Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Rüdemann's Bille
    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 - Rüdemann's Bille
    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 Io v. Buchheim and Dam Preußen's Hesta
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 1.172%    very very low    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 2.344%    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)61
    Ancestor Loss1
    Ancestor Loss in %98.39 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Io v. Buchheim50.00011
    Preußen's Hesta50.00011
    Greif v. Reitbach25.00011
    Leonie v. Alten Hafen25.00011
    Dark v. d. Himmerner Heide25.00011
    Osy v. Wiken25.00011
    Aaron v. Fliethbachtal12.50011
    Fenja v. Rethwischer Moor12.50011
    Don v. Forst Ostenwalde12.50011
    Anja v. Veybach12.50011
    Rika v. Linduri12.50011
    Arras v. Eschbach12.50011
    Linda v. Fasanenhof12.50011
    Basko v. Tannengarten12.50011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land9.370211
    Ilse v. Fasanenhof6.25011
    Bonny v. Brückhof6.25011
    Bonny v. Rethwischer Moor6.25011
    Arras v. Eikenloh6.25011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga6.25011
    Cliff v. Fränkischen Bauern6.25011
    Elko v. Huntetal6.25011
    Milla v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund6.25011
    Hera v. Wasserplatz6.25011
    Bautz v. d. Leda6.25011
    Lord v. Hofried6.25011
    Eddy v. d. Pfauheck6.25011
    Jule v. Linduri6.25011
    Gina v. Roonstein6.25011
    Basko v. Bucheneck3.12011
    Ilka v. Elbufer3.12011
    Cäsar v. Elsternkamp3.12011
    Afra v. Grevensberg3.12011
    Bodo v. Steyerberg3.12011
    Hesta v. Linduri3.12011
    Lucie Nelha3.12011
    Groll Holsatia3.12011
    Esko v. Huntetal3.12011
    Groll v. Huntetal3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Anett v. Fasanenhof3.12011
    Aika v. d. Pfauheck3.12011
    Corda v. Schatzrain3.12011
    Graf v. Silbersee3.12011
    Aika v. Buchwald3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Kummel3.12011
    Lukas v. Linduri3.12011
    Gitta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Dax v. d. Aue3.12011
    Anka v. Schönrain3.12011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Heidehexe v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Freya v. Roonstein3.12011
    Laika v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Cora v. Schäferbusch3.12011
    Derry v. Erlesberg3.12011
    Jakob v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Pascha v. Elbufer3.12011
    Laura v. Poppenforst3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s