Stallions to improve front legs

[JWB]

I have a LOVELY BWP mare who has scored very well at both Holsteiner and BWP breeding stock approvals. She's MMP and an elite mare candidate with an amazing jump and a puppy-dog personality. Her major flaw is that she toes in slightly and paddles a little on the right - Nothing dramatic but it is a flaw and I am aware of it and would like to improve on that in the next generation.

One of her BWP elite mare requirements is producing a foal and I'll probably do that next year or the following year via ET (she'll be working on performance requirements at the same time)....

So I'm looking for a stallion that is either BWP approved or has full European WB approval (not provisional) and has completed the performance requirements who has consistently IMPROVED the front legs, in terms of correctness. Mind you, I'm not looking for dressage movement. My mare is from jumper lines (I'm using her for eventing). I'm not looking for a stallion that produces flashy - I'm looking for a stallion that produces CORRECT and still keeps the nice jumping ability. That is my most important requirement...

Other "likes" are good personality, proven foal crops, modern type (mare is about PERFECT modern type and I don't want to go bigger or smaller in terms of build). She is 16.2 and still growing - I'd rather NOT produce something over 17 hh. Also I have a fairly strong (and very unjust, I know) aversion to gray horses so I would probably not breed to a gray unless there was no other choice.

My mare's bloodlines are L-Line Holsteiner on the stallion side, and mother was a fantastic producing TB who produced an AHHA licensed stallion and a long list of premium AHHA, ATA and BWP fillies/mares.

Here's a picture....
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2316965&l=9eecf171fe&id=665238181

[JWB]

And here are "outside" stallion requirements.

With the advent of the European Union it has recently become possible to register foals that are by outside approved stallions and out of dams that have been entered into either the main or auxiliary studbook of BWP. These stallions must be approved for breeding by the European studbooks of the Hanoverian, Oldenburg, Dutch, Selle Francais, or certain other recognized studbooks. The stallion must be over 6 years old, and have already completed his performance requirements at the time of breedings. These requirements, and blood typing or DNA typing, and the payment of an extra fee will allow the resulting foals to be registered into one of the foal books of the BWP.

[ne1]

for all that is spoken of quinar, often lost in the sauce is the fact that he is absolutely a conformation specialist, which is partly why he was so heavily use din holstein before coming here. the mare's feet do well to not be too small, because he can reduce feet size, but in terms of straightening legs he is the best known holsteiner stallion i am aware of to fix that trait. he, like your mare, is modern and stands 16.2. perhaps worth consideration.

[JWB]

Thanks ne1. He does look interesting... Nice size. Would love to see what he throws (it's hard to tell from a picture)

Anyone else have suggestions? Usually people LOVE to offer stallion suggestions. I guess it's harder to talk about improving front leg confirmation/movement though.

[YankeeLawyer]

Anyone else have suggestions? Usually people LOVE to offer stallion suggestions. I guess it's harder to talk about improving front leg confirmation/movement though.

Well, for one thing, leg conformation is only 20% heritable. So it is virtually impossible to suggest any horse that will "improve" a front leg. The object is to breed horses that are correct. If anyone tells you their stallion consistently "improves" a front leg, really, I would question that claim. Traits such as movement and jumping ability are far more heritable.

[ne1]

jwb, i believe there are several pictures of his offspring on karen's site (foxfire farm). i only have one here.

yankee lawyer, quinar has consistently improved leg conformation for breeders in holstein. there are others on this forum who know this to be so. it is probably astute to be cautious about such claims. my post is the result of feedback from breeders in holstein having produced many hundreds of horses from him. you are welcome to be skeptical. i am happy to offer information from what i know. i'm less likely to bother arguing about it.

[Fairview Horse Center]

yankee lawyer, quinar has consistently improved leg conformation for breeders in holstein. there are others on this forum who know this to be so.

Actually front leg heritability is only about 16%, so more likely, those mares with issues would be improved 84% of the time no matter what stallion bred to.

Front leg correctness is mostly environment and growth, and that goes for the reasons for the issues in the mare herself, rather than genetics.

