Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Emil v. Odisheim
    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 - Emil v. Odisheim
    COI 5 gen: 1.758%    very very low    Calculate COI again

    Please do the new calculation only if you have entered new ancestors of this dog!


    COI Calculation - Sire Juwel v. Perverberg and Dam Carlotta v. Odisheim
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.977%    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)58
    Ancestor Loss4
    Ancestor Loss in %93.55 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Carlotta v. Odisheim50.00011
    Juwel v. Perverberg50.00011
    Carlo v. Eulenhof25.00011
    Jako v. Fasanenhof25.00011
    Grille v. Lönsstein25.00011
    Tessi v. Odisheim25.00011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp15.620211
    Ilse v. Fasanenhof12.50011
    Clerens v. Riedhauser Wald12.50011
    Anka v. Kappelbuck12.50011
    Bobby v. d. Hasenheide12.50011
    Onko v. Tecklenburg12.50011
    Bruna v. Lönsstein12.50011
    Erda v. Ruthenstrom12.50011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen9.370211
    Esko Vun'N Wischhoff9.370211
    Hektor v. d. Lindenhöhe6.25011
    Cäsar v. d. Zirkelquelle6.25011
    Amsel v. Fredenhof6.25011
    Drossel v. Hofried6.25011
    Olga v. Bärenhorst6.25011
    Cita v. Winterberg6.25011
    Lukas De Wynen6.25011
    Cliff v. Linduri6.25011
    Biene v. Werhholz6.25011
    Anett v. Fasanenhof6.25011
    Graf v. Silbersee6.25011
    Dax v. d. Aue6.25011
    Alin v. Ruthenstrom6.25011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg6.25011
    Birko v. Holsatia6.24022
    Gero v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Arrak v. Hagenpolder3.12011
    Xaver v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Edu v. Forstgarten3.12011
    Boss v. Silbersee3.12011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde3.12011
    Bella v. d. Aue3.12011
    Dolly v. Lossetal3.12011
    Ajax v. Klockhof3.12011
    Bill v. Bessingslust3.12011
    Ute v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Boro v. Silbersee3.12011
    Alic v. Basbek3.12011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Amsel v. Rothäuser Bruch3.12011
    Janka v. Tecklenburg3.12011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Biene v. Ringofen3.12011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp3.12011
    Erle v. Steinroden3.12011
    Asta v. Bartelskamp3.12011
    Grandel v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Hazel De Wynen3.12011
    Hella v. d. Moorbrücke3.12011
    Asta v. Hofried3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Olli v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s