Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Birke v. Stammberg
    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 - Birke v. Stammberg
    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 Mando De Wynen and Dam Bonni v. Lundberg
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 1.172%    very very 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)62
    Ancestor Loss0
    Ancestor Loss in %100.00 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Mando De Wynen50.00011
    Bonni v. Lundberg50.00011
    Joe De Wynen25.00011
    Jula Vun'N Wischhoff25.00011
    Cliff v. Linduri25.00011
    Gilla De Wynen25.00011
    Boro v. Silbersee12.50011
    Esko v. Bärenhorst12.50011
    Cent v. Hofried12.50011
    Drossel v. d. Grassel12.50011
    Hazel De Wynen12.50011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp12.50011
    Rachel De Wynen12.50011
    Eika Vun'N Wischhoff12.50011
    Xandra v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Astor v. Rothen Hahn6.25011
    Biene v. Ringofen6.25011
    Bob v. Zent-hof6.25011
    Asta v. Hofried6.25011
    Cai Holsatia6.25011
    Fanny De Wynen6.25011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Astor v. d. Weide6.25011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst6.25011
    Unda v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Citta v. Langen Siek6.25011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg6.25011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen6.25011
    Birko v. Holsatia6.25011
    Britta v. Hasselbach6.25011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand3.12011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde3.12011
    Diwa v. Kampstüh3.12011
    Greif v. Felsenkeller3.12011
    Tim v. Feuersang3.12011
    Dina v. Steinroden3.12011
    Asta v. Werlacke3.12011
    Assi v. Grabengrund3.12011
    Golo Dankwarder Ode3.12011
    Hanko v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Heike v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Arno v. Karlshof3.12011
    Lady De Wynen3.12011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp3.12011
    Afra v. Seggehorn3.12011
    Zent v. Feuersang3.12011
    Gambo v. Werlacke3.12011
    Fenna v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Mary v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Rasso v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Olli v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011
    Cilli v. Berghof3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Jette v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Manto v. d. Düsterbeck3.12011
    Alf v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Anka v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Betty v. Weberhof3.12011
    Utz v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Ajax v. Klockhof3.12011
    Dolf v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Gero v. Sämmenhof3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s