Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Käthe v. Eulenspiegel
    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 - Käthe v. Eulenspiegel
    COI 5 gen: 0.977%    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 D'Emil v. Eulenspiegel and Dam Maite v. d. Riede
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 1.172%    very very low    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)60
    Ancestor Loss2
    Ancestor Loss in %96.77 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    D'Emil v. Eulenspiegel50.00011
    Maite v. d. Riede50.00011
    Osca Aus Grupilinga25.00011
    Kondy v. d. Horstbüschen25.00011
    Grace v. Frochtmannshof25.00011
    Isolde v. Alten Hafen25.00011
    Arco v. Backemeer15.620211
    Fee v. Alten Hafen12.50011
    Dean v. d. Horstbüschen12.50011
    Eika v. Frochtmannshof12.50011
    Emmy v. d. Horstbüschen12.50011
    Solojäger's Laura12.50011
    Greif v. Reitbach12.50011
    Dax v. Forst Ostenwalde12.50011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga6.25011
    Hera v. Wasserplatz6.25011
    Arras v. Eschbach6.25011
    Moni v. Tillplatz6.25011
    Aron v. Averbeck6.25011
    Bea v. d.Manningaburg6.25011
    Solojäger's Harras6.25011
    Eddy v. d. Pfauheck6.25011
    Quell v. Huntetal6.25011
    Hakon v. Forstgarten6.25011
    Quinta v. Fasanenhof6.25011
    Asja v. Alten Hafen6.25011
    Cim v. Wuddelhoff6.25011
    Dandy v. Roonstein6.25011
    Anke v. Keenmoor6.25011
    Rika v. Linduri6.25011
    Bautz v. d. Leda6.24022
    Cent v. Hasselbach3.12011
    Solojäger's Distel3.12011
    Andra v. Wuddelhoff3.12011
    Anka v. Birkenhaus3.12011
    Bodo v. Steyerberg3.12011
    Halla v. Linduri3.12011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Aika v. d. Pfauheck3.12011
    Chico v. Borgkamp3.12011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund3.12011
    Mirco v. Linduri3.12011
    Juwel v. Perverberg3.12011
    Vella v. Fährhaus3.12011
    Henk v. Huntetal3.12011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Maika v. Wiken3.12011
    Gina v. Roonstein3.12011
    Laura v. Poppenforst3.12011
    Eiko v. Weithof3.12011
    Basko v. Bucheneck3.12011
    Nimrod's Birko3.12011
    Cliff v. Fränkischen Bauern3.12011
    Arras v. Eikenloh3.12011
    Bine v. Sünnekenbusch3.12011
    Gitta v. d. Wallburg3.12011
    Dina v. Forstgarten3.12011
    Ira v. Tillplatz3.12011
    Burga v. d. Heustätte3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s