Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Pollux v. d. Riede
    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 - Pollux v. d. Riede
    COI 5 gen: 0.391%    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 Xaro v. d. Hafkesdell and Dam Nike v. d. Riede
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.977%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 1.172%    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)60
    Ancestor Loss2
    Ancestor Loss in %96.77 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Nike v. d. Riede50.00011
    Xaro v. d. Hafkesdell50.00011
    Vranzi v. d. Hafkesdell25.00011
    Elvis v. Horum25.00011
    Grace v. Frochtmannshof25.00011
    Gero v. Alt-Hümmling25.00011
    Caj v. Alt-Hümmling12.50011
    Wilco v. Huntetal12.50011
    Suko v. d. Hafkesdell12.50011
    Bea v. Calveslage12.50011
    Eika v. Frochtmannshof12.50011
    Falko v. Forst Ostenwalde12.50011
    Cita v. Hollbäck12.50011
    Greif v. Reitbach12.50011
    Aron v. Averbeck9.370211
    Hanno v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Karlo v. Linebrok6.25011
    Arras v. Eschbach6.25011
    Quendy v. Huntetal6.25011
    Samson v. Linduri6.25011
    Aischa v. Heek6.25011
    Cora v. Bonrechtern6.25011
    Aska v. Forstkamp6.25011
    Westfalen's Artus6.25011
    Quinta v. Fasanenhof6.25011
    Arras v. d. Segeberger Heide6.25011
    Rika v. Linduri6.25011
    Hera v. Wasserplatz6.25011
    Coach v. Ziegelweiher6.25011
    Gera v. d. Hafkesdell6.25011
    Bautz v. d. Leda6.24022
    Bobby v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Kira v. Tillplatz3.12011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund3.12011
    Maika v. Wiken3.12011
    Juwel v. Perverberg3.12011
    Laura v. Poppenforst3.12011
    Amor v. Butendieks3.12011
    Olga v. d. Drachheide3.12011
    Dargo v. d. Hafkesdell3.12011
    Gina v. Roonstein3.12011
    Asta v. Averbeck3.12011
    Henk v. Huntetal3.12011
    Gera v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Cliff v. Fränkischen Bauern3.12011
    Gora v. Linebrok3.12011
    Cora v. d. Hafkesdell3.12011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga3.12011
    Arras v. Eikenloh3.12011
    Westfalen's Birka3.12011
    Artos v. d. Schirmkiefer3.12011
    Hesta v. Linduri3.12011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land3.12011
    Gitta v. d. Wallburg3.12011
    Meika v. Wasserplatz3.12011
    Burga v. d. Heustätte3.12011
    Ambra v. Struthof3.12011
    Perro Nelha3.12011
    Igor v. Linebrok3.12011
    Benno v. Pfarrerwald3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s