Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Elch v. Rodekopp
    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 - Elch v. Rodekopp
    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 Elch v. Hanauer Land and Dam Aika v. Rodekopp
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.781%    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)61
    Ancestor Loss1
    Ancestor Loss in %98.39 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Elch v. Hanauer Land50.00011
    Aika v. Rodekopp50.00011
    Aury v. Waidbosch25.00011
    Bodo v. d. Hasenheide25.00011
    Tanja De Wynen25.00011
    Aika v. Buchwald25.00011
    Cora v. Holmesborn12.50011
    Vulkan De Wynen12.50011
    Graf v. Silbersee12.50011
    Ondra v. Lossetal12.50011
    Cliff v. Linduri12.50011
    Olga v. Bärenhorst12.50011
    Esko v. Mühlenberg12.50011
    Jolly De Wynen12.50011
    Utz v. Lönsstein9.370211
    Asta v. Bartelskamp6.25011
    Bosco v. Rotenberg6.25011
    Itta De Wynen6.25011
    Maestro De Wynen6.25011
    Eike v. Lossetal6.25011
    Nadja De Wynen6.25011
    Dolly v. Lossetal6.25011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel6.25011
    Fanni v. Osterfeld6.25011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp6.25011
    Yalk De Wynen6.25011
    Catja v. Niddatal6.25011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant6.25011
    Hasso v. d. Holzheide6.25011
    Boss v. Silbersee6.25011
    Janka v. Holmesborn3.12011
    Timm v. d. Holzheide3.12011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Britta v. Hasselbach3.12011
    Xandra v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Evi v. Neuenhof3.12011
    Britta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Rachel De Wynen3.12011
    Citta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Esko v. Steinroden3.12011
    Astor v. d. Weide3.12011
    Gero v. Wiken3.12011
    Xandra v. Mühlenberg3.12011
    Falko v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Britta v. Bärenhorst3.12011
    Irrwisch De Wynen3.12011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen3.12011
    Flocke v. d. Tränke3.12011
    Esko Vun'N Wischhoff3.12011
    Jenny De Wynen3.12011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Ines v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst3.12011
    Hesto v. Werlacke3.12011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand3.12011
    Asta v. Rauhen Ebrach Tal3.12011
    Cent Graf v. Amelsbüren3.12011
    Boss Holsatia3.12011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s