Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Otti v. Lönsstein
    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 - Otti v. Lönsstein
    COI 5 gen: 1.562%    very very low    Calculate COI again

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


    COI Calculation - Sire Don v. Forst Ostenwalde and Dam Heidehexe v. Lönsstein
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.977%    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)59
    Ancestor Loss3
    Ancestor Loss in %95.16 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Heidehexe v. Lönsstein50.00011
    Don v. Forst Ostenwalde50.00011
    Bautz v. d. Leda25.00011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga25.00011
    Hera v. Wasserplatz25.00011
    Gera v. Lönsstein25.00011
    Graf v. Silbersee15.620211
    Laura v. Poppenforst12.50011
    Bruna v. Lönsstein12.50011
    Elch v. Hanauer Land12.50011
    Basko v. Bucheneck12.50011
    Bobby v. d. Hasenheide12.50011
    Gitta v. Lossetal12.50011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek12.50011
    Cliff v. Linduri9.370211
    Olga v. Bärenhorst9.370211
    Uhl v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Alf v. Wachtelrangen6.25011
    Flocke v. d. Tränke6.25011
    Chico v. Borgkamp6.25011
    Fee v. d. Kiefhornsmühle6.25011
    Natja v. d. Holzheide6.25011
    Hektor v. d. Lindenhöhe6.25011
    Cita v. Winterberg6.25011
    Jerome De Wynen6.25011
    Dolly v. Lossetal6.25011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide6.25011
    Asra v. Eulenhof6.25011
    Boss v. Silbersee6.25011
    Aika v. Buchwald6.25011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand3.12011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst3.12011
    Anka v. Kappelbuck3.12011
    Cent Graf v. Amelsbüren3.12011
    Xari v. Wolfsgrund3.12011
    Maestro De Wynen3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Pitt v. d. Bärenburg3.12011
    Cora v. Holmesborn3.12011
    Citta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Grandel v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Nadja De Wynen3.12011
    Bill v. Bessingslust3.12011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Elvi v. Lossetal3.12011
    Niklas De Wynen3.12011
    Edda v. Haselbusch3.12011
    Eyko v. Arlsberg3.12011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel3.12011
    Yalk De Wynen3.12011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Anka v. Jagenberg3.12011
    Britta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Cita v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Ute v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Esko Vun'N Wischhoff3.12011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Asta v. Bartelskamp3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s