Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

LFS NEWS


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#21 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 13 August 2010 - 05:04 PM

I just got the notice from Cornell this morning. Looks like it will be ordered a little different than some of the labs do for other tests. See below info from Cornell.

http://ahdc.vet.corn...p?testcode=LFSG

Hair, blood or other tissue. $45/horse + $2/group accession fee. Test needs to be ordered through vet, so vet will need an account #. Click on "Test Fee & Schedule" and submission policies under "Guide to Submissions" for more info. Permission can be given to submit samples without going through vet, but the AHDC needs to be contacted prior to submission.

Please pass the word...I'm gradually making my way around the forums and getting info for the AHA site put together.

Thanks -

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#22 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 16 August 2010 - 06:43 PM

And an update....apparently Cornell isn't really ready yet - the LFS test info was prematurely listed on their lab page (it was removed shortly after the link was posted on Friday). But, the good news is that they ARE going to streamline the ordering process.

So, more to come!

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#23 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 02 September 2010 - 04:46 PM

Okay, let's try this again. This information is now fully listed on the Cornell AHDC site - so it should now be "a go" to order and much more streamlined:

Info on ordering LFS test: http://ahdc.vet.corn...p?testcode=LFSG

LFS Fact Sheet from Cornell: http://ahdc.vet.corn.../issues/lfs.asp

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#24 ivahri

ivahri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Ivahri Arabians is a breeder of Crabbet & Crabbet related Arabians located in Sth West Sydney Australia

Posted 02 October 2010 - 11:21 AM

The official release re: the Cornell test will come when the embargo is released on the scientific manuscript pending publication and the licensing details are finalized with the lab(s) who will commerically offer the test; as Cornell is not set up to commerically run the test.

The South African test is a separate test, offered by a lab in South Africa based on work they have done. I haven't seen any published work regarding this test and am not sure if they have anything submitted for publication or not.

Beth

Hi Beth,

I know this is an old post but I did speak to the scientist involved in managing the licenced use of the Uni of Pretoria test at the NSW Department of Industry run Elizabeth Macarthur Institute. It is important for Americans to realise that Pretoria actually developed their test for LFS BEFORE Cornell did, and had been offering it for some time before Cornell started to do so. From a scientific perspective I was told the actual test is a rather simple one, so it is not surprising that two establishments could have developed equivalent tests.

The bottom line is that Australians finally have a local source of this test, and no longer need to deal with Cornell. The test here is $57.10, and a bulk rate is currently being negotiated through the Arabian Horse Society of Australia. For us breeders in Sydney we can even drop the samples off... the airfare to New York would be a killer!

Cheers,


Richard
Ivahri Arabians
Greendale/Wallacia area Sth West
Sydney - Australia
email: Ivahri-arabians@aapt.net.au
website: http://www.ivahri.com/ (OzCrabbetref % list)

#25 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 05:11 PM

Hi Beth,

I know this is an old post but I did speak to the scientist involved in managing the licenced use of the Uni of Pretoria test at the NSW Department of Industry run Elizabeth Macarthur Institute. It is important for Americans to realise that Pretoria actually developed their test for LFS BEFORE Cornell did, and had been offering it for some time before Cornell started to do so. From a scientific perspective I was told the actual test is a rather simple one, so it is not surprising that two establishments could have developed equivalent tests.

The bottom line is that Australians finally have a local source of this test, and no longer need to deal with Cornell. The test here is $57.10, and a bulk rate is currently being negotiated through the Arabian Horse Society of Australia. For us breeders in Sydney we can even drop the samples off... the airfare to New York would be a killer!


Hi Richard,

Yes, the SA lab brought their test out last November (as already discussed on this thread). However, having been privy to some communication from both labs during their work on this test, I'm not sure the SA's actually identified the mutation first and I suspect they worked off of data that Cornell presented the summer of 2009. As a side note - so far Cornell is the group with a publication record on this test, which IMO is important acknowledgement; regardless of who started commerically offering the test first.

But regardless, having a test now available from multiple sources is ultimately the most important thing. However, I am looking forward to finally seeing the SA paper published, which is supposed to be this fall, though I am curious why it has taken so long.

