Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Nero v. Wiken
    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 - Nero v. Wiken
    COI 5 gen: 0.488%    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 Lukas v. Linduri and Dam Fenja v. Rethwischer Moor
    Sire: COI 5 gen: 0.000%    too low to be reliabe    Calculate COI again

    Dam: COI 5 gen: 3.125%    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)60
    Ancestor Loss2
    Ancestor Loss in %96.77 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Fenja v. Rethwischer Moor50.00011
    Lukas v. Linduri50.00011
    Bonny v. Rethwischer Moor25.00011
    Olly v. Bärenhorst25.00011
    Lord v. Hofried25.00011
    Hesta v. Linduri25.00011
    Groll Holsatia15.620211
    Drossel v. d. Grassel12.50011
    Etzel v. Nörderkamp12.50011
    Ilka v. Elbufer12.50011
    Bodo v. d. Kummel12.50011
    Afra v. Grevensberg12.50011
    Asta v. Bartelskamp12.50011
    Paris v. d. Waterkant12.50011
    Dina v. Steinroden9.370211
    Ines v. d. Waterkant6.25011
    Ria v. d. Böckelsburg6.25011
    Dixi v. Elbufer6.25011
    Groll v. Reutherspfad6.25011
    Britta v. Hasselbach6.25011
    Boss Holsatia6.25011
    Astor v. d. Weide6.25011
    Hektor v. d. Lindenhöhe6.25011
    Cindy v. Tenntal6.25011
    Kessy v. d. Böckelsburg6.25011
    Artus v. d. Hasewiesen6.25011
    Britta v. Bärenhorst6.25011
    Bautz v. Mönchsbrunnen6.25011
    Hanko v. Sämmenhof6.25011
    Gero v. Wiken6.25011
    Eike v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Lasko v. Holmesborn3.12011
    Afra v. Seggehorn3.12011
    Gina Dankwarder Ode3.12011
    Delta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Unda v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Grandel v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Kondor v. Odisheim3.12011
    Golo Dankwarder Ode3.12011
    Anka v. d. Zirkelquelle3.12011
    Utz v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Olli v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011
    Ingo v. Schadwalde3.12011
    Cora v. Tannenkamp3.12011
    Manto v. d. Düsterbeck3.12011
    Arco v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Bill v. Bessingslust3.12011
    Rasso v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Condor v. d. Jägerhalle3.12011
    Enno Holsatia3.12011
    Ajax v. Klockhof3.12011
    Cilly v. Waterkant3.12011
    Okko Fortuna3.12011
    Tasso v. Feuersang3.12011
    Diwa v. Kampstüh3.12011
    Blanka v. d. Böckelsburg3.12011
    Heidi v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Nora v. d. Bärenburg3.12011
    Pascha v. d. Binnenelbe3.12011
    Rena v. d. Binnenelbe3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s