WigWag said:
I am very happy for you that he is healthy but I have to ask why such a long list?
Why not?
These are all tests that are readily available and all help to make sure you are using the healthiest possible animals when breeding in an attempt to prevent passing along any diseases that *can* be tested for.
Since I'm in the animal health profession, I figure you can't know *too much* about an animal's health.
I would honestly never consider a breeding to a stud dog (I'm not talking about 25-year-old frozen semen here) who didn't have at least hips, elbows, and annual CERF...and Optigen if I didn't know for sure that my girl was an "A."
I added in patellas when he had his final hips/elbows done a few weeks back because I know of 3 people now who got puppies from extremely well-bred litters and extremely reputable breeders whose dogs are affected by MPL's. It was just an added in palpation/manipulation test.
Cardiac? Because I feel that again, knowing people who have TVD-affected dogs, I want to make sure everything is A-OK. I think most around here anyhow are moving toward making sure that is another clearance on a stud dog they may be looking into and most reputable breeders around here are just automatically doing some sort of cardiac clearance on their stud dogs. Besides, there was a heart clinic at the SVLRC specialty this past fall and the color doppler echo was half-price of anywhere else, and done by a cardiologist who actually authored a veterinary cardiology textbook. Can't get much better than that!
Color testing? We already know what he'd be because of his pedigree. However, it is a good thing to have in writing. Another thing that you would likely want to know for a planned breeding to a girl who is or may carry chocolate, to ensure the stud dog doesn't carry chocolate too.
The CNM test was done on more of a "dare" from a few of the field breeders I have hung around with...one of those complaints that "show people don't do this"- now they can't say that. One of them was thinking of possibly adding in some show lines with their stock, but hesitated because of lack of testing for these types of things. I never figured that it would be a problem (and had no doubts he'd clear that with flying colors), but it is just another clearance to add.
Since most of the rest are *easy* tests to run (just bloodwork or a swab), why not? It makes me feel better that I know he doesn't have anything going on that can be tested for, especially since he is getting some interest and inquiries as a stud dog.
WigWag said:
And I believe they only need a DNA marker on file if they sire more than 3 litters in a year.
He should be expecting a litter around Feb 10th, and has another planned breeding in the next 2-3 wks. Both *very* nice girls, and if these litters end up as nice as we hope, he probably will have another one lined up in the spring. We'll see. That takes him to that magic number very early in the year.
Wish us luck! Fingers crossed that he's going to be a daddy soon!