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#26 ivahri

ivahri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Ivahri Arabians is a breeder of Crabbet & Crabbet related Arabians located in Sth West Sydney Australia

Posted 02 October 2010 - 09:45 PM

Hi Richard,

Yes, the SA lab brought their test out last November (as already discussed on this thread). However, having been privy to some communication from both labs during their work on this test, I'm not sure the SA's actually identified the mutation first and I suspect they worked off of data that Cornell presented the summer of 2009. As a side note - so far Cornell is the group with a publication record on this test, which IMO is important acknowledgement; regardless of who started commerically offering the test first.

But regardless, having a test now available from multiple sources is ultimately the most important thing. However, I am looking forward to finally seeing the SA paper published, which is supposed to be this fall, though I am curious why it has taken so long.

Beth



Hi Beth

I thought that Cornell announced their information at the same time as Pretoria announced testing was available (Nov 2009). From the information I have in 2006 Pretoria Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa had done postmortem tissue tests on 3 foals who breeders had provided to the facitily. From there they announce in Nov 2009 at the same time as Cornell advised they had had a DNA test, Pretoria announced they also had a DNA test and that the test was available at that point to breeders. Plus Pretoria has made available their information to other labs sharing the knowledge for betterment of the Arabian breed. Cornell came on line this year with availability of the test to breeders.

Regards

Jill
Ivahri Arabians
Greendale/Wallacia area Sth West
Sydney - Australia
email: Ivahri-arabians@aapt.net.au
website: http://www.ivahri.com/ (OzCrabbetref % list)

#27 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 10:20 PM

Hi Jill,

Yes, both labs announced in November '09. However, there is often a time gap between when a discovery is made vs. when a public announcement is made; especially when there is a publication involved. I don't feel it is my place to go into detail re: communication from either of the labs during the work, so I feel I need to stop here re: this aspect.

Regarding the sharing of information - if the SA lab is now providing details on their test, that is a change; as I know inquiries were made earlier in the year for details on the test and the response was until their publication was out, they were unable to share any information. So, I'm curious when they started providing the information - especially since the Cornell publication came out in April and provided background on how their test was developed and provided the blueprint for others to follow. The only publication I've seen so far from the SA group is their paper from several years ago describing their necropsy cases (and yes, DNA from those cases was used in their more recent work to develop a test). Though I'm hoping the grapevine is correct and the paper on their LFS test work will be out this fall.

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#28 ivahri

ivahri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Ivahri Arabians is a breeder of Crabbet & Crabbet related Arabians located in Sth West Sydney Australia

Posted 03 October 2010 - 12:58 AM

Hi Jill,

Yes, both labs announced in November '09. However, there is often a time gap between when a discovery is made vs. when a public announcement is made; especially when there is a publication involved. I don't feel it is my place to go into detail re: communication from either of the labs during the work, so I feel I need to stop here re: this aspect.

Regarding the sharing of information - if the SA lab is now providing details on their test, that is a change; as I know inquiries were made earlier in the year for details on the test and the response was until their publication was out, they were unable to share any information. So, I'm curious when they started providing the information - especially since the Cornell publication came out in April and provided background on how their test was developed and provided the blueprint for others to follow. The only publication I've seen so far from the SA group is their paper from several years ago describing their necropsy cases (and yes, DNA from those cases was used in their more recent work to develop a test). Though I'm hoping the grapevine is correct and the paper on their LFS test work will be out this fall.

Beth

Hi Beth,

At the end of the day we all should just be thankful that this test, unlike the SCID test, is becoming widely available and affordably priced- regardless of the country we are in.

However are you insinuating that Uni of Pretoria "stole" data from Cornell to develop their test? If so, what evidence is there of this? Or could it just be that the Uni of Pretoria developed their test in approximately the time scale as Cornell?

Lastly, do you know what other institutions Cornell have licenced to do their test for LFS? Have they made any offer to work with Australian institutions- because if they haven't it contrasts markedly with Pretoria's willingness to work with both NSW Department of Industry & the Queensland University, and without that the much lauded AHSA initiative to bring in testing for all imports and domestic stallions wouldn't be financially viable.

Regards,


Richard
Ivahri Arabians
Greendale/Wallacia area Sth West
Sydney - Australia
email: Ivahri-arabians@aapt.net.au
website: http://www.ivahri.com/ (OzCrabbetref % list)

#29 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 05:27 AM

Hi Beth,

At the end of the day we all should just be thankful that this test, unlike the SCID test, is becoming widely available and affordably priced- regardless of the country we are in.

