Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Curtis v. Tiefen Vehn
    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 - Curtis v. Tiefen Vehn
    COI 5 gen: 1.367%    very very low    Calculate COI again

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


    COI Calculation - Sire Hannes v. Kiekenbruch and Dam Fary v. Frochtmannshof
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.391%    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
    Hannes v. Kiekenbruch50.00011
    Fary v. Frochtmannshof50.00011
    Lukas v. Auwelt25.00011
    Clara v. Kiekenbruch25.00011
    Quinta v. Fasanenhof25.00011
    Gero v. Alt-Hümmling25.00011
    Aron v. Averbeck15.620211
    Greif v. Reitbach12.50011
    Caj v. Alt-Hümmling12.50011
    Burga v. d. Heustätte12.50011
    Yda v. d. Binnenelbe12.50011
    Imme v. Auwelt12.50011
    Cita v. Hollbäck12.50011
    Juwel v. Perverberg12.50011
    Arras v. Eikenloh9.370211
    Jako v. Fasanenhof6.25011
    Samson v. Linduri6.25011
    Grille v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Cliff v. Fränkischen Bauern6.25011
    Castor v. d. Hirtenburg6.25011
    Coach v. Ziegelweiher6.25011
    Aischa v. Heek6.25011
    Alicia v. d. Heustätte6.25011
    Esta v. Auwelt6.25011
    Gitta v. d. Wallburg6.25011
    Rika v. Linduri6.25011
    Aska v. Forstkamp6.25011
    Arco v. Backemeer6.25011
    Arras v. Eschbach6.25011
    Gabi v.d. Röthaller6.25011
    Bautz v. d. Leda6.24022
    Anka v. Schönrain3.12011
    Cina v. d. Röthaller3.12011
    Artos v. d. Schirmkiefer3.12011
    Jakob v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Asta Westerode3.12011
    Alice v. Wiebusch3.12011
    Gina v. Roonstein3.12011
    Asta v. Averbeck3.12011
    Meika v. Wasserplatz3.12011
    Ilse v. Fasanenhof3.12011
    Lucie Nelha3.12011
    Westfalen's Birka3.12011
    Onko v. Tecklenburg3.12011
    Hesta v. Linduri3.12011
    Hajo Aus Grupilinga3.12011
    Asta v. Butendieks3.12011
    Bobby v. d. Hasenheide3.12011
    Lukas v. Linduri3.12011
    Bruna v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Amsel v. Silbergrund3.12011
    Brutus v. Stockey3.12011
    Igor v. Linebrok3.12011
    Hakon v. Forstgarten3.12011
    Tina v. d. Bilsbek3.12011
    Mirco v. Linduri3.12011
    Horrik v. Wasserplatz3.12011
    Anke v. Keenmoor3.12011
    Gordon v. d. Hafkesdell3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s