Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Daica v. Steinbachthal
    This page shows the inbreeding calculations for the dog you selected or the "Test Mating" you have entered. The calculations on this page are accurate to the point that they can only be made based upon the information in the database. For more detailed calculations please make sure that as many ancestors as possible are entered to the database.

    COI Calculation - Daica v. Steinbachthal
    COI 5 gen: 0.781%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Please do the new calculation only if you have entered new ancestors of this dog!


    COI Calculation - Sire Etzel v. Buchheim and Dam Blacky v. Steinbachthal
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 1.562%    very very low    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.195%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Ancestor-Loss coefficient (ALC)
    This method doesn't replace the calculation of the COI but also gives important information for the breeder. Ancestor-Loss is given when the same ancestor appears more than once in the pedigree of the dog. A 5-generations-pedigree shows 62 possible ancestors. If one of this 62 possible ancestors appears twice, the dog in question has indeed only 61 different ancestors. If 3 ancestors appear twice, this dog has indeed only 59 different ancestors. The ALC is calculated out of the nr. of the ancestors and the total nr. of possible ancestors.

    # of dogs
    Ancestors in 5 Generations (max. 62)59
    Ancestor Loss3
    Ancestor Loss in %95.16 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Blacky v. Steinbachthal50.00011
    Etzel v. Buchheim50.00011
    Anka v. Rothsee25.00011
    Jesko v. Heek25.00011
    Greif v. Reitbach25.00011
    Katteneck's Daisy25.00011
    Brack v. Kampstüh12.50011
    Cora v. Heek12.50011
    Elch v. Rodekopp12.50011
    Cora v. Deutschen Orden12.50011
    Aenne v. Stockey12.50011
    Arras v. Eschbach12.50011
    Rika v. Linduri12.50011
    Hardy v. Paradies12.50011
    Bautz v. d. Leda12.490312
    Gina v. Roonstein6.25011
    Arras v. Eikenloh6.25011
    Orpheus v. Innviertel DK6.25011
    Evita v. Stockey6.25011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund6.25011
    Dele v. Paradies6.25011
    Igor v. Perverberg6.25011
    Clitt v. Westermoor DK6.25011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land6.25011
    Aika v. Rodekopp6.25011
    Alexa v. Deutchen Orden6.25011
    Laika v. Kampstüh6.25011
    Samson v. Linduri6.25011
    Anka v. Heek6.25011
    Isko v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Cäsar v. Elsternkamp6.24022
    Graf v. Silbersee3.12011
    Chica v. d. Hafkesdell3.12011
    Asco Westerode3.12011
    Unda v. Bärenhorst3.12011
    Gitta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Hesta v. Linduri3.12011
    Annett v. Paradies3.12011
    Lucie Nelha3.12011
    Cora v. Schäferbusch3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Grille v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Igor v. Linebrok3.12011
    Aika v. Buchwald3.12011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga3.12011
    Freya v. Roonstein3.12011
    Asta v. Averbeck3.12011
    Jaspa v. Innviertel DK3.12011
    Derry v. Erlesberg3.12011
    Tanja De Wynen3.12011
    Lukas v. Linduri3.12011
    Farah v. Innviertel DK3.12011
    Xaver v. d. Binnenelbe3.12011
    Beste v. Hegholz3.12011
    Gitta v. Buchheim3.12011
    Grando v. d. Schladebacher Alm3.12011
    Aury v. Waidbosch3.12011
    Lord v. Jurawald3.12011
    Yenni v. Westermoor3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s