Breeding and Guaranteed Chinnie Health

[chinsNdobermans]

Very interesting information Luke. Thanks for passing that on to us.

 

[ABBY W.]

Yes, I agree. I would not breed any chin with malo at all, BECAUSE we don't know if it's genetic or not. I would not want to take the chance.

 

[RMC]

Genetic mall. has been proven by one of the leaders and giants in the chinchilla community. To claim that his work isn't valid then you better disregard almost all genetics that are known today about chinchilla. Because that vast majority of it is either a direct result of Dr. Lauridsens work/research. or is a result of those that expanded on his work.
The methodoligy used in his study of the genetics af mall. is still valid today and is still used by many researching recessive genetic malady's not only in animals but in human populations as well.
So once again where is the RESEARCH that proves the research done by one on those who has single handedly did more for the understanding of chinchilla genetics then any other single person is wrong?
Can we prove that every single case is genetic? No. But to claim that mall. at a later age isn't genetic isn't supported by the research. Nor is it supported by the findings of those who have tracked peds. of chins that had mall. more recently.

 

[galtinel]

I'm going back to the OP's comment about "points on the teeth."

Guys, from what I understand -- that's more an evironmental issue than genetic. Genetic Mallo is *usually* the root growth into the eye sockets or out the lower jawbown. Or am I mistaken?

As for "points" -- my experience has been that's due to a single type of hay being fed and not allowing the chin to chew in different ways (e.g.: woody hays vs. grass hays require different grinding patterns just like our eating meats vs. raw carrots).

And for this to show up later in life...if his highly regarded breeders are also fur or wholesale breeders, then they may not have animals that have lived with the breeders for 6 years from the gene-pool in question.

 

[RDZCRanch]

In my experience and from what I've read and heard...points on the teeth are caused by overgrowing roots as well as environmental factors.

For any reason that the teeth are not connecting correctly, a spur(or point) is allowed to grow.

 

[equus_peduus]

The problem is that Dr Lauridsen's work is not readily available to the veterinary community, best as I can tell. When was it published? In what journal? Was it peer reviewed? What was the study design? What were the materials and methods? Was it a prospective or retrospective study? How did he define malocclusion? Were all animals housed, treated, fed absolutely identically? How long did he follow each animal? Did it matter at what age an animal developed malocclusion? Were any animals excluded from study (e.g., due to head trauma) which may have skewed results? Was it an open or closed herd? Were they breeding for malocclusion for the duration of the study? If not, what were they breeding for, or was it random mating? Were any animals lost to followup? And BTW, what was Lauridsen's specialty? A geneticists? dentist? veterinarian? nutritionist? Who funded the study? These are just some of the questions off the top of my head... and I'm not even a very good journal reader (i.e., I don't typically come up with the *really* good questions that put holes in the study)

Just because someone has performed a study doesn't mean it's a good study (in design, execution, results or conclusions). Even GOOD studies have holes in them (and a really good paper should acknowledge that); the hope is to minimize those holes so that the study results are still valid. And the paper writer's conclusions aren't always great either; when reading a paper, you need to think about what they did, how they did it, what they got, and whether or not you agree with the conclusions that they drew - and if not, why not.

A study that only one person appears to have access to means jack ****. The whole point of publishing studies is to share knowledge (and to get one's scientific prestige up ) so that future studies can build on what's happened in the past. Papers are not meant to be inaccessible to the future generations. If Luke can post us a reference, then I would love it if someone who lives near a university (especially a veterinary school) could go raid the library and see if they can find it - or I'll try to remember to do so next time I go up to Davis - the library there has some really fascinating old stuff in it (veterinary journals from the late 1800s anyone?)

