fault for choosing one as a pet.
I don’t see so many GDs anymore it must be said but it can’t be coincidence alone that every time I do see one it’s similarly afflicted? They just can’t quite move with the same predictable grace or quite frankly normality other large dogs can like borzois.
Is this varying degrees of HD Im seeing in them? Im used to seeing German Shepherds walking with a back end waddle, hocks together, toes out sideways, weaving and wobbling gamely and painfully, this has become almost the norm in that breed too.
Breeding for over angulation to get that movement (side gate) drive but ending up with a dead back end instead? Why is the pelvis always so weirdly tipped under?
On reading this blog entry I have to say Im shocked. I thought for a moment it was going to woosh over my head but it all makes perfect and rather insane sense to boot.
Its almost like finding that piece of a jigsaw puzzle buried behind the sofa cushions when you’ve already thrown the whole puzzle away. And surely that’s exactly what the Great Dane Club of America is doing with the Great Dane except incredulously they knew that piece was buried behind the sofa all along.
Why in heavens name do they still insist on keeping the colours in strictly separate breeds? The gene-pool is surely weakened enough already.
Are they hoping by some magic if they continue to breed harlequins like this the lethal dogs will eventually by magic simply disappear. That somehow science got it wrong, things will correct themselves as long as you breed “pure”, all those lovely mutants er pet quality dogs will one day just vanish.
They don’t recognise merle yet promote it’s production with the approved colour seperation breeding chart???! Are they bonkers?
No wonder the word “mutant” is banned from their lips, they must think if they don’t say it this will aid in that vanishing magic. Push that head deeper into the sand until not a word can you hear much like some of the dogs they are breeding.
Im surprised no one has taken the GDCA to court yet to face charges of deliberate premeditated cruelty to animals.
Shocked absolutely truly and utterly shocked from well outside Tunbridge Wells.
The temperament in Danes alone has gone to crap. At dog shows you see them lunging after other dogs as well. A dog that big with a poor temperament is SCARY.
My friends had a Shepherd/Dane cross and man that dog was AWESOME. Best of both. Great temperament yet would watch the home when they left. He was one of a kind.
Corgeek recently posted..A ranked Meech
The author is incorrect that merle in its homozygous state is always lethal. This is true for harl, but not merle gene. Contradicts themselves when speaking of merlequins and whites, both of which are double merles (ie homozygous merles).
I’m a Dane owner and I can tell you that the idiots breeding these dogs to get the “designer colors”…. are NOT responsible breeders. They are Back yard breeders looking to make a buck off the pups… and unfortunately there are lots of people who are uneducated and looking for a cheaper way to get the puppy they want that they unwittingly support these knuckleheads and of course the gratification of selling these puppies feeds the need to keep breeding them.
a Responsible breeder will breed to BETTER the breed, will follow the guidelines set by the AKC and CKC (Canadian Kennel Club). They will health test (this is much more than having a vet look at the dog and say “yep looks healthy” the testing will be genetic testing to make sure that the dogs the plan to breed have the right combinations that will not pass on the recessive genes and created impaired puppies. They also have hip and joint test done to ensure that there are no sign of a degenerative bone issue that can be passed on to the pups. The also have CERTIFIED eye checks, and all the breeders will post this and will not budge at the request from potential puppy buyers. They have a long pedigree of the lines and they will do extensive research to make sure that their breeding stock will have happy and healthy tempers.
so before you start bashing the breed…. do a little more research and attack the idiots that breed for money instead of love of the breed…
Stop buying back yard puppies!!! This is for any breed! Stop supporting the BYBer’s!!!
HollyVenus recently posted..2014 National Hurricane Conference Update
Do you have reading comprehension issues. It doesn’t say anywhere that homozygous merle is “always lethal.” It just doesn’t say that or suggest that anywhere. Where the hell do you think the photos of the double merles come from? If it were 100% lethal we’d never see it.
And your points about “responsible breeders” are stupid as well. The drive to breed deformed Danes comes FROM THE ELITE in the breed. The Color families which promote merle to merle breeding are part of the STANDARD. I’ve documented the top winning Danes in the country and world having merle to merle breeding. So pretending this is some “backyard breeder” problem is just stupid. There is no way to breed merle to merle safely. There is no test. No amount of supposed experience or knowledge can avoid the issues or lessen them even 1%.
So anyone who does this, and I’ve shown how this breeding goes right to the top of the breed, the elite of the elite, is guilty of inhumane torture breeding for no reason other than shallow aesthetics and maintaining the extant culture. There is no health test to avoid these issues. There is no way to breed responsibly when you follow the standard and the color families.
So don’t be stupid and pretend that it’s some “backyard” breeders doing this. It’s not.
Well said.
She was rather setting herself up for that.
A classic example presented as if by magic.
This is the typical show breeders response you can read it on hundreds of breeder web sites across the world wide web.
In fact it’s probably more likely you will get a healthy dog from a “back yard breeder” as “pet quality” from a show breeder with those “long pedigree of lines” almost certainly means line bred degenerate that includes all the worst exaggerations in the breed.