[ne1]

darlyn,

after taking into account the genetic/environmental realities which you discuss, there remain horses whose get throw legs we more often like and those we more frequently don't. (linaro and contender have some problems in this area).

again, after a production from quinar numbering at least in the hundreds, to those breeders who have lived with the offspring, who know and who have used and seen the horse the feedback is that he is one to whom they will turn to when looking for improved leg conformation.

this issue speaks to the difficulties of breeding in the usa relative to in europe where not only the numbers are greater, but also the breeding community is much stronger. when this is the case there are greater opportunities from the larger quantity of production to leverage the easier and more reliable means of personal communications within a limited geographical area and allow breeders to improve both their knowledge and their feeling for their national herd, and what that may offer to their own personal breeding persuits.

we, on the other hand, are left with much less by way of valuable information. we leverage heritibility testing of traits from tb's in ky and generic studies of genetic vs environmental. while these tools have value, it is not the same as the high voumes of data from localised breeding communities which we do not have in america.

your mileage may vary, and we each will determine and act upon information we have confidence in, but for myself, in sharing the objective and the gene pool of the farmers in holstein, i will respect the statistics you would like to publish and then return to focus on the findings of those who have succeeded in the area i am also persuing.

ne1

ps quinar improved the front legs of my argentinus mare. you may spin it whatever other way you like.

[Fairview Horse Center]

your mileage may vary, and we each will determine and act upon information we have confidence in, but for myself, in sharing the objective and the gene pool of the farmers in holstein, i will respect the statistics you would like to publish and then return to focus on the findings of those who have succeeded in the area i am also persuing.

I don't need to publish statistics. I believe Dr Christmann has already done so, and he is using the shared pool of information from farmers, and inspections in Hannover. ;) http://www.hanoverian.com/ludwigherit.html

There are some stallions known in the US for front leg issues, in spite of our lack of information sharing. Mr Prospector comes to mind, but on the whole, I do believe the published findings are pretty accurate.

[ne1]

yes, you're right, the published findings by dr christmannn are accurate and i recall first viewing them the year they came out, but this is way off the point. what he published were generic heritabilities of different traits.

now, i'm not a huge fan of the kwpn method of indexing, but at least that is a tool where a horse's various traits can be looked at comparatively. it's very linear and scientific and can be useful.

the point is, if all we go on are heritability percentages from dr christmann little is left for a stallion to prove. for example, while jumping may have a higher heritability than front leg conformation, nonetheless, some stallions jump well and others don't. does breeding to cassini guarantee you olympic scope and technique? of course not. but it may well improve your chances over a stallion who is not known to throw jump as well.

so is the same with quinar and leg conformation. for sure, much is left up to the mare, but when studying a population of offspring from different stallions some will be on, some behind, and some ahead of the curve.

all i came on here to let you fine people know is that breeders in holstein have found that quinar improves leg conformation. be as skeptical as you please, but in that other part of the world it is known to be so, and use is made of that information.

[About Time]

JWB. I believe Balta Czar may fit the desired requirements. He has excellent leg conformation himself though if its not to be carried on more than 16%, I'm not sure how much that helps you. I have a 2007 filly with excellent conformation by BC. Check out www.jumpstartfarm.com Her name is Harper's Baczar. You can see many other progeny there as well.

[stoicfish]

Le Primeur standing at Spruce Meadows might fit the bill. He has some kids eventing, and has some of the stats that you are looking for. He is also known for producing really trainable horses, if that is a factor for you. He stood at Celle for a number of years and won his test (300 d) with impressive scores for both jumping and dressage. His breeding value for limbs is 124, and jumping is 140.
http://service.vit.de/hvp/index.jsp?zv=31&jahr=2009 (just need to type his name in)
http://www.sprucemeadows.com/le_primeur.htm

[TrotTrotPumpkn]

Here's what doesn't make sense to me about the statistics saying only 16%. Friend has a mare that was bred before a few times prior to friend buying her (as a riding horse). Mare toes in in front and out behind--quite distinctly. I saw her offspring and the geldings' also had the same exact leg conformation. I believe the stallion was "straight." Another group of mares were bred to the same stallion (all different bloodlines in the mares). I never saw the stallion but each baby's leg conformation seemed to mimic the mare's. For example, one mare toed out with her left front, but was straight with her right and her foal's legs were exactly the same (although a bit more so--I imagine when the chest fills in the baby will straighten out to be exactly the same as the mare). Other mare's were straight in front and so were the foals.

I've seen this time and again. So in general, anecdotally, it appears to me then that a mare's leg conformation is more heritable than the stallion's. I'm struggling with the "16%" figure...

Good to know about Quinar, btw, thanks.

