Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Thanehøjs Anna
    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 - Thanehøjs Anna
    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 Pico v. d. Horstbüschen and Dam Asta v. Kumpfmühl
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 1.367%    very very low    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.586%    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)61
    Ancestor Loss1
    Ancestor Loss in %98.39 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Asta v. Kumpfmühl50.00011
    Pico v. d. Horstbüschen50.00011
    Neele v.d. Horstbüschen25.00011
    Arco v. Hautzerfeld25.00011
    Merlin v. d. Haagerleiten25.00011
    Agi v. Minatal25.00011
    Anton v. Steinbachtal12.50011
    Boss v. Labertal12.50011
    Yra v. Minatal12.50011
    Kim v. d. Horstbüschen12.50011
    Lucky v. Heesenhof12.50011
    Karlo v. d. Haagerleiten12.50011
    Dina v. Ziegelweiher12.50011
    Lexa v. d. Haagerleiten12.50011
    Westfalen's Cuno6.25011
    Ines v. d. Haagerleiten6.25011
    Dean v. d. Horstbüschen6.25011
    Aikfried v. Murner See6.25011
    Hanno v. Emsdeich6.25011
    Drago v. Rodekopp6.25011
    Clara v. d. Wendlinger Seerose6.25011
    Tina v. Minatal6.25011
    Anka v. Rothsee6.25011
    Centa v. Ohetal6.25011
    Emmy v. d. Horstbüschen6.25011
    Sinus Frankundfrei6.25011
    Westfalen's Birka6.25011
    Hanko v. Wasserplatz6.25011
    Cora v. Mittelrhein6.25011
    Uhl v. Poppenforst6.25011
    Kira v. Tillplatz6.24022
    Grandl De Wynen3.12011
    Kastor v. Wasserplatz3.12011
    Aika v. Rodekopp3.12011
    Rena v. Elbufer3.12011
    Moni v. Tillplatz3.12011
    Benno v. Pfarrerwald3.12011
    Greif v. Reitbach3.12011
    Benno v. Brückhof3.12011
    Arras v. d. Segeberger Heide3.12011
    Quell v. Huntetal3.12011
    Foks v. Langer-Rau3.12011
    Debby v. Emsdeich3.12011
    Bea v. d.Manningaburg3.12011
    Charly v. Kraxberg3.12011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land3.12011
    Ivo v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Nora v. Minatal3.12011
    Bianka v. d. Wendlinger Seerose3.12011
    Eddy v. d. Pfauheck3.12011
    Gauner v. Stockey3.12011
    Laura v. Poppenforst3.12011
    Elch v. Rodekopp3.12011
    Birke v. Stammberg3.12011
    Aco v. d. Wendlinger Seerose3.12011
    Osca Aus Grupilinga3.12011
    Cora v. Deutschen Orden3.12011
    Bella v. Lamprechtshausner Langhaar3.12011
    Greif v. Zellergarten3.12011
    Hedda v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Riecke Frankundfrei3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s