However are you insinuating that Uni of Pretoria "stole" data from Cornell to develop their test? If so, what evidence is there of this? Or could it just be that the Uni of Pretoria developed their test in approximately the time scale as Cornell?

Lastly, do you know what other institutions Cornell have licenced to do their test for LFS? Have they made any offer to work with Australian institutions- because if they haven't it contrasts markedly with Pretoria's willingness to work with both NSW Department of Industry & the Queensland University, and without that the much lauded AHSA initiative to bring in testing for all imports and domestic stallions wouldn't be financially viable.


Hi Richard,

I agree, at the end of the day having the test widely available and affordable is the most important thing - that's why I'm not sure why you felt the need to bring up an old post with a new discussion which seems to be setting lab against lab.

I believe that whatever work the U of P did was greatly advanced by the presentation given by Cornell at the Havemeyer Workshop in London during the summer of 2009. Is that "stealing"? No and nowhere did I ever use the term steal. The only reason I bring this up is because your initial post from the other day seemed to dismiss the Cornell efforts as being secondary to the U of P, because they didn't bring a commerical test out first. While being the first lab to offer the test commerically is certainly beneficial, before a test could be offered, the mutation had to be identified. And, I am hard pressed to believe that the U of P would have developed their test, in the timeframe in which they did, without the preliminary data provided by Cornell that greatly narrowed the hunt for the location of the mutation; especially given the very small number of affected foal samples U of P had to work with and if I understood correctly, they didn't use any whole genome scanning. And, I am still puzzled on why it is taking so long for their publication to come out.

Lastly, I have no idea if anyone has contacted Cornell re: their test and unless international patents have been applied for, I'm not sure anyone outside of the US would need a license to set up the test. I would think if someone was interested in using the Cornell test, they would initiate contact with Cornell and not expect Cornell to seek them out.

In closing, as of now, the test is available in the US, Europe, South Africa and most recently, Australia - I think this is good coverage considering how new the test is. Ultimately, getting people to now use the test is where the focus should be now. So, on that note, I am bowing out of further discussion on this - because I'm not really sure this lab vs. lab discussion is really necessary.

Best wishes,

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#30 ivahri

ivahri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Ivahri Arabians is a breeder of Crabbet & Crabbet related Arabians located in Sth West Sydney Australia

Posted 03 October 2010 - 08:05 AM

Hi Richard,

I agree, at the end of the day having the test widely available and affordable is the most important thing - that's why I'm not sure why you felt the need to bring up an old post with a new discussion which seems to be setting lab against lab.

I believe that whatever work the U of P did was greatly advanced by the presentation given by Cornell at the Havemeyer Workshop in London during the summer of 2009. Is that "stealing"? No and nowhere did I ever use the term steal. The only reason I bring this up is because your initial post from the other day seemed to dismiss the Cornell efforts as being secondary to the U of P, because they didn't bring a commerical test out first. While being the first lab to offer the test commerically is certainly beneficial, before a test could be offered, the mutation had to be identified. And, I am hard pressed to believe that the U of P would have developed their test, in the timeframe in which they did, without the preliminary data provided by Cornell that greatly narrowed the hunt for the location of the mutation; especially given the very small number of affected foal samples U of P had to work with and if I understood correctly, they didn't use any whole genome scanning. And, I am still puzzled on why it is taking so long for their publication to come out.

Lastly, I have no idea if anyone has contacted Cornell re: their test and unless international patents have been applied for, I'm not sure anyone outside of the US would need a license to set up the test. I would think if someone was interested in using the Cornell test, they would initiate contact with Cornell and not expect Cornell to seek them out.

In closing, as of now, the test is available in the US, Europe, South Africa and most recently, Australia - I think this is good coverage considering how new the test is. Ultimately, getting people to now use the test is where the focus should be now. So, on that note, I am bowing out of further discussion on this - because I'm not really sure this lab vs. lab discussion is really necessary.

Best wishes,

Beth


Hi Beth,

I agree, I'm not trying to have a dig at anyone. Aren't these institutions supposed to share their information? If Cornell shared information that assisted other institutions to progress their research, how is this any different to the way Australian researchers shared information on SCID with the University of Texas? That is the way it should be, surely? Given that there are more tests still in need of development I just hope that international co-operation goes on so that the AHSA's dream of a complete package of tests can be achieved and that we don't end up with an expensive hotch-potch of patent & licence holders to negotiate with. Hopefully given your role with the AHA you can respect the need to avoid that.