And anyway, even if it is old enough that the full text of the article is not online, there are several journal archiving databases that have abstracts from journals going back fifty years and more that this article should be findable. And I, at least, am unable to find it (though I admit that no longer being a student I don't have quite as wide access to the databases as I used to). So until we can find the actual text of the article you're defending so stringently, we are all in this together - no one has produced verifiable research. And when an author publishes a new paper, they're expected to perform a search of the literature and make reference to any relevent papers. Presumably Dr Crossley did so, and presumably he does have full access to the databses; occasionally older papers do get missed, which doesn't mean that the author of the current paper is lying or trying to belittle previous work; it just means they couldn't find it.

And BTW, a health certificate (at least for the purpose of travel) basically says that the vet certifies the animal appears to be free of infectious disease at the time of examination. It does not ask whether the animal has heart disease or liver disease or kidney disease or dental disease or anything else that's not contagious.

And btw, am I allowed to say how much it truly bugs me to see people abbreviate "malocclusion" as "malo" or even worse "mall" which doesn't even make sense?! Probably like how some people can't stand "prego" or "preggers" ... lol

 

[RMC]

If you examine the skulls of chins with mall. You will find they have spurs and all kinds of irregular wear patterns. look at the pics on P67 of "Basic Genetics and History of Mutation Chinchilla" You can clearly see the root growth into the eye socket and out of the lower Jaw bone ,as well as irregular wear on the teeth as well as "points on the teeth"
Once again where are all those who have posted in this thread and others that have claimed for years that genetic mall. can't or isn't likely to appear in older chins. They have been very quick to jump on the band wagon and challange anyone who claims different. But yet in a debate thread that they have posted to ,can't or won't defend their claims and have vanished into thin air. Are they going to continue to claim that mall isn't likely in older chins ,regardless of research that states it can, Without providing any RESEARCH that supports their own claims. I really don't think we need the heart ache and pain and suffering to happen again that happened a few years back when a breeder to a similiar stand. And didn't remove chins from breeding that developed teeth issues at a older age. Mal can and will happen in any herd , But responsibly breeders will remove these animals from breeding and do what is necessary to limit the number of affected chins .

 

[RMC]

Equus Peduus. Most of Dr. Lauridesens work is available to any one and every one . I am not a vet yet I can find it. Once again attack the messanger rather then the message.
Yep all my points are worthless and mean nothing because I use the abbreviation mall. That and misspell words and don't always use proper punctuation. I would much rather practice sound breeding practices that are supported by research and use incorrect abbreiviations and spelling. Then to practice poor breeding practices and use proper spelling. Don't know a single chin that has died a slow painfull death from mall. By my poor spelling. But I can tell you of numerious chins who have died a slow painfull death and suffered from mall and the heartache of many that comes along with it because a single breeder chose to accept the false claims made by many in this thread.
The world doesn't revolve around the web. It is amazing whjoe anything was accomplished and research was done with out the web. I am amazed that many still believe that if it isn't on the web. it must not exist.
and just because it is posted on the web it must be true.

 

[equus_peduus]

Equus Peduus. Most of Dr. Lauridesens work is available to any one and every one . I am not a vet yet I can find it. Once again attack the messanger rather then the message.

Then please provide us with a reference so that it is more easily findable. I do not currently live next door to a comprehensive health sciences library, or I'd go over there and do it myself. My personal library does not contain this information, and I highly doubt that my local city library does either. All I am asking for is some help in finding it. Running a search on the online database for "lauridson" yields a number of papers having to do with various fatty acids in cattle, pigs and chickens under a number of different Lauridsens (first initials include M, C and J) from 1966 to the present. Not one has anything to do with chinchillas, much less their teeth. Thus, I need a little more information to try to locate this paper that you keep citing. Wouldn't it be less work to give us the information than to argue that we should be able to find it on our own?

Yep all my points are worthless and mean nothing because I use the abbreviation mall.

When did I say that your ability to spell, or choice of abbreviations, invalidated what you said? I just said it bugs me. Personal pet peeve. It bugs me when it's you, and it would bug me if it were my professor in dentistry. It doesn't matter to me *who* uses the abbreviation; it bothers me, but it doesn't mean that I disregard what you say.

