Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ca Is There Any In Straight Egyptian Who
StraightEgyptians.com Forum > Overview - ‹bersicht > Discussion - Diskussion
topic news
Is there any case of a Straight Egyptian Arabian horse testing positive for CA who does not contain any one of these horses in their Straight Egyptian pedigree? If so, who is verified?

Badaouia
Eid
El Nasser
Mashaan
Nabras
Exochorda (Aiglon / Leila)
MHuprich
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 16 2012, 04:33 PM) *
Is there any case of a Straight Egyptian Arabian horse testing positive for CA who does not contain any one of these horses in their Straight Egyptian pedigree? If so, who is verified?

Badaouia
Eid
El Nasser
Mashaan
Nabras
Exochorda (Aiglon / Leila)


There are lots of them tested as CA carriers that do not carry any of these lines.
topic news
such as?
thanks
MHuprich
It's a huge list of carriers on the site. http://www.cerebellar-abiotrophy.org/index...4&Itemid=58
And these are only the horses whose test results have been reported to this site.



anitae
If you review the list to which Melissa referred you (thank you, Melissa), I think you will find that the vast majority of SE horses that are reported as having at least one CA gene do not have any of the horses you listed. So, I'm wondering why you asked your question?

Anita
Kimberli
Hadba Zaafarana, half brother half sister mating. Double NABRAS and Double BADAOUIA CA clear...
Kimberli
Look for Bint Serra in pedigrees of CA carriers.

I know people are not going to like this but I have yet to find a carrier that did not carry thins horse. If you find one, I would like to know about it. Please email me at waheeb@hotmail.com

Thank you, Kimberlli
topic news
Anita, yes they do, however they also have one other horse in common. i see a small number of straight egyptians who are linked by one horse and then there may possibly be a second horse but this second horse may be eliminated as a source. this being the case, of the living descendants of those one or two in straight egyptian it seems to be on a downward scale who are remaining in the breeding population
topic news
QUOTE (MHuprich @ Jun 16 2012, 11:25 PM) *
It's a huge list of carriers on the site. http://www.cerebellar-abiotrophy.org/index...4&Itemid=58
And these are only the horses whose test results have been reported to this site.



is it a huge list? Of the 466 carriers, i only see about 25 as straight egyptian with some of them being progeny or one parent testing as a carrier. less than 1% of all tested, less than 5% of all carriers. Yet we see it may turn out that it is only one horse we need to focus on in a pedigree? is this what you see?
MHuprich
This list is voluntary and I know there are SE horses (stallions and mares) that tested as CA carriers that are not on the above list.

I did not go see which of the carriers were SE and did not pull up datasource on all the ones that I did not know if they were SE or not.

And, until the entire population of SE horses (not only in the US but around the world) are tested, no one knows how many will turn out to be carriers.

I do not think it is scientifically robust to see a common horse in the pedigree and assume that is the only source of CA, especially with the small % of SE that have been tested and that have had their status reported one way or the other here.

topic news
QUOTE (MHuprich @ Jun 17 2012, 08:11 PM) *
.

I did not go see which of the carriers were SE and did not pull up datasource on all the ones that I did not know if they were SE or not.



I did.

There are only about 135 original horses who were used to build the entire worldwide population of straight egyptian. To identify from these roots which horse(s) may be an original carrier could be a very productive way to make this determination if a horse needs to be tested or not, other than your suggestion which is to test the ENTIRE worldwide population.

MHuprich
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 17 2012, 04:39 PM) *
I did.

There are only about 135 original horses who were used to build the entire worldwide population of straight egyptian. To identify from these roots which horse(s) may be an original carrier could be a very productive way to make this determination if a horse needs to be tested or not, other than your suggestion which is to test the ENTIRE worldwide population.


I heard at the last breeder's seminar that the list of original horses in SE is now less than 100. And since our recorded history doesn't go all that far back, it could be that there are less than that, if we only knew their parentage.

I do not think that it is scientifically accurate or meaningful approach to look at common horses on the small list of tested horses, look at the CA carriers and then to derive from that which of these 100 were CA carriers. However, I am not a genetecist.

And of course, if the sire and dam are tested clear, there should not be a need to test their offspring. However, there have been horses tested as carriers who had both parents tested as clear, and those cases have not been publicly resolved yet.
topic news
QUOTE (MHuprich @ Jun 17 2012, 08:48 PM) *
I heard at the last breeder's seminar that the list of original horses in SE is now less than 100.