I also found out that it was Pretoria that took the initiative to offer it to Australian labs. I think that should be applauded.

Regards,


Richard
javascript:void(0)
Ivahri Arabians
Greendale/Wallacia area Sth West
Sydney - Australia
email: Ivahri-arabians@aapt.net.au
website: http://www.ivahri.com/ (OzCrabbetref % list)

#31 anitae

anitae

    Advanced Member

  • Gold Sponsor
  • PipPipPip
  • 417 posts
  • Location:California

Posted 12 November 2010 - 02:42 AM

The paper from the RSA researchers on their LFS has research has been published and is available on-line (free).

http://onlinelibrary...10.02086.x/full

This research identifies the same mutation as identified in the paper previously published by Cornell University.

In my opinion this is terrific news, as it shows that two separate, independent research teams identified the same mutation.

Anita

#32 szedlisa

szedlisa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts

Posted 23 November 2010 - 03:40 AM

Richard writes---Aren't these institutions supposed to share their information?

Richard,

Hypothetically this would be the ideal sitution, generally this does not happen.

However as Beth has pointed out, when a research has been completed , it must be accepted for publication in one of the medical journals. There is a backlog and not all medical journals will accept all research. Prior to publication, many scientists will supply "Posters" referring to their work at the various annual conferences. These "Posters" contain enough information on how the research is being done and what elements used so that another group of scientists could take that information if they were interested and start or apply it to their own research project. (That in fact is how the Dutch VHL lab started their work on CA, from the information on Leah Brault´s "Poster".)

Once the thesis on the completed research is published in a recognized medical journal so that it can be reviewed by their peers, if no conflicting issues are noted/addressed, then the research moves forward as a developed test; bids are made for a suitable laboratory which can deal with the expected volume. And the test is offerred to the public.

Cornell felt initially that they could not deal with the expected volume. This did cause a delay until sorted out. They were , however, fortunate in finding a slot for publication.
Pretoria may well have completed their independant research, felt that they could handle their expected volume (at first they were only doing tests for resident South African horses with a few exceptions) and their publishing could be delayed simply by not being able to get a slot in the magazine of their choice.

For example Penedo and Brault have had their research thesis on CA ready for publication as of May 2010 and have only recently found a medical journal in which to publish. There is a back log but they have been assurred that it will be published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research (AVMA)...eventually.

Frustrating as it is to us laymen/laywomen, the institutions do not share information when doing the research. And once completed ( or even nearing completion) testing is licensed out to other institutions which request participation and are willing to pay the price of the licensing.

For example: The Belgium lab PROGENUS has arranged licensing from UC Davis to do the CA Marker Test in unison with Davis. In France, Véto-Pharma sub-licensed. They do the CA Testing under licence from PROGENUS (Belgium) and therefore can offer the CA test in cooperation with the University of California, Davis.


We will probably see the LFS Testing being done the same way.

Lisa

#33 ivahri

ivahri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Ivahri Arabians is a breeder of Crabbet & Crabbet related Arabians located in Sth West Sydney Australia

Posted 24 November 2010 - 03:26 AM

Hi Lisa,

Thanks for the background! However I have been trusted enough to have been supplied with the correspondence between the the AHSA and the EMAI going back to early July and there was indeed co-operation between Pretoria and EMAI for the LFS test to be developed & provided in Australia by EMAI based on source genetic material provided by Pretoria. So it might not generally happen but it did happen in this case.

The whole concept of co-operation in the development of genetic testing needs to be accepted by all institutions. It is not enough to just accept that research is done in isolation, patented, and then exclusively licenced. Society is starting to revolt against this with human genetic testing, and we have to do the same for the sake of our equines. In the recent AHSA Breeders Bulletin this issue is openly canvased as to the time now having arrived for the exclusive licence for SCID testing to Vetgen being challenged in the Australian courts. The only thing holding back such a challenge is money. If such licencing was about maintaining quality control most of us would accept it but this has nothing to do with quality but entirely about maximising returns for the investors & benefactors of the Uni of Texas and the shareholders of Vetgen.

