Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Dolly v. d. Riedleite
    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 - Dolly v. d. Riedleite
    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 Urban v. Buchheim and Dam Ulla v. d. Riedleite
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 1.855%    very 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)62
    Ancestor Loss0
    Ancestor Loss in %100.00 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Ulla v. d. Riedleite50.00011
    Urban v. Buchheim50.00011
    Janka v. d. Riedleite25.00011
    Locke v. Buchheim25.00011
    Harras v. Forst Ostenwalde25.00011
    Faust v. d. Mainauen25.00011
    Hera v. Wasserplatz12.50011
    Egon v. Buchheim12.50011
    Horneth v. Buchheim12.50011
    Hanno v. Emsdeich12.50011
    Foko v. Erlengrund12.50011
    Bonie v. Keltenquell12.50011
    Samson v. Linduri12.50011
    Bara v.d. Mainauen12.50011
    Bonie v. Birkengehege6.25011
    Caesar v. Holdergrund6.25011
    Achill v.d. Krakequelle6.25011
    Hesta v. Linduri6.25011
    Mona v. Linduri6.25011
    Centa v. Kirschenberg6.25011
    Rivkah v. Buchheim6.25011
    Karlo v. Linebrok6.25011
    Greif v. Reitbach6.25011
    Debby v. Emsdeich6.25011
    Fabo v. Siegbogen6.25011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga6.25011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land6.25011
    Westfalen's Chef6.25011
    Laura v. Poppenforst6.25011
    Unken v. Buchheim6.25011
    Jerome De Wynen3.12011
    Artus v. Elztal3.12011
    Rika v. Linduri3.12011
    Bonny v. Erdinger Moos3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Lord v. Jurawald3.12011
    Gora v. Linebrok3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Denver v. d. Schmiede3.12011
    Perro Nelha3.12011
    Basko v. Bucheneck3.12011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund3.12011
    Kira v. Tillplatz3.12011
    Arko v. Deutschen Orden3.12011
    Alf v. Siegbogen3.12011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Farah v. Hilkefeld3.12011
    Asmus v. d. Segeberger Heide3.12011
    Arras v. Eschbach3.12011
    Aika v. Buchwald3.12011
    Lilli v. Buchheim3.12011
    Heido v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Osca Aus Grupilinga3.12011
    Birka v. Hasenkamp3.12011
    Bautz v. d. Leda3.12011
    Nixe v. Buchheim3.12011
    Quell v. Huntetal3.12011
    Perle v. Buchheim3.12011
    Natja v. d. Holzheide3.12011
    Laika v. Linduri3.12011
    Akira v. Birkengehege3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s