Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Gundel v. Brückhof
    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 - Gundel v. Brückhof
    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 Jockel v. Schlemminer Forst and Dam Diana v. Brückhof
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.781%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 2.051%    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
    Jockel v. Schlemminer Forst50.00011
    Diana v. Brückhof50.00011
    Ando v. Birkengehege25.00011
    Galli Il v. Schlemminer Forst25.00011
    Bianka v. Brückhof25.00011
    Alex v. Murner See25.00011
    Esko v. Huntetal12.50011
    Elkan v. Linebrok12.50011
    Foks v. Langer-Rau12.50011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga12.50011
    Grandl De Wynen12.50011
    Corda v. Schatzrain12.50011
    Laika v. Linduri12.50011
    Anjuscha v. Schlemminer Forst12.50011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp9.370211
    Dean v. d. Schmiede6.25011
    Hella v. Nörderkamp6.25011
    Arko v. d. Seewiese6.25011
    Elch v. Jägerkreuz6.25011
    Hesta v. Linduri6.25011
    Laika v. d. Waterkant6.25011
    Bautz v. d. Leda6.25011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land6.25011
    Olly v. Bärenhorst6.25011
    Zuska v. Schlemminer Forst6.25011
    Alka v. Erlesberg6.25011
    Xanthippe De Wynen6.25011
    Basko v. Bucheneck6.25011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek6.25011
    Dolly v. Langer-Rau6.25011
    Graf v. Silbersee3.12011
    Orion De Wynen3.12011
    Iska v. Werneck3.12011
    Cora v. Karwald3.12011
    Flott Frankundfrei3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Asra v. Eulenhof3.12011
    Pascal De Wynen3.12011
    Benno v. Pfarrerwald3.12011
    Anja v. Salinenblick3.12011
    Gitta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Aika v. Buchwald3.12011
    Cora v. Linebrok3.12011
    Bessy v. d. Schmiede3.12011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011
    Fee v. d. Kiefhornsmühle3.12011
    Hecht v. d. Königseiche3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Asta v. Bartelskamp3.12011
    Hella v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Chico v. Borgkamp3.12011
    Groll v. Huntetal3.12011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen3.12011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Mando De Wynen3.12011
    Assel v. Jürgenstorf3.12011
    Bob v. d. Schlei3.12011
    Alf v. Wachtelrangen3.12011
    Aury v. Waidbosch3.12011
    Xorro De Wynen3.12011
    Ines v. d. Waterkant3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s