In this case it can even mean a blind deaf and mentaly unstable dog, even with all the health testing in the world. Because guess what that’s what they have intentionaly bred.
Just for good measure I find the “looking for their forever homes” “ready for adoption” thing all rather sick as well.
Question: Shouldn’t the hmhm dog be solid black?
He *could* be solid black. The white on the dog in the diagram is caused by “Irish White” which is located on an entirely different locus than the Harlequin gene or the Merle gene. This gene is very popular in the Harlequin lines as it does add more white in apparently desirable places.
According to my Punnett squares, you would get the same percentage of harlequins from either harlequin x solid breeding or merle x mantle breeding.
Same situation with frame overo in horses. OO is lethal…If you breed an Oo horse to an oo horse, you get 50% frame overos & 50% non-frames, which is better than Oo x Oo: 50% overos, 25% non-frames, & 25% dead foals.
One thing to consider is that the visual pattern we call Harlequin is the interaction of TWO lethal semi dominant genes. Harl and Merle. So the dog has to be HhMm to appear “Harlequin.” This complicates the squares as there are two genes that are independently passed on.
But yes, the problem with breeding Harl to Harl, Merle to Merle, and HhMm to HhMm, is that the HH and MM situations are lethal and unlikely to produce any offspring. And when they do, when an animal beats the odds (I’m unaware of any animals being born with HH, but this hasn’t exactly been the product of a lot of study) and is born, they are very often disabled.
That’s why I *suspect* that the worst of the blind and deaf danes are HhMM, because we do know that some MM survive.
So yes, save for the MMs that do survive, you are throwing away those percentages that are MM and HH, so breeding that way thinking you’re going to get more “usable” or desirably colored animals is just not supportable.
In fact, I would not be surprised if the ratios are worse due to smaller litter sizes and dead fetuses spoiling whole litters at a time on occasion.
I talk about the issue of Merle alone in this post:
http://www.border-wars.com/2011/03/the-unfortunate-case-of-the-wild-australian-shepherd.html
Perhaps you could clarify what you mean by “solid” and “mantle.” HhMm (“harlequin”) x hhmm (solid?) vs. hhMm (merle?) x Hhmm (mantle?).
I am assuming you mean solid to be a dog with neither Merle nor Harlequin and a Mantle as a dog with Harl (but you can’t SEE it because it is not also merle.
Technically you could have a Mantle that has neither Harl or Merle and just has Irish White. But that’s obviously not the interesting case here. It is represented on my chart above… the dog in the bottom right corner is Mantle and lacks both the Harl and Merle gene. The other two in the yellow area have one (invisible) copy of Harl.
I think breeding HhMm to Hhmm would be acceptable as HH is lethal in the womb and as far as I’ve been able to discern no HH puppies have actually ever been born (correct me if I’m wrong?).
You’d get the same proportion of HhMm as a harl to harl mating I think.
I worked it out as 25% Harlequin, 25% mantle, 25% lethal (not born), 12.5% merle, 12.5% solid (maybe I made a mistake somewhere though).
The “problem” with this mating is of course the proportion of merle dogs (which apparently isn’t recognized as a “proper” colour for show even though harlequin uses merle genes… *sigh*). But then these could always be sold as pets – most pet owners don’t care that it’s not a “proper” colour.
This is not about proper colors of a litter. It is to address the lethal harlequin modifier of the merle gene. Yes it is assumed a double harlequin dies in the womb. Without the merle gene the harlequin modifier (carrier) does not express. It creates carriers that could be black or brown without knowing the lethal modifer exist for expression in the next generation. Fortunately, there is a test for the harlequin modifier for breeding purposes of this type of breeding protocol. Just as the double merle gene however, the harlequin gene brings along what is called Merle Ocular Abnormalites among other defects such as heart, bone abnormalties.etc. http://www.eyecareforanimals.com/conditions/the-merle-gene-and-multiple-ocular-abnormalities/ The owner of this blog controls all trollers.
Colour isn’t a problem for me I assure you, I don’t care what colour my dog is as long as its healthy (flourescent pink would be a bit weird but if it was a good dog I’d accept it) – but for show people colour apparently matters enough that it could be considered a “problem” for them. They may not take kindly to suggestions that throw a lot of “mismarked” dogs or non-standard colours… Personally I think showing (for looks) of dogs and other animals should be abolished but I can’t see that happening any time soon 🙂
It would seem that because the Merle gene is a fragile that easily mutates and the harlequin being a dominant expression of modification of the merle gene easily could become a dominant color pattern in any species carrying it hidden. This is what happen to the Great Dane even their Fawn pigmentation which is same gene at the Agouti recessive a^y? Therefore jeopardizing not just the merle from Standards but how the phenotype expression of sables that actually sable merles. Blue merle phantoms or cryptic is easier but if there is no tri factoring as in pure for sable …generally no typical mask markings… Well guess one would have to genetic markers for color and merle markers?