[JWB]

I agree TrotTrotPumpkin
I also knew a mare who produced 3 foals (out of 4 breedings) with clubby feet. All were from different stallions. She got put back to work rather than being used as a broodmare because that was something she passed on 75%, although she was not clubby and the foals varied from mild to very severe. It was not an environmental issue in the case of these foals. There were three other brood mares on the farm and none of them produced a clubby foal ever.

I'm starting off with something that is not perfect and I realize I might get something with a flaw. I just think (and apparently so did the AHHA and BWP judges) that there is enough other stuff going on with her for her to be a really nice brood mare in spite of that.

Genetic can be a total shot in the dark anyhow. We bred three FULL SIBLING TBs and they are all different as night and day so I'm just trying to make the best educated guess and try to have the very best odds I can hope for.

And statistics can say what they want. You can make 100% of statistics say what you want 25% of the time.....
Some stallions "stamp" their foals more than others. I've seen stallions that tend to throw a very mixed basket of foals (pretty much whatever the mare was) and I've seen stallions who's babies all carry some trait that marks them. That's why I'm going to pick a veteran stallion with lots of crops on the ground - one who has consistently produced foals similar to what I'm hoping to produce... and in my case, one with a good track record of correct movement and legs. There are no guarantees in breeding but we can sure try to give ourselves the best odds possible.

[ne1]

"Some stallions "stamp" their foals more than others. I've seen stallions that tend to throw a very mixed basket of foals (pretty much whatever the mare was) and I've seen stallions who's babies all carry some trait that marks them. That's why I'm going to pick a veteran stallion with lots of crops on the ground - one who has consistently produced foals similar to what I'm hoping to produce... and in my case, one with a good track record of correct movement and legs. There are no guarantees in breeding but we can sure try to give ourselves the best odds possible."

it is refreshing to see this understanding posted here. this is part of the mindset we find when speaking with the most successful breeders in europe for our discipline of showjumping. whatever stallion you decide on, this, as einstein said, is 'how to think about the problem'.

baloubet is one stallion who stamps his get hard as a rule. they can be hard to miss, as can some of his conformational weaknesses, and the jump! however, as a rule, the breeders i work with estimate that the mare typically contributes not less than 60% (some estimate higher) to her foals.

this therefore, makes stallion selection based on certain traits challenging, because, as you said jwb, the 'x' factor of genetics could overrule whatever strength you would like for the stallion to bring! nonetheless, you still have to try and 'give yourself the best odds possible'. thinking this way will lead to a degree of breeding success which failing to think this way will not lead to.

breeding strengths to weaknesses will improve your breeding.

good luck!
ne1

[bloomingtonfarm]

I agree 100% with Ne1.

Genetic science and statistics are very interesting and can help decision making, BUT individual are not statistic.

Just take a look at human genetics. I have this friend, she had two children divorced and then got married again and had another child. Well his first son was a clone of his dad, her second daughter was a clone of herself and her third son was a clone of her second husband! They were so different in every aspect that it was incredible.

The same applies for horses. Statistics are statistics and you have to be careful with that. I am a huge fan of the stallion linear scoring of the KWPN but I don’t expect to have exactly what the stats have found out on a specific stallion. Some mares are very strong in producing the same characteristics in every single foal and some don’t. The statistics just reflects the average of them all. The 16 to 20% is real for the entire population but an individual like Quinar for example could be stamping his gets at a 60%. This is why European breeders are so in advance compare to us, not because they are smarter but they have the quantities, the organisation and they have the chance to see hundred of foals very easily which is not our case.

[Fairview Horse Center]

Just take a look at human genetics. I have this friend, she had two children divorced and then got married again and had another child. Well his first son was a clone of his dad, her second daughter was a clone of herself and her third son was a clone of her second husband! They were so different in every aspect that it was incredible.

You can't compare humans that have not been purpose bred for many generations of similar characteristics.

Some mares are very strong in producing the same characteristics in every single foal and some don’t. The statistics just reflects the average of them all. The 16 to 20% is real for the entire population but an individual like Quinar for example could be stamping his gets at a 60%.

Exactly. Because horses have been purpose bred for many generations of similar characteristics. Genetic density tends to breed thru.

The Hanoverian statistics did find that most legs issues were environment caused, and not genetically related. That does not mean that all are not.

Club foot is often caused by rapid growth of the bones, and tendons that can't keep up. That can be argued that growth rate is genetic, and that is why you see several offspring do the same, but it is still caused by development, not usually genetics. The outcome also can be changed by management.

