Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Meika v. Wasserplatz
    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 - Meika v. Wasserplatz
    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 Hajo Aus Grupilinga and Dam Dixie v. Wasserplatz
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    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)59
    Ancestor Loss3
    Ancestor Loss in %95.16 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga50.00011
    Dixie v. Wasserplatz50.00011
    Basko v. Bucheneck25.00011
    Elko v. Huntetal25.00011
    Tinka v. d. Bilsbek25.00011
    Laura v. Poppenforst25.00011
    Alf v. Wachtelrangen12.50011
    Asra v. Eulenhof12.50011
    Laika v. d. Waterkant12.50011
    Natja v. d. Holzheide12.50011
    Fee v. d. Kiefhornsmühle12.50011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp12.50011
    Jerome De Wynen12.50011
    Chico v. Borgkamp12.50011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst6.25011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen6.25011
    Maestro De Wynen6.25011
    Yalk De Wynen6.25011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg6.25011
    Nadja De Wynen6.25011
    Anka v. Jagenberg6.25011
    Ines v. d. Waterkant6.25011
    Xari v. Wolfsgrund6.25011
    Niklas De Wynen6.25011
    Pitt v. d. Bärenburg6.25011
    Bob v. d. Schlei6.25011
    Elvi v. Lossetal6.25011
    Anka v. Kappelbuck6.25011
    Edda v. Haselbusch6.25011
    Eyko v. Arlsberg6.25011
    Jenny De Wynen6.24022
    Ajax v. Klockhof6.24022
    Irrwisch De Wynen6.24022
    Aslak v. Waldesgrün3.12011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp3.12011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Drossel v. Hofried3.12011
    Rachel De Wynen3.12011
    Wido v. Schwege3.12011
    Anke v. Birkenhof3.12011
    Rasso v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Unda v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Hesto v. Werlacke3.12011
    Lutz v. Huywald3.12011
    Falko v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Asta v. Rauhen Ebrach Tal3.12011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde3.12011
    Erle v. Fichtenkopf3.12011
    Flocke v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Bill v. Bessingslust3.12011
    Olli v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011
    Bessi v. Haselbusch3.12011
    Kascha v. d. Bärenburg3.12011
    Sonja v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Drauf v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Candra v. Waldesgryn3.12011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Cilly v. Waterkant3.12011
    Cäsar v. d. Zirkelquelle3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s