Pedigree Analysis

    Generations

    Coefficients of Kinship, Relationship and Inbreeding 5 Generations - Rena v. Elbufer
    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 - Rena v. Elbufer
    COI 5 gen: 0.195%    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 Carlo v. Eulenhof and Dam Maja v. Elbufer
    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)58
    Ancestor Loss4
    Ancestor Loss in %93.55 %

    Contributing Ancestors
    AncestorBlood %# of appearances12345
    Carlo v. Eulenhof50.00011
    Maja v. Elbufer50.00011
    Clerens v. Riedhauser Wald25.00011
    Anka v. Kappelbuck25.00011
    Dixi v. Elbufer25.00011
    Bodo v. d. Kummel25.00011
    Cindy v. Tenntal12.50011
    Drossel v. Hofried12.50011
    Lukas De Wynen12.50011
    Biene v. Werhholz12.50011
    Cäsar v. d. Zirkelquelle12.50011
    Rena v. d. Binnenelbe12.50011
    Groll Holsatia12.50011
    Hektor v. d. Lindenhöhe12.50011
    Gero v. Sämmenhof9.370211
    Groll v. Reutherspfad6.25011
    Hella v. d. Moorbrücke6.25011
    Dina v. Steinroden6.25011
    Xaver v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Asta v. Hofried6.25011
    Ajax v. Klockhof6.25011
    Nina v. d. Binnenelbe6.25011
    Boro v. Silbersee6.25011
    Bill v. Bessingslust6.25011
    Nora v. d. Bärenburg6.25011
    Amsel v. Rothäuser Bruch6.25011
    Uhl v. Lönsstein6.25011
    Condor v. d. Jägerhalle6.25011
    Grandel v. d. Lindenhöhe6.25011
    Hazel De Wynen6.25011
    Bodo v. Weserstrand6.24022
    Bob v. d. Falloh3.12011
    Arco v. Reutherspfad3.12011
    Citta v. Langen Siek3.12011
    Konny v. d. Rosenburg3.12011
    Bill v. Straufhain3.12011
    Lux v. Fleestedt3.12011
    Heidi v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Citta v. Arlsberg3.12011
    Ilka v. Buchenberg3.12011
    Etzel v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Ino v. Kreyenhorst3.12011
    Cessie v. Holundereck3.12011
    Asko v. Nordpark3.12011
    Grille v. d. Bärenburg3.12011
    Assi v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Gina Dankwarder Ode3.12011
    Tasso v. Feuersang3.12011
    Heike v. Sämmenhof3.12011
    Asta v. d. Moorbrücke3.12011
    Drauf v. d. Lindenhöhe3.12011
    Mary v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Dralle v. Waldesgryn3.12011
    Fanny De Wynen3.12011
    Assi v. Nörderkamp3.12011
    Dolf v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Natter v. Lönsstein3.12011
    Astor v. Rothen Hahn3.12011

    Last updated Wednesday 23 November 2022 20:32 CET



    I have 🍪s