Offset knees are often how the foal was positioned in the womb. Leggy horses tend to have more growth issues during their first year or two of life if not properly managed. Young horses that have done lots of showing also tend to be toed in when mature, as their legs were trimmed to be straight. Then there is the question of how toed out do you leave them, to have them straight at maturity? It is a guessing game for most farriers. Shorter necks, and longer legged foals need more aggressive management due to grazing patterns in their feet.

There will be individuals that have genetic density both for deviations, and correctness, but the statistics help us to weight each thing on our shopping list of choosing a match. There are no perfect horses, so you need to look at the whole picture: conformation, movement, temperament, and athletic ability in making a choice.

[stoicfish]

Well I would love to hear an explanation from Dr. Christmann as to how that stat (16%) was determined, because they have the “limb index” which they also deem an important and relevant stat. I think limbs may have a multifactorial genetic nature to them which makes direct correlation difficult, as opposed to something like color which is fairly straight forward. And like many have pointed out growth rate is a huge factor of leg development even though is not genetically related, and then there is an environemental factor too. So my guess is that even if a stallion was to have high degree of heritability of limbs, there are other factors by the time the offspring matures that might change those numbers. The only way I can see the index and the 16% both making sense is if the stallion is able to transmit all the factors, such as slow growth rate, good utilization of nutrients, etc. That would be an interesting correlation study to see what are the “other” traits that affect limb development.

The heritability article http://www.hanoverian.com/ludwigherit.html

You can't compare humans that have not been purpose bred for many generations of similar characteristics

Bloomingtonfarm - I agree with you about your example. Warmbloods are not that uniform in there genetic make up as a group, if they were we wouldn't pay $5000 for a straw for one stallion as opposed to $1000 for a LFG on another. Any one individual genotype may be more homozygous then others but I have never heard of any stallion that is guaranteed 100% dominate for all traits. If that was the case you would have guaranteed results- if there is such an individual I would like to know:) I am sure most of us have seen the highly regarded "proven" stallion offspring that are less then stellar because of the cross or even full siblings.

[bloomingtonfarm]

I've seen stallions that tend to throw a very mixed basket of foals (pretty much whatever the mare was) and I've seen stallions who's babies all carry some trait that marks them. That's why I'm going to pick a veteran stallion with lots of crops on the ground - one who has consistently produced foals similar to what I'm hoping to produce... and in my case, one with a good track record of correct movement and legs. There are no guarantees in breeding but we can sure try to give ourselves the best odds possible.

This makes sense. However if you want to be in the top of your game, I believe it might be better to use your proven broodmares to a new top stallion and keep the veteran stallion for your still unproven mares.

Each generation is and should be better than the one before, overall anyway. It makes me remember of a conversation we had with a judge from Holland who was pointing out the fact that some great stallions of the past such as Ramiro for example, wouldn't have been accepted as a stallion in today’s criteria. They done their job, but their sons and daughters are even better than themselves and so forth.

[ne1]

i agree with your point, except the one minor difference that ramiro is known to breeders to come through his daughters, not his sons. there are a couple of approved ramiro sons, but his strengths are seen where he is the dam sire or third sire in a pedigree. he is also one of those, like corde, that it is possible to linebreed with heavily without penalty. the breeders love what his blood brings in the pedigree.

just to add one little tidbit to this thread which is almost relevant :0) a quinar daughter won the 5yo world championships at lanaken (zangersheide) yesterday (or today it may have been).

the mare came from a carthago mare which are typically big beasts, which shows the value of using quinar correctly. there is much written about him on the chron bb's, but so far he is the most productive son of quidam to be approved in holstein.

kudos to karen.

[JWB]

keep the veteran stallion for your still unproven mares.


Exactly what I'm looking to do here....

[alison123]

:D I have to say that I have used the holsteiner stallion chesapeak. His conformation is outstanding. I have a mare now three by him named wishful thinking she is beautiful. I bred to him again with the same mare and now have a colt. Crimson cavalier, again beautiful. Wishful thinking was a premium holsteiner filly and we are hoping cavalier will be as well. We have our inspections coming up. Any way he is a well bred stallion and moving up. He has a lot of power. The babies are a little strong willed but I have to say not spoooky. They do test you a bit and when they know they cant get away with anything they settle. They are very smart. We will be starting our three year old this fall. I have only great things to say about this stallion. He is reasonably priced and his frozen semen worked the first time. Hope this helps. I am not sure how to post pics but feel free to look at some of his offspring on our website. Chesapeak himself is at wildturky farm.