Than that makes it easier.
anitae
Kimberli, there are at least 2 horses on the public list that have at least one CA-mutation gene that do not have Bint Serra anywhere in their registered pedigree. I will send you private email.

Anita
anitae
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 17 2012, 01:51 PM) *
Than that makes it easier.


Uh, makes what easier?

Anita
Kimberli
I am sorry, I should not have mentioned Bint Serra. All of my horses that have tested as CA carriers have Bint Serra in the pedigree as do all those SE horses listed on the CA list.

If you take bint Serra back to the desert you have Ghaziah, it is most likely that she is the origin of CA in SE horses.

We have always had CA and it has rarely reared its ugly head. I do not care if my horses are carriers and only test when someone else is concerned about it. My advice is if you care, test, if you don't don't. Trying to find the source is only of academic interest to those of us who are interested in history.
DemelzaH
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 18 2012, 08:39 AM) *
To identify from these roots which horse(s) may be an original carrier could be a very productive way to make this determination if a horse needs to be tested or not, other than your suggestion which is to test the ENTIRE worldwide population.

I'm just trying to clarify what you're implying here with the following hypothetical situation. If for example, I owned a CA carrier mare, and you an untested stallion with a pedigree free of the horse that you suspect is the original CA carrier, would you recommend the breeding of the pair?
Kimberli
QUOTE (DemelzaH @ Jun 18 2012, 01:11 AM) *
I'm just trying to clarify what you're implying here with the following hypothetical situation. If for example, I owned a CA carrier mare, and you an untested stallion with a pedigree free of the horse that you suspect is the original CA carrier, would you recommend the breeding of the pair?


When in doubt, DON"T....
topic news
QUOTE (DemelzaH @ Jun 18 2012, 02:11 AM) *
I'm just trying to clarify what you're implying here with the following hypothetical situation. If for example, I owned a CA carrier mare, and you an untested stallion with a pedigree free of the horse that you suspect is the original CA carrier, would you recommend the breeding of the pair?


I think you are trying to veer this into another direction. When you as the mare owner in this hypothetical situation of course, knowingly have a CA mare, want to breed ?


Originally, I asked if there anyone who began the process of making determinations as to identifying any horses in SE as being suspect as originators of CA in SE.
Kimberli
The test is $35 bucks, why would you be asking this? If in doubt TEST, if you don't care why would we be having this discussion?
sgarabians
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 18 2012, 04:27 AM) *
I think you are trying to veer this into another direction. When you as the mare owner in this hypothetical situation of course, knowingly have a CA mare, want to breed ?


Originally, I asked if there anyone who began the process of making determinations as to identifying any horses in SE as being suspect as originators of CA in SE.


But such an approach seems somewhat foolish considering the generations of horses that have been bred in between now and when whoever the originator was breeding. IF indeed you thought process is to thus determine where the carrier population is and thereby avoid it?

What would you do - exclude every animal with that 'suspect' individual in it's pedigree from any breeding forward?

The beauty of genetic testing is it's here and it's cheap and it provides us with an answer. We don't have to GUESS at who might and might not be a carrier. Why would any sensible breeder spend hours pondering rather than just plucking a few hairs and posting it off?

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your perspective on this.

This comment you made to another poster:

'When you as the mare owner in this hypothetical situation of course, knowingly have a CA mare, want to breed ?'

Could you be kind enough to explain what you mean by it? It reads as though you are suggesting that a carrier mare should not be knowingly bred from - but surely that is not what you meant?
JoeFerriss
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 16 2012, 08:33 PM) *
Is there any case of a Straight Egyptian Arabian horse testing positive for CA who does not contain any one of these horses in their Straight Egyptian pedigree? If so, who is verified?

