Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Daria v. Köhlerwald
    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 - Daria v. Köhlerwald
    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 Eddi v. Reitbach and Dam Andra v. Köhlerwald
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.586%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    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)62
    Ancestor Loss0
    Ancestor Loss in %100.00 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Eddi v. Reitbach50.00011
    Andra v. Köhlerwald50.00011
    Rika v. Linduri25.00011
    Anouk v. Eulenspiegel25.00011
    Nöck v. Wiken25.00011
    Basko v. Forst Ostenwalde25.00011
    Isolde v. Alten Hafen12.50011
    Bautz v. d. Leda12.50011
    Arko v. Deutschen Orden12.50011
    Certa v. Hülsebusch12.50011
    Fenja v. Rethwischer Moor12.50011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund12.50011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga12.50011
    Lukas v. Linduri12.50011
    Bonny v. Rethwischer Moor6.25011
    Gitta v. Buchheim6.25011
    Olly v. Bärenhorst6.25011
    Gitta v. Lossetal6.25011
    Arco v. Backemeer6.25011
    Lord v. Jurawald6.25011
    Jerome De Wynen6.25011
    Fee v. Alten Hafen6.25011
    Lord v. Hofried6.25011
    Cora v. Schäferbusch6.25011
    Derry v. Erlesberg6.25011
    Graf v. Silbersee6.25011
    Hesta v. Linduri6.25011
    Basko v. Bucheneck6.25011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek6.25011
    Nixe v. d. Holzheide6.25011
    Dolly v. Lossetal3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Asja v. Alten Hafen3.12011
    Dax Nelha3.12011
    Boss v. Silbersee3.12011
    Asta v. Bartelskamp3.12011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Asra v. Eulenhof3.12011
    Anke v. Keenmoor3.12011
    Afra v. Grevensberg3.12011
    Gustel v. d. Kiefhornsmühle3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Distel v. Buchheim3.12011
    Flocke v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Faro v. d. Falkenweiden3.12011
    Dandy v. Roonstein3.12011
    Axel v. d. Lechmündung3.12011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst3.12011
    Alf v. Wachtelrangen3.12011
    Gwenda v. Jurawald3.12011
    Groll Holsatia3.12011
    Chico v. Borgkamp3.12011
    Ilka v. Elbufer3.12011
    Fee v. d. Kiefhornsmühle3.12011
    Nadja De Wynen3.12011
    Locke Frankundfrei3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Kummel3.12011
    Yalk De Wynen3.12011
    Hella v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Niklas De Wynen3.12011
    Hakon v. Forstgarten3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s