Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Gina v. Poppenforst
    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 - Gina v. Poppenforst
    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 Benno v. d. Haalquelle and Dam Natja v. d. Holzheide
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.195%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.781%    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
    Natja v. d. Holzheide50.00011
    Benno v. d. Haalquelle50.00011
    Cäsar v. Bruckhof25.00011
    Hilda v. d. Hasewiesen25.00011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst25.00011
    Niklas De Wynen25.00011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad12.50011
    Moritz v. Sämmenhof12.50011
    Arrak v. Hagenpolder12.50011
    Unda v. Lönsstein12.50011
    Irrwisch De Wynen12.50011
    Cita v. d. Donauauen12.50011
    Jenny De Wynen12.50011
    Carry v. d. Hasewiesen12.50011
    Arco v. Reutherspfad6.25011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp6.25011
    Nadja v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Asta v. Werlacke6.25011
    Hazel De Wynen6.25011
    Alan Z Serikoveho Kraje6.25011
    Heidi v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Fango v. Waterkant6.25011
    Xandra v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde6.25011
    Gambo v. Werlacke6.25011
    Utz v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Fani v. Breitenstein6.25011
    Basko v. Hesselborn6.25011
    Hella v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Boro v. Silbersee6.25011
    Asta v. Steinleite6.24022
    Cilly v. Waterkant3.12011
    Mary v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Cilla v. d. Holzheide3.12011
    Brack v. d. Kautenback3.12011
    Elko v. Turkenweg3.12011
    Illo v. Grunewald3.12011
    Alf v. Schinterkogel3.12011
    Fanny De Wynen3.12011
    Centa v. Felsenkeller3.12011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Astor v. Rothen Hahn3.12011
    Bobby v. Leefeld3.12011
    Amsel v. Maistieg3.12011
    Assi v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Okko Fortuna3.12011
    Citta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Zent v. Feuersang3.12011
    Baron v. Rehsprung3.12011
    Arras v. Düllberg3.12011
    Carke Z Drazne3.12011
    Birko v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Eike v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Certa v. d. Frankenburg3.12011
    Adar Z Dubikova3.12011
    Mucke v. Feuersang3.12011
    Eske v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Wido v. Schwege3.12011
    Dolf v. Lönsstein3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s