Badaouia
Eid
El Nasser
Mashaan
Nabras
Exochorda (Aiglon / Leila)


I applaud anyone's curiosity in looking into the ancestral fabric of Egyptian horses with the hope of learning more about genetic relationships. I do not mean to be presumptuous but in looking over your above list it appears that all of these are 20th century outrcross desert bred horses added to the foundation of Egyptian bloodlines. If that is your criteria then I suggest that your exploration is incomplete in that it leaves out other contemporaries some of which are repeated many times in today's Egyptian pedigrees. I would add to your list the following if your criteria is to explore outcross foundation animals of the 20th century:
El Deree circa 1920 stallion
El Kahila 1921 mare
El Samraa 1924 mare
El Shahbaa (El Hamdani al-Nasiri x Ubayyah Umm Jurays) 1925 mare
Beshier El Ashkar 1935 stallion
Badria 1941 mare
Hind (Saud) 1942 mare
Mabrouka (Saud) 1930 mare
Nafa'a (Saud) 1941 mare
Gamal El Din (Barakat x a Kuhaylah Hallawiyah) no date recorded, sire of Saema 1945
Ibn Farhan ("Dahman" x an Obeya) 1947 stallion sire of all of Saema's foals
Kareema (a Dahman x an Obeya) mare, no date recorded, daughter born 1935
Folla 1942 mare
Futna 1943 mare
Bint Barakat 1941 mare
Ghandour (Merzuk DB x Jazia) stallion, no date recorded, foals born 1941

It would seem to me from what I have read and heard in lectures that the "distribution" of repeated animals is the most likely way to bring to the surface the expression of genes not previously as prominent. So out of curiosity, I decided to map the distribution of some of the desert bred horses listed above in the pedigrees of two sample "World Champion" straight Egyptian stallions. I am not implying these sample horses are carriers of anything, but if you are wondering about the role of the straight desert bred outcrosses, it seems only fair that their contributions genetically be counted in the pedigrees being examined. The two sample stallions are also very popular sires, Simeon Shai and Al Lahab. Lets look at the number of crosses of various 20th century outcross desert breds in their pedigrees:

Simeon Shai
El Deree: 3 crosses
Exochorda 1 cross

Al Lahab
El Deree: 26 crosses
El Samraa 4 crosses
El Shahbaa 3 crosses
Badaouia 2 crosses
Mashaan 2 crosses
El Nasser 2 crosses
Exochorda 1 cross

Personally it seems that testing and selection is now the best path for dealing with most genetic issues the same as is done in other livestock. However if one chooses to scrutinize the ancestral make up of Egyptian horses, the more complete the analysis the better the understanding of the composition of what is behind today's Egyptian pedigrees. It is also my personal opinion that often the "outcross desert blood" adds some good things rather than take good things away from the gene pool. And for that reason all of the above outcross desert bred ancestors should be reviewed in a different light because some of this blood is in danger of falling out of the distribution due to the over use of some of the more popular lines. Generally speaking, in the above 2 lists the most prevalent ones found in Egyptian pedigrees are El Deree, El Samraa, El Shahbaa, Besheir El Ashkar, Badria, with a reasonable amount of El Nasser, Badaouia, Mashaan and Nabras. Otherwise the rest are not as populace as one might think and Ghandour only survives in Egypt.
topic news
[quote name='JoeFerriss' date='Jun 25 2012, 04:33 PM' post='392885']
your above list it appears that all of these are 20th century outrcross desert bred horses added to the foundation of Egyptian bloodlines.

the list is a "specific group" added to Egyptian lines, the list you added is a 'different' group added to Egyptian lines, they are not the same group. Let us consider one at a time as to not confuse the issue.

It would seem to me from what I have read and heard in lectures that the "distribution" of repeated animals is the most likely way to bring to the surface the expression of genes not previously as prominent

distribution is a different subject, it is not the same as the manner in which CA is transmitted
MHuprich
Hi Topic News - could you let us know who you are? Thanks.
topic news
QUOTE (JoeFerriss @ Jun 25 2012, 03:33 PM) *
Personally it seems that testing and selection is now the best path for dealing with most genetic issues the same as is done in other livestock.





testing and the second is selection as you said, is the best path for dealing with genetic issues the same as in done in other livestock


Testing of the "selected" is to test judiciously
JoeFerriss
QUOTE (topic news @ Jun 25 2012, 05:31 PM) *
the list is a "specific group" added to Egyptian lines, the list you added is a 'different' group added to Egyptian lines, they are not the same group. Let us consider one at a time as to not confuse the issue.


Forgive me for being still confused but can you tell me what is the specific difference from your list and the additional list that I suggested? How is your listed distinguished from the other?
Thanks.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.