[JackieBlue]

Actually front leg heritability is only about 16%, so more likely, those mares with issues would be improved 84% of the time no matter what stallion bred to.

Front leg correctness is mostly environment and growth, and that goes for the reasons for the issues in the mare herself, rather than genetics.

Heritability is a little more complicated than this. In looking for a good way to word my thoughts I found this on the CO State website:

"Heritability has two definitions. The first is a statistical definition, and it defines heritability as the proportion of phenotypic variance attributable to genetic variance. The second definition is more common "sensical". It defines heritability as the extent to which genetic individual differences contribute to individual differences in observed behavior (or phenotypic individual differences)."

The published heritability percentages that have been referred to fit the first definition. Heritability is known to be an abstract concept and not much help in identifying genes and predicting phenotypes.

Also from the CO State site:


Heritability and environmentability are abstract concepts. No matter what the numbers are, heritability estimates tell us nothing about the specific genes that contribute to a trait. Similarly, a numerical estimate of environmentability provides no information about the important environmental variables that influence a behavior.
Heritability and environmentability are population concepts. They tell us nothing about an individual. A heritability of .40 informs us that, on average, about 40% of the individual differences that we observe in, say, shyness may in some way be attributable to genetic individual difference. It does NOT mean that 40% of any person's shyness is due to his/her genes and the other 60% is due to his/her environment.
Heritability depends on the range of typical environments in the population that is studied. If the environment of the population is fairly uniform, then heritability may be high, but if the range of environmental differences is very large, then heritability may be low. In different words, if everyone is treated the same environmentally, then any differences that we observe will largely be due to genes; heritability will be large in this case. However, if the environment treats people very differently, then heritability may be small.
Environmentability depends on the range of genotypes in the population studied. This is the converse of the point made above. However, it probably does not apply strongly to human behavior as it does to the behavior of specially bred animals. Few--if any--human populations are as genetically homogeneous as breeds of dogs, sheep, etc. "Here is a good, brief and basic description of heretability, clarifying that it does NOT describe how much heredity contributes to an expressed trait an individual displays, but that it demonstrates the proportion of total variation among individuals in a given population that is due to genetic variation.

http://www.indiana.edu/~p1013447/dictionary/herit.htm

For anyone who wants to go more in depth on heritability, this is an informative article dealing with canine genetics:

http://www.workingdogs.com/doc0189.htm

[flisunun]

I have read your topic. What's useful innformation for my job.
I do agree with you. Those are the most effective way
have a blessed day

[stoicfish]

JackieBlue,
I think the four points are about inherited behavior, and not referring to physical traits. The different academic disciplines use terms differently
Narrow-sense heritability
... quantifies only the portion of the phenotypic variation that is additive (allelic) by nature (note upper case H2 for broad sense, lower case h2 for narrow sense). When interested in improving livestock via artificial selection, for example, knowing the narrow-sense heritability of the trait of interest will allow predicting how much the mean of the trait will increase in the next generation as a function of how much the mean of the selected parents differs from the mean of the population from which the selected parents were chosen. The observed response to selection leads to an estimate of the narrow-sense heritability (called realized heritability).


Not a big fan of the Wik but I think this is what you were getting at? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
Basically I think limbs are multifactorial and have a high degree of environmental influence which makes for a low percentage (16%) of a parent successful affecting that trait in the offspring based on their own phenotype. But we would have to ask how it was calculated to know for sure.
I would still want to see many of a stallions offspring as a guild, and registries have a limb index so they must think it is relevant too. I believe that other factors can mess up a good limb, but if the stallion is throwing offspring with issues, that will not be changed. The 16% is indicative of a population study, whereas the limb index is based on the individual.

Mutifactorial explaination http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_trait_locus

[JackieBlue]

Behavior is a trait, i.e. "personality traits", so the science still applies. Granted, this topic was started with a focus on limb correctness, but the heritability of behavioral traits is defined and calculated the same way as that for physical traits. The 16% figure does not predict a parent's ability to influence the particular phenotype in its offspring. And, to be completely technical, that number only applies to the population studied, which I believe were Hanoverians in Germany.

[stoicfish]

Jackieblue,
Not trying to be difficult but since this is an information board, they are calculated differently. Each researcher (in different fields and studies) usually tweaks the calculation to their own purpose and factors. Behavioral studies in populations seldom leads to an identification of a set of alleles and they are not sure of what aspect of behavior are nature vs nurture.
You picked a discipline with way lower heritability and a gaping knowledge hole in the link between actual genetics and behavioral traits, so the language and thinking reflects this.