The world doesn't revolve around the web. It is amazing whjoe anything was accomplished and research was done with out the web. I am amazed that many still believe that if it isn't on the web. it must not exist.
and just because it is posted on the web it must be true.

I am aware that there is a whole world of information out there that is not available on the web. However, at current, the web is what I have available to me (at least, without a 1-2 hour drive and the need to dig through individual journals in the stacks), so that is what I used. In fact, I have very frequently utilized the paper library when doing reading for projects and for cases when a particular article I wanted to look at wasn't available on the web - I'd have a journal, a year, an author, a title of the paper, a page number, and sometimes an abstract gleaned from the internet or from the library catalogue, and then go digging through the stacks to find the print copy of the article. Sometimes I'd look for a paper that was referenced in another paper that wasn't even in the library catalogue, but since the library had the journal - I went hunting, and found it. Some older papers are very useful. Some are mostly useful to find out what people used to think so that you can figure out how the thinking has changed. Some are totally laughable. But they are all interesting and can be very valuable. So please don't tell me that I don't understand the value of real, in print, paper copies of journals, because I do. And actually would prefer to never have to read another journal online again, but I haven't got that luxury.

You think we're insulting you, but I'm trying not to while you're doing your best to insult me. Just give us a reference to the paper, and hopefully someone will be able to dig it up to verify what you're saying. After all, that's what you want, isn't it? For someone to believe what you're saying so they stop arguing with you?

 

[RDZCRanch]

Equus Peduus. Most of Dr. Lauridesens work is available to any one and every one . I am not a vet yet I can find it. Once again attack the messanger rather then the message.
Yep all my points are worthless and mean nothing because I use the abbreviation mall. That and misspell words and don't always use proper punctuation. I would much rather practice sound breeding practices that are supported by research and use incorrect abbreiviations and spelling. Then to practice poor breeding practices and use proper spelling. Don't know a single chin that has died a slow painfull death from mall. By my poor spelling. But I can tell you of numerious chins who have died a slow painfull death and suffered from mall and the heartache of many that comes along with it because a single breeder chose to accept the false claims made by many in this thread.
The world doesn't revolve around the web. It is amazing whjoe anything was accomplished and research was done with out the web. I am amazed that many still believe that if it isn't on the web. it must not exist.
and just because it is posted on the web it must be true.

I didn't read any attack or insult in her post at all. Just asking questions to further our knowledge. You always perceive anyone asking you about your information as a personal attack. This is why it is difficult to try and debate or discuss things with you, not your bad spelling, grammar, and punctuation. People repeatedly ask where your information is found and how and all you can say is not to attack you. NO ONE is attacking you, we are trying to further our education so that we can continue to improve our breeding practices. As a member of the chinchilla community you should be more than willing to share your "wealth" of information with us by telling us where you found your information or just answering the questions people put to you.

 

[Parkerspetchins]

I see no one here recommending or condoning anyone breeding a chinchilla that has maloccluded regardless of the age it happened. That's just stupid. The point being made was that the OP shouldn't be angry with the breeder, the breeder couldn't have known that the chin he/she sold would malocclude. I doubt any breeder who cares about his/her reputation in the chinchilla world would knowingly sell a chinchilla with malocclusion in its lines. The second point that I think was trying to be made was that it happened after 6 years, the breeder has nothing to be held accountable for, it's been too long. Maybe if an unfortunate occurrence of malocclusion popped up in 6 months or some specified amount of time something should be done about it, or not, I guess it depends on the breeder, but the point is the OP is indignant and many people were trying to say that yes, it's unfortunate, but nothing is to be done except alert whom needs to be alerted. I may be naive, but it would not be a wise business decision for anyone to knowingly sell a chinchilla with malocclusion in its lines. I think it's pretty simple and I bet research can be done for decades with thousands of chinchillas and the results will all come to the same conclusion, if a chinchilla exhibits signs of malocclusion, don't breed it.