This is not just me trying to sound like a left-wing socialist (which I am far from...), but about creating an environment where testing is an accepted, minimal cost, part of the breeding process. As I pointed out to the AHSA Registrar Europeans (in particular) have no understanding of how different horse (not just Arabian) breeding in Australia is to the rest of the world (except maybe the US to some extent). We have a majority of horse breeders who are hobbyists that financially support their horses from outside, very modest income sources and not from the sale of horses. Horse ownership here ranges from teenagers & pensioners of very modest means through to the multi-million dollar breeders known to many. What the AHSA will not do, because it would be suicidal, is impose any process that imposes multiple expensive tests on top of the normal cost of registration. If it did this many would just cease to register their Arabians, or stop breeding all together. So unless SCID, LFS, CA and eventually GPT can be packaged in to a single source, modest extension of the parentage process- it will NOT happen. What the AHSA is doing now is working with EMAI, Uni of Queensland and most likely Holland (as Vetgen point blank don't seem to wish to co-operate) to implement this. Now if some want to get hung up on whether an institution has published or not... well that is their right but the rest of us live in the real world where any reputable institution that offers a test will be trusted to provide reliable results with or without published papers. EMAI & Uni of Queensland have been around for many many years so Australians know that the results received from these will be reliable.

Things are moving in the right direction Lisa. We just need to give it time.

Regards,


Richard




Richard writes---Aren't these institutions supposed to share their information?

Richard,

Hypothetically this would be the ideal sitution, generally this does not happen.

However as Beth has pointed out, when a research has been completed , it must be accepted for publication in one of the medical journals. There is a backlog and not all medical journals will accept all research. Prior to publication, many scientists will supply "Posters" referring to their work at the various annual conferences. These "Posters" contain enough information on how the research is being done and what elements used so that another group of scientists could take that information if they were interested and start or apply it to their own research project. (That in fact is how the Dutch VHL lab started their work on CA, from the information on Leah Brault´s "Poster".)

Once the thesis on the completed research is published in a recognized medical journal so that it can be reviewed by their peers, if no conflicting issues are noted/addressed, then the research moves forward as a developed test; bids are made for a suitable laboratory which can deal with the expected volume. And the test is offerred to the public.

Cornell felt initially that they could not deal with the expected volume. This did cause a delay until sorted out. They were , however, fortunate in finding a slot for publication.
Pretoria may well have completed their independant research, felt that they could handle their expected volume (at first they were only doing tests for resident South African horses with a few exceptions) and their publishing could be delayed simply by not being able to get a slot in the magazine of their choice.

For example Penedo and Brault have had their research thesis on CA ready for publication as of May 2010 and have only recently found a medical journal in which to publish. There is a back log but they have been assurred that it will be published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research (AVMA)...eventually.

Frustrating as it is to us laymen/laywomen, the institutions do not share information when doing the research. And once completed ( or even nearing completion) testing is licensed out to other institutions which request participation and are willing to pay the price of the licensing.

For example: The Belgium lab PROGENUS has arranged licensing from UC Davis to do the CA Marker Test in unison with Davis. In France, Véto-Pharma sub-licensed. They do the CA Testing under licence from PROGENUS (Belgium) and therefore can offer the CA test in cooperation with the University of California, Davis.


We will probably see the LFS Testing being done the same way.

Lisa


Ivahri Arabians
Greendale/Wallacia area Sth West
Sydney - Australia
email: Ivahri-arabians@aapt.net.au
website: http://www.ivahri.com/ (OzCrabbetref % list)

#34 szedlisa

szedlisa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts

Posted 26 November 2010 - 12:44 AM

I am really glad to hear that Richard.

I know how hard severalmof us worked back in 2007 just to get the two university labs to work together on the CA research. The principals knew each other which helped but the policies of the clinics under which they worked caused a major snag.

Information was not exchanged laterly.

It seemed like such a shame as at that time neither had many actual samples from which to analyse and further the research.

Lisa

#35 Jill Erisman

Jill Erisman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 508 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:The horses.

Posted 21 March 2011 - 06:13 PM

Just adding the results for my
mare and stallion to this thread.

Both tested LFS negative and
I'm doing a happy dance!

Jill

#36 DJ Sheldon

DJ Sheldon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Middle Tennessee

Posted 21 March 2011 - 09:25 PM

Just adding the results for my
mare and stallion to this thread.

