Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Caja v. Forst Ostenwalde
    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 - Caja v. Forst Ostenwalde
    COI 5 gen: 1.465%    very very low    Calculate COI again

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


    COI Calculation - Sire Lord v. Jurawald and Dam Certa v. Hülsebusch
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.586%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 8.398%    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)69
    Ancestor Loss-7
    Ancestor Loss in %111.29 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Bessi50.00011
    Bølle50.00011
    Certa v. Hülsebusch50.00011
    Lord v. Jurawald50.00011
    Jerome De Wynen25.00011
    Bess25.00011
    Gwenda v. Jurawald25.00011
    Axel v. d. Lechmündung25.00011
    Bodo v. Hasselback25.00011
    Nixe v. d. Holzheide25.00011
    Irrwisch De Wynen15.620321
    Jenny De Wynen12.50022
    Daisy v. Sämmenhof12.50011
    Benno v. d. Sorge12.50011
    Fara v. Friedleinsgrund12.50011
    Jakob v. Sämmenhof12.50011
    Cindy v. Bärenhorst12.50011
    Nadja De Wynen12.50011
    Yalk De Wynen12.50011
    Fleur12.50011
    Niklas De Wynen12.50011
    Dux v. Falkenhorst12.50011
    Xandra v. Lönsstein9.36033
    Asta v. Werlacke9.36033
    Cessy v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Vallensbæks Manja6.25011
    Ass v. d. Schlei6.25011
    Asta v. Mönchsbrunnen6.25011
    Rachel De Wynen6.25011
    Unda v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Graf v. Silbersee6.25011
    Zick v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Hesto v. Werlacke6.25011
    Alf v. d. Waterkant6.25011
    Lara v. Werlacke6.25011
    Hecht v. Wulfshagen6.25011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad6.25011
    Arko v. Kammerforst6.25011
    Adda v. Neuenhof6.25011
    Artemis v. d. Wandelburg6.25011
    Hazel De Wynen6.24022
    Boro v. Silbersee6.24022
    Gambo v. Werlacke6.24022
    Utz v. Lönsstein6.24022
    Boss v. Silbersee3.12011
    Anka v. d. Zirkelquelle3.12011
    Cai Holsatia3.12011
    Ajax v. Klockhof3.12011
    Flora v. Wulfhagen3.12011
    Dolly v. Lossetal3.12011
    Zent v. Feuersang3.12011
    Anja v. Fährhaus3.12011
    Bobby v. Leefeld3.12011
    Alf Chamavia3.12011
    Heidi v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Centa v. Mönchsbrunnen3.12011
    Edda v. Moor3.12011
    Anke v. Birkenhof3.12011
    Bona v. Hohen Geroldseck3.12011
    Gero v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Donar v. Turkenweg3.12011
    Petra v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Vroni v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Nora v. Hahnenkamm3.12011
    Flott v. Rüdenhay3.12011
    Immo v. d. Binnenelbe3.12011
    Arco v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Cent v. Hofried3.12011
    Harro v. Lossetal3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s