Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Camilla v. d. Reutereiche
    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 - Camilla v. d. Reutereiche
    COI 5 gen: 0.000%    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 Heinz v. Rodekopp and Dam Bessy v.d. Reutereiche
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    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)77
    Ancestor Loss-15
    Ancestor Loss in %124.19 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Heinz v. Rodekopp50.00011
    Bessy v.d. Reutereiche50.00011
    Rachel De Wynen25.00011
    Egon v. Buchheim25.00011
    Artus v. d. Slawenschanze25.00011
    Elsbeth v. Rodekopp25.00011
    Andra v.d. Reutereiche25.00011
    Hektor v. Emsdeich25.00011
    Condor v. d. Jägerhalle12.50011
    Cai Holsatia12.50011
    Aika v. Rodekopp12.50011
    Glenda v. Nordpark12.50011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land12.50011
    Ira v. Stockey12.50011
    Samson v. Linduri12.50011
    Greif v. Reitbach12.50011
    Xandra v. Lönsstein12.50011
    Debby v. Emsdeich12.50011
    Biene v. Nordpark6.25011
    Farah v. Hilkefeld6.25011
    Herman v. Schatzrain6.25011
    Tanja De Wynen6.25011
    Mary v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Aury v. Waidbosch6.25011
    Arras v. Eschbach6.25011
    Dolf v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Asko v. Nordpark6.25011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga6.25011
    Rika v. Linduri6.25011
    Hanko v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Hesta v. Linduri6.25011
    Quell v. Huntetal6.25011
    Dralle v. Waldesgryn6.25011
    Aika v. Buchwald6.25011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide6.25011
    Jette v. d. Bilsbek6.25011
    Gusti v. Stockey6.25011
    Cox v. Lindenbauer6.25011
    Aris Soprec6.24022
    Alpha v. Waldfrieden3.12011
    Cara Frankundfrei3.12011
    Henk v. Huntetal3.12011
    Dolly Nelha3.12011
    Drauf v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Vulkan De Wynen3.12011
    Jolly De Wynen3.12011
    Evita v. Stockey3.12011
    Arras v. Eikenloh3.12011
    Blanka v. Holundereck3.12011
    Dina v. Schatzrain3.12011
    Baron v. Rehsprung3.12011
    Basko v. Bucheneck3.12011
    Nimrods Enno3.12011
    Cilli v. Preussenwald3.12011
    Immo v. d. Binnenelbe3.12011
    Graf v. Silbersee3.12011
    Ondra v. Lossetal3.12011
    Alfa v. d. Mollwiese3.12011
    Janko v. Waldsteinberg3.12011
    Okko Fortuna3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Artus v. Elztal3.12011
    Fina v. Kuhlenbruch3.12011
    Polo v. Feuersang3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Esko v. Mühlenberg3.12011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund3.12011
    Alex v. Bannwald3.12011
    Alf v. d. Strohee3.12011
    Dukka v. Spitzberg3.12011
    Eike v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Cora v. Holmesborn3.12011
    Bautz v. d. Leda3.12011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Maika v. Wiken3.12011
    Gina v. Roonstein3.12011
    Certa v. d. Frankenburg3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s