Dexter Genetics - Is there a variance around the world????

[jamshundred]

Carol,

I sincerely apologize for erring in my perception of the comment. It has been a rough week plus here!
The remark about the semen had no relevance to the dicussion - so perhaps you can see why I jumped to an errent conclusion. Sorry. Still confused though because YOU did bring up the semen search which you said didn't interest you which why you didn't bring it up. Have I really heard the end of it?

Judy

[midhilldexters]

Apology appreciated, thank you.
 I think maybe if I'd have been clearer in what I wrote it may have made more sense? Lindon had mentioned semen, CD had said she wouldn't need it ..... So in my head it made sense that's why you were requesting semen, for that project. yes i was surmising? Make more sense?
In regard to the it didn't interest me quote, I was referring to bringing it up when I saw the add on the British site, which was quite some time ago, not just in this thread.
Hopefully all more clear?

Carol K

[jamshundred]

Absolutely all clear. . . but the semen had nothing to do with UCD. It was for parentage verifications in the Legacy database. Legacy tries to make all the oldest connections possible especially of living animals or where there might be a chunk of meat still hiding in the bottom corner of a freezer.

Judy

[Deleted]

Thanks Judy and Carol

This information is absolutely wonderful for me and I bet, everyone else on the forum.

I will be copying your in depth reply of dexter history Judy.

YOU need to write a book or have a website with all this info on it. Gosh it is so good to read and learn the history.

We are not expecting miracles in the research with UCD, but it does have to start somewhere so it can progress as we move forward.

FIFTY years in Dexters WOW !!!!

My lunchtime break at work will be coming back and reading all the info from the provided links - thank you.

Cheers Donna

[Deleted]

Hi Genebo, I certainly will, and I intend to keep in touch with Judy too. That woman is amazing in what she knows and in the how's to get the information she is seeking.

[cddexter]

dug up old bones in the back of her pickup?

When pha hit, I talked with Eric Lawlor, and he agreed to dig up Wheatear to get a bone for me to test. I was really excited.

Then I checked with a university research dept. who did forensic dna work, and was told the bones were too old, they couldn't get dna from them.

Did I give up too easily? Where's Judy getting her old bones tested? is there a cut off date for being able to test?

Maybe we can check Wheatear after all? That would put all the questions to rest.

c.

[Deleted]

Bones too old?
Really?

I will drag out some of my old data when working at CSIRO. It wasnt related to bovines, but poultry at that time..................

Now I never ever thought of asking for Wheatear's bones.Good thinking there C.

But to really think about it, Would it make much of a difference to locate the ‘source’?

PHA test was not available until recently, and there was that early on study of bull dog calves, where there is suspicion that some of the physical descriptions of the foetuses is not of bulldogs but most likely that of possible PHA.

I have always wondered if PHA has not always been around, in very low numbers, but has been so easily confused with BD1?

Other than leg lengths, I could see how easily it is to confuse the two.

[cddexter]

hi. I see you've been reading up on stuff. Actually, I think it does matter. England tested a very few animals that might have been carriers, based on their best guess of where the gene might be. There is still the idea there that maybe it didn't come from them, but started with Priapus. Especially since so many of Wheatear's offspring are not carriers. I think it would help decide the source and where it should be traced.

I asked Julie about having bones tested, and she put me onto a lab in Queensland. I was told there the bones had been buried too long, the marrow would have gone and with it, any chance of getting dna. I gave up. c.

[kansasdexters]

C.

There were other Woodmagic Wheatear descendants (with no Aldebaran Priapus in their pedigree) that tested as PHA carriers. Here's one of the more famous ones that was properly reported:

www.dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=12091&HorseName=Earlona&Page=1&Sort=0

There can't be any doubt that Woodmagic Wheatear was a PHA-carrier, since there are multiple lines of PHA-carrier descendants that trace back directly to her as their common denominator.

I tested semen from Trillium Cluny and Aldebaran Priapus (his son out of Woodmagic Wheatear). Trillium Cluny tested as a non-carrier of PHA, and Aldebaran Priapus tested as a PHA-carrier. After Earlona Fillsey tested as a PHA-carrier (and she had only one line of descent from Woodmagic Wheatear), that showed that Cranworth Yanna (a Woodmagic Wheatear daughter) had to have also been a PHA-carrier. So the PHA gene could be traced from Woodmagic Wheatear to Cranworth Yanna to Cranworth Clipper to Aldebaran Yanne to Aldebaran Bridget to Earlona Fillsey.

Patti

[cddexter]

Hi Patti.

I knew about Fillsey, of course, but your post says 'other descendants...that tested as carriers'. That's plural. Have there been others besides Fillsey that go back to either Yanna or some other offspring? It just seems so strange that we only have absolute knowledge about two offspring (Priapus and Yanna) when there were so many and all the others appear to not carry. Having just one other made me think it would be worthwhile to really confirm Wheatear's status.

England only tested a few animals they thought most likely to be in the line behind Wheatear, and they came back negative. This has been used as a reason to more or less poopoo the whole issue over there, and it certainly has sunk well below eye level as any kind of issue for them.

I notice that Duncan McIntyre's resignation letter included a reference to pha...Maybe England decided not to pursue it? Anyway, yes, based on one test of one animal, we believe Wheatear is the source. I just thought it a useful exercise to confirm it 100% by checking Wheatear herself.

cheers, c.

[tarsallat]

Hey Genebo, maths is wrong. Pha carrier bred to PHA carrier gives 25% non-carrier, 50% carrier , 25% dead.

[jamshundred]

Extracting DNA from animals that are deceased has to be done with forensic testing if there is no meat available. UCD will do meat and it is the same process as tail hairs, just have to be careful with the packaging and post it overnight or priority.

The best and most successful method is with teeth, so if you want to test Wheatear have the skull dug up and pull out a tooth. The price for forensic testing is $250.00 versus $25 for meat, hair, or semen. It also has to be handled differently and there has to be communication with the lab to arrange the testing beforehand although this might have changed. As recently as tonight the online forms have changed again and they have added the ability to request this test with the other tests.


Judy

[cddexter]

Thanks, Judy. That's great news. It's a shame someone didn't mention teeth at the time. I was thinking leg bone to get marrow, but was told it was waaaaay too long ago. Is there a time limit on teeth? c.

[Deleted]

I think there is no 'time' limit on teeth.

Check this link mobile.boston.com/news/science/articles/2009/10/18/scientists_pull_an_ancient_tooth_for_dna_clues/