Both tested LFS negative and
I'm doing a happy dance!

Jill

Congratulations Jill. I wish I had a happy dance to do, but two of mine tested as LFS carriers, Lady Minstril and her daughter, Kaahileh. It's better to know than not, but I admit I was a much happier person before I started all this testing and found among my mares I not only have 2 LFS carriers, but 3 others are CA carriers. I can thank my lucky stars that my stallion is clear of everything.

#37 phanilah

phanilah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 525 posts

Posted 21 March 2011 - 09:51 PM

Thanks to everyone who is testing for LFS.

Please make sure to report your results to FOAL, for inclusion on the list on their website.

You can access the report form here http://www.foal.org/...eport_Form.pdf'> http://www.foal.org/LFS_Report_Form.pdf and the results list can be found here http://www.foal.org/...foal2_26_11.pdf

Beth
si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes

#38 Jill Erisman

Jill Erisman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 508 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:The horses.

Posted 22 March 2011 - 09:17 PM

Congratulations Jill. I wish I had a happy dance to do, but two of mine tested as LFS carriers, Lady Minstril and her daughter, Kaahileh. It's better to know than not, but I admit I was a much happier person before I started all this testing and found among my mares I not only have 2 LFS carriers, but 3 others are CA carriers. I can thank my lucky stars that my stallion is clear of everything.


DJ I am bummed with you...such lovely mares,
I'm so sorry. Thank goodness Prince Rex is clear.

Please give them each a pat for me,

Jill

#39 DJ Sheldon

DJ Sheldon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Middle Tennessee

Posted 23 March 2011 - 10:40 PM

DJ I am bummed with you...such lovely mares,
I'm so sorry. Thank goodness Prince Rex is clear.

Please give them each a pat for me,

Jill

Well Jill, they are still lovely mares, but my options with them have just been limited. The two older mares, one testing as a LFS carrier and one a CA carrier, I hadn't really planned on breeding again. Two of the younger mares, one a LFS carrier and the other carrying CA, like their mamas, are Rex daughters and I obviously can't use him on them. I haven't had the best of luck finding stallions I like that are tested clear, or tested at all. That leaves me with one young CA carrier mare that I could breed with my stallion.

This just makes me wonder on the prevalence of these genetic disorders in the population. I know my percentages stink. I am hearing from a lot of people that they won't test because they never had a problem. And as surprising as it seems, there are still plenty of people breeding who haven't even heard of any of these conditions, so figure if they haven't heard about it, it isn't really a problem. And there are still more people who plan to test someday, but go ahead and breed untested horses now and hope for the best. Sometimes I wonder if they haven't got the right idea. If they don't know, they don't run the risk of turning off buyers by admitting they have carriers.

#40 VanAlma

VanAlma

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 02:46 PM

Well Jill, they are still lovely mares, but my options with them have just been limited. The two older mares, one testing as a LFS carrier and one a CA carrier, I hadn't really planned on breeding again. Two of the younger mares, one a LFS carrier and the other carrying CA, like their mamas, are Rex daughters and I obviously can't use him on them. I haven't had the best of luck finding stallions I like that are tested clear, or tested at all. That leaves me with one young CA carrier mare that I could breed with my stallion.

This just makes me wonder on the prevalence of these genetic disorders in the population. I know my percentages stink. I am hearing from a lot of people that they won't test because they never had a problem. And as surprising as it seems, there are still plenty of people breeding who haven't even heard of any of these conditions, so figure if they haven't heard about it, it isn't really a problem. And there are still more people who plan to test someday, but go ahead and breed untested horses now and hope for the best. Sometimes I wonder if they haven't got the right idea. If they don't know, they don't run the risk of turning off buyers by admitting they have carriers.

DJ - you still have lovely horses who can breed on :bigemo_harabe_net-03:
I have to admit, I am one of "those" who has not tested her mares as I know the stallions I am breeding them to at this point are clear, so I have no worries about an affected foal, which is all I personally care about. My breeding mares will all get tested at some point, some this year, but since I know the status of the stallions I don't worry. I won't worry if they are carriers, although do understand the complexity of the situation if they are. However, my focus is riding horses and people who ride only care that the horse in question carries a rider, but I know I'm few and far between when it comes to that mentality.
Don't let it get you down!

Van Alma Arabians
Find us on Facebook!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users