I just wanted to share Yoda with you all. He is my 2 year old double merle Great Dane. He was rescued from severe neglect at 1 year old. He is blind and deaf and happy, healthy, smart, beautiful, friendly and gentle. I did some research before I adopted him so I could be prepared for what I was about to get into. It is a lot like having a toddler around, he investigates everything I do, follows me everywhere and can’t be left alone. The only thing he hasn’t been able to do (that a “normal” dog can) is play fetch-he has figured everything else out (which is why he was named after the Jedi master). I know he may have more health issues in the future that may impair his life span but I cherish every day that I have with him and enjoy him immensely. I would prefer that breeders be more careful about bringing these puppies into the world but being blind and deaf is not the end of the world they are still GREAT dogs.
Marion: Hope you understand Yoda like every Great Dane that I have come in contact in my life time is a marvelous gentle giant among canines. I find it heart breaking that for every sighted and herding Dane that I come in contact there are ten blind and deaf ones today. My great Aunt bred these giants among K-9 and remember vividly being quite short looking up into the eyes of her black stud dog. I do not recall seeing a harlequin among her breeding stock or puppies. Glad to report did not see one Harlequin at the last several Dog Shows. I do not believe anyone here Marion does not realize that your Great Dane deserves to walk without pain—be able to see and hear .The focus here Marion is Yoda’s health issues are preventable. Personally am weary of witnessing eyeless and blind pure breeds. It makes me sick to my stomach to see a Collie, Border Collie, Aussie, or Great Dane without eyes or blind. Is not adopting these animals supporting the breeders who refuse to adopt new breeding protocol based on new scientific knowledge? Are not such Adopting Pure Breeds supporting the AKC failure to step up to the plate against the Pure Breed Clubs who allow merle to merle breeding and entries of double dilute offspring?
This was very educational, and thoroughly heartbreaking. Thank you for the clear illustrations of the situation. What changes would you make to the standards, and, were your changes employed, and only breeding a fitting said standards were employed, what would be the likely percentage of harlequins in the possible resulting litters, and what percentage, of any, would there be of puppies with blindness, deafness, or other serious defects affecting their quality of life? I recognize this would involve significant high-low ranges, but I would think if the harlequin could still be achieved with less mortality and defect, it would be obviously worthwhile to make such changes from a humane standpoint. I am a lawyer for a large animal rescue, and an owner of a gorgeous and photogenic harlequin Dane with a bleeding disorder (adopted from our shelter), and a semi-retired, highly successful Chesapeake show dog, so I see both the breeder and the shelter perspectives on these types of breeding issues, and appreciate the exhibits you presented to demonstrate your arguments (which were sound).
That’s a rather big question.
(1) Ban Merle to Merle breeding. This includes Harlequin to Harlequin. The production of double Merle (homozygous Merle) puppies is unethical.
This would prevent the majority of the most severe problems.
(2) Allow all the intermediate colors to be shown with no penalties. If you’re going to produce these dogs as a normal part of your breeding program, the fact that certain coat patterns are not allowed makes little sense. Basically the standard is corrupt as it is. It artificially divides one breed into what is basically several smaller breeds. And then all the “non-standard” colors that will always persist (like plain old merle), are none-the-less not show-able so it drives breeders to both limit the gene pool artificially and over-produce pet only dogs and to risky breed. They breed Harlequin to Harlequin to try and maximize the number of puppies that are Harlequin, because if they produced harlequin in a more safe manner, they would not get as many Harl puppies per litter, so they don’t do it, and they thus create all the screwed up puppies.
It’s a sick process.
If they allowed all the harlequin family “mis-marks” to be shown as fine, then you wouldn’t need to dump otherwise fine dogs off as pets and over-breed just to try and get some stupid ideal of an ideal color markings.
Christopher: I note a Change in the breeding standard by the Great Dane Breed Club?The fact is just as in Great Danes I find that common old terms called mismarks or sable merlequins in Dane litters are the same as in Collie litters. Take a look carefully if color is what might interest draws one to a specific sable for because at the end of day better do some digging on health as it is way more important than color or color pattern from planning litter research.
Should not all herding breeds take a warning from the Great Dane in breeding sable merles? Especially pure for sable merles? Those of us should take heed from the Great Dane Health Advisory..who state even when your Merle is perfect in every way, great conformation, character and all else that a Dane can be.
Breeding merles is currently deemed an unethical practice by the Great Dane Club of America’s breeder’s code of ethics. Not to mention that breeding merles may produce dead puppies, sick puppies, and Danes that are predisposed to future health problems. This is possible if the “merle” gene is present in both parents, resulting in double “merle” dogs that can be stillborn, deaf, blind and genetically flawed.
Now why would the Breed Club make such as statement? Is it because the harlequin modifier of the merle gene has engulfed their gene pool eliminating the merle from the Standard at this time will clean up the available gene pool for healthy genetic diversity and jeopardizing the sable pigmentation which they call fawn light cream and tan? A sable is a sable be it Great Dane or Collie breeds.