From the class notes pages you linked to:
To repeat once more: Everything about an animal or a plant depends both on heredity and on the environment in which its heredity is expressed. Every gene must express itself in an environment, and all environments must act on the genotype an individual gets.

While this is somewhat true, the degree is considerable higher in behavior because they are not sure about which is inherited and what is learned or environmental. The statement “Heritability is known to be an abstract concept and not much help in identifying genes and predicting phenotypes.”
With respect, is not true in physical traits at all. Like I said I am not trying to be rude but the whole study of genetics came about because of people noticing traits being passed on with high heritability. Mendel based his whole study on traits with high heritability (and thus created the study of genetics) and first year University genetics students use fruit flies to learn because of high hereditarily. Take color of a horse, very high heritability and we can test for it. Usually traits that have high heritability are monogenic or have few polygenic aspects and have clear dom/ress.
Heritability is a great tool in identifying the mechanisms of a trait. Some traits have lower (which says something about them) and some have very high numbers, which means the transmission is more simple, like coat color. Never the less it is not abstract and is very useful in characterizing a trait.
“The 16% figure does not predict a parent's ability to influence the particular phenotype in its offspring” Actually that is exactly what the 16% predicts, but in its lower number it shows that there is lower rate of that trait being passed on base on the parents phenotype. The last paragraph of the second article you posted says it very well:

How Should a Breeder Look at Heritability Estimates?
For a breeder, its simplest use is to decide how effective selection might be, particularly phenotypic selection. For a trait with a very low heritability, selecting on phenotypes directly is not a promising approach. For these kinds of traits, combinations of phenotypes from relatives, such as is achieved through progeny testing, is needed to determine more accurately the underlying genetic merit of the potential parents. When heritability for a trait is high, phenotypic selection will be more effective and obtaining additional information on relatives is of less value than when heritability is low. Methods such as selection indices and best linear unbiased prediction have been developed to combine information from relatives to achieve this goal. The latter method is currently being used in evaluations of livestock such as beef and dairy cattle.

[JackieBlue]

Stoicfish, I have no interest in arguing with you or anyone else on this board, but just to give you a little background, I've BEEN one of those "first year genetics students" you referred to and made it a bit further than that as well. ;) Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're trying to say, but if you're implying that heredity and environment aren't intertwined in the expression of physical traits I'm afraid you're mistaken. A horse with a genetic predisposition for a club foot, for example, may display that tendency more in your barn than mine. Maybe because our feeding programs are different and maybe because your stall floors are less packed than mine. But environment does a play a role in the expression of physical traits that are already genotypically inherent. And I will stand by my earlier statement that many are oversimplifying the definition and usefulness of "heritability" when it comes to breeding. Especially when it comes to limbs. It's just not that clear cut and, again, the 16% that keeps coming up only applies to the studied population of Hanoverians in Germany anyway. Equine legs are quite literally my bread and butter so, previous education aside, I make it my business everyday to be as informed as possible in this arena.

[stoicfish]

Jackieblue,
This is not personal at all, just disagreed with some of statement that were made (as I posted). You have an interesting career and I am glad there is technology out there to help, hope I never need it but glad that I know someone if I do!
And no I never intended that the environment does not play a factor, quite the opposite. It is a factor in hereditability, and often one that reduces the numbers in value, but it does not make the overall concept “to be an abstract concept and not much help in identifying genes and predicting phenotypes.” Background information is great but needs to be taken in context and some of the statements were personal opinion. I didn’t want people to walk away with the idea that those numbers are useless. The second article was much more relevant to this forum. I think the 16% is very telling and I am not sure why Hans would be different then any other warmblood since it is a registry and not a breed.
Best Wishes

[JackieBlue]

I think the 16% is very telling and I am not sure why Hans would be different then any other warmblood since it is a registry and not a breed.
Best Wishes

Anytime heritability is calculated the figures are only accurate for the specific population being studied. The 16% figure applies only to the population of Hanoverians studied. One could probably generalize that a horse is a horse, of course, of course, but that's not really true when studying vastly differing breeding populations and environments. ;)
Seriously though, the heritability figure accounts for phenotypical differences between individuals and their peers in a given population, so the "peer pool", or specific population, is quite relevant.