Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Lucie Nelha
    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 - Lucie Nelha
    COI 5 gen: 0.586%    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 Joe v. Fasanenhof and Dam Solojäger's Granne
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    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)60
    Ancestor Loss2
    Ancestor Loss in %96.77 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Solojäger's Granne50.00011
    Joe v. Fasanenhof50.00011
    Onko v. Tecklenburg25.00011
    Solojäger's Distel25.00011
    Becas v. Lönsstein25.00011
    Ilse v. Fasanenhof25.00011
    Hektor v. d. Lindenhöhe12.50011
    Dax v. d. Aue12.50011
    Anett v. Fasanenhof12.50011
    Amsel v. Fredenhof12.50011
    Edda v. Jurawald12.50011
    Graf v. Silbersee12.50011
    Bautz v. Mönchsbrunnen12.50011
    Cita v. Winterberg12.50011
    Birko v. Holsatia12.490312
    Janka v. Tecklenburg6.25011
    Erle v. Steinroden6.25011
    Grandel v. d. Lindenhöhe6.25011
    Boss v. Silbersee6.25011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen6.25011
    Dolly v. Lossetal6.25011
    Bill v. Bessingslust6.25011
    Anja v. Taubertal6.25011
    Bella v. d. Aue6.25011
    Moritz v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Lasko v. Holmesborn6.25011
    Ute v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Edu v. Forstgarten6.25011
    Anka v. d. Zirkelquelle6.25011
    Esko Vun'N Wischhoff6.25011
    Polo v. Feuersang3.12011
    Citta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Manto v. d. Düsterbeck3.12011
    Astor v. Fichtenhain3.12011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde3.12011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp3.12011
    Dina v. Forstgarten3.12011
    Cilli v. Preussenwald3.12011
    Cessie v. Holundereck3.12011
    Citta v. Arlsberg3.12011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Biene v. Ringofen3.12011
    Bill v. Straufhain3.12011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Osi v. Volkach3.12011
    Dina v. Tecklenburg3.12011
    Alan Z Serikoveho Kraje3.12011
    Gina Dankwarder Ode3.12011
    Tim v. Feuersang3.12011
    Dina v. Steinroden3.12011
    Alf v. d. Waterkant3.12011
    Drauf v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Basko v. Hesselborn3.12011
    Hella v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Britta v. Lossetal3.12011
    Hella v. d. Moorbrücke3.12011
    Asta v. Duewelsknapp3.12011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Whisky v. Schwege3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s