 

[Claire D]

Dr. Crossleys claim that no research has been done that indicate that genetics is a factor in Mall. Is wrong., The Research has been done and was done on over 2500 animals . So to claim that their is no research indicateing it is not gentic is not accurate.
It has been done and has been published in more then one publication. So to base a assumption on the claim that no research has been done to indicate it is genetic is starting out with a flawed thesis.

Lauridsen's research does not seem to appear in veterinary resources - in which case, Crossley's statement is true based on the available information which he would have reviewed prior to starting his thesis. Searches would have been carried out for proper robust, valid research papers and would have included peer reviews and veterinary journals etc

I have yet to find Lauridsen's work in a publication other than the Basic Genetics & History of Mutation Chinchillas Book - I cannot find it in veterinary references. It is set out more like an article than a full research paper and does not appear to be robust in terms of content.

True malocclusion may well be genetic and recessive in origin but, as with the majority of chinchilla issues, it is not clearly demonstrated through robust, valid research.

Lauridsen's work still does not provide us with what we are seeking in this thread.

What I will say, in reference to this thread is that Lauridsen comments that most of the chinchillas with malocclusion were dead by the time they were 48-49 months old and only 1 chinchilla out of the 2500 (or so, numbers are not specific) developed malocclusion at 6 1/2 years - not statistically significant and does not support the assumption that all malocclusion is genetic.

 

[RMC]

If you look at post #54 in this thread. You will find where I found the info. this is now post #71 So provided the referance the first time it was asked for more then 15 posts ago. I also asked for any research that proves the research I quoted is inaccurate. Yet no one has provided a single source in over 15 posts. are you trying to imply that I am the only one on this board that has the book I referanced. Give me a break. If you don't have it it can be purchased from the MCBA website. It is very readily available.
I have heard the claim that mall. isn't likely to appear in older chins yet no one will provide me with a single bit of research to support that claim. I have provided not only the research but also pointed out that those who did research a few years ago involving chins with Mall. supported the research i posted. So the claim that I am not providing the research is a smoke screen . So why not just provide me with the research to support your claims. Or debate the validitity of the research I posted.

 

[equus_peduus]

If you look at post #54 in this thread. You will find where I found the info. this is now post #71 So provided the referance the first time it was asked for more then 15 posts ago.

You told us where a summary of the research could be found. I am looking for the original paper. And if it is not published in a scientific journal, it doesn't count as valid research anyway. It counts as anecdote. And as Claire has pointed out - there is very little valid, scientifically published, peer-reviewed information out there on chinchillas. Anyone can publish anything they want in a textbook (though this seems like it's not even a textbook, just a book with information in it). It doesn't have to have anything behind it other than the author's opinion, which as I'm sure you're aware, isn't going to be scientifically valid.

 

[Claire D]

If you look at post #54 in this thread. You will find where I found the info. this is now post #71 So provided the referance the first time it was asked for more then 15 posts ago. I also asked for any research that proves the research I quoted is inaccurate. Yet no one has provided a single source in over 15 posts. are you trying to imply that I am the only one on this board that has the book I referanced. Give me a break. If you don't have it it can be purchased from the MCBA website. It is very readily available.
I have heard the claim that mall. isn't likely to appear in older chins yet no one will provide me with a single bit of research to support that claim. I have provided not only the research but also pointed out that those who did research a few years ago involving chins with Mall. supported the research i posted. So the claim that I am not providing the research is a smoke screen . So why not just provide me with the research to support your claims. Or debate the validitity of the research I posted.

You clearly don't read anyone's posts properly .................

I have the book sitting beside me, Luke - it is not a piece of research published in a veterinary journal, nor a peer reviewed work. It is not robust, valid research - it would not stand up to proper research critique.


Crossley's work on the other hand has been published in numerous veterinary journals - the research is continuing and I await publication of any further results with eagerness.
Have you looked at the Crossley pages I linked or attempted to find and read his thesis?
Crossley DA (2001) Dental Disease In Chinchillas in the UK. Journal of Small Animal Practice. 42:1 12-19.

