This example is just using 2-3 other breeds, you can see how diverse the genes could become using 4 or more, mixing them all up, breeding back constantly to purebreds to solidify the Doberman side. If done properly they could have a solid Doberman with great diversity in no time.
Yes, this going to be very interesting.
They will have four litters of dobe crossed to one of the other four breeds.
And then 2gen at four litters again...amiright? The possibilities on 3gen get complicated after that...but we are looking at at least four years for four generations at minimum to evaluate the admixtures chosen genetically and then x years longer to wait and see if DCM shows up anywhere from 2 to 5 years, which is sort of the window ethical breeders have to work with while keeping fingers crossed, correct?
I wonder who will be buying the pups not saved for breeding in each of those, after they hold back (i guess?) a sire and dam from each.
How will they rank and select for best of each beyond genetics?
I can see there might be a LOT of interest in what would be called
@designer dogs otherwise, if given out with health checks, paid annually etc.Thats what UofMN is foing in their 4000 dibe cohort- asking for yearly detailed questionnaire, to see what actually shows up in various genetic markers found as in Embark and the predictions of best pairings as in Betterbred, vs the reality of diseases and conditions over time.
It would be very interesting to get the proposal that was run by the FKC. My guess is it was generated by U Utrecht or U Helsinki who have both been noted as doing wide area studies in genetic disease, in diseases common to dobes and run either in house or subbed out to a large breeder(s) agreeing to breed and colllect data, and find homes with owners who will report back.