 

[RMC]

If you read the forward of the book sitting in front of of you it states that the book is a assemblance of prior articles. Many are already whining that they can't find the book yet they want me to post where to find the original publicated article.
Yep I must not read anyones posts properly. That or many are now looking for some place to hide or back peddling from a claim that mall at a older age CAN"T be genetic.
Of course the research I posted can't be valid. Because it contradicts the claims made by many. Yet you still have yet to provide a single drop of research that supports your claims.
Tell those that had chins die from mall. and then they research they did that discovered the parents had died at older ages from Mall. isn't valid. Tell them that the x-rays that showed teeth growing into the eye sockets and out of the lower jaws aren't valid.
Sounds like some of the same claims made by the breeder that produced the mall. chins and her supporters claimed at the time. How many more chins have to die how much more hearthache must people go through because people choose to ignore research done on Mall. and yet can't provide a single scrap of research to suppoert the claims they make?

 

[Parkerspetchins]

If all of the research points to the same conclusion that chins that show signs of malocclusion should not be bred, whether anyone knows for sure whether it is genetic or not, what is the point of the argument? Don't we all agree? They shouldn't be bred.

 

[RDZCRanch]

You really are not reading the posts thoroughly. Claire isn't claiming that old age thing that you keep saying. She is saying that Crossly's work indicates Mal is not entirely genetic or it is possible that it could be environmental rather than genetic.

i haven't claimed malocclusion in older chins isn't hereditary. I don't believe it is entirely genetically based or environmental. I believe both contribute or it can be one or the other. I haven't seen any research that solidly proves it one way or the other and as such no one can make the statement that it is one or the other. It's pure speculation at this point based on one person's research from Luke's standpoint and heresay from other people's standpoints. I don't think this debate will go anywhere when there isn't enough solid evidence and research done to prove one or the other.

ETA: Agreed...no one wants to breed for malocclusion. I don't...I even took an entire line out of breeding because the sire maloccluded at 3 years old. No one likes malocclusion, no one likes seeing their animals suffer.

 

[RMC]

The point of this debate is wether it is acceptable to continue to breed the offspring from chins with mall. Many have made the excuse that any chin with teeth issues at an older age can't be genetic, So it is totally acceptable to keep not only the offspring in breeding but full siblings and parents as well. This attitude as well as poor breeding choices has caused much hearthache and loss when many of the chins from this breeder ended up with Mal. Much of the hearthache and pain and suffering could have been avoided if this breeder would have removed the lines from breeding when the issue was first descovered , rather then to take the position that many have made over the years, That it is ok to keep such lines in breeding because it isn't a genetic issue.

 

[Claire D]

The point of this debate is wether it is acceptable to continue to breed the offspring from chins with mall. Many have made the excuse that any chin with teeth issues at an older age can't be genetic, So it is totally acceptable to keep not only the offspring in breeding but full siblings and parents as well. This attitude as well as poor breeding choices has caused much hearthache and loss when many of the chins from this breeder ended up with Mal. Much of the hearthache and pain and suffering could have been avoided if this breeder would have removed the lines from breeding when the issue was first descovered , rather then to take the position that many have made over the years, That it is ok to keep such lines in breeding because it isn't a genetic issue.

WTF?? I think you're reading a different thread to the rest of us .......... seems that's your modus operandi not to read things properly and to jump to completely erroneous conclusions. :wacko:

That's NOT what is being said in this thread at all! People have continued to assert that the OP cannot blame the breeder for a chin that maloccludes at 6 years old because it is not necessarily genetic. Other factors can be involved (and since you love the Lauridsen work - he corroborates that in the first paragraph). There has been NO valid, robust research presented yet that supports the belief that all malocclusion at older age is genetic - Lauridsen's work showed 1 chin developing malocclusion at 6 1/2 years - he does not link this to genetics nor to other factors - not statistically significant.