Genetic idiopathic epilepsy - Page 4

Kitkat, I  had the misfortune of breeding a dog that was put down at 7 years - uncontrollable epilepsy. One of 11, the only epileptic dog from the litter and the only one I knew of before or since. I bred his litter sister before I knew he had epilepsy. I probably would not have done that had I known. Anyway, she had a beautiful litter of 7 including a record setting specialty winner when linebred to her uncle. (Not GSD, a breed where linebreeding and inbreeding isn't considered as taboo as it is in this one.) I kept in touch with every buyer, kept 2 pups myself,  no problems. Most were used for breeding and as far as I know, there was never another produced with a seizure disorder. It's a  very complicated disease.

booboo: As noted above, the genetic heritability of epilepsy in dogs is complex and varies with the breed. While it is always wise to first eliminate known causes of seizures such as hypoglcemia, heat stress, ingestion of toxic materials ( fertilizer, snail bait, xlitol etc), the reality is in certain dog breeds - the GSD included it is known by test breedings to have a genetic hertability even tho we do not know the exact method of inheritance. Not knowing the exact method is not cause for saying it is not or can not be inherited. I am not a vet but I am an owner and student of this breed for over 50 years. In that time I have known of a few  GSDs that had or passed on epilepsy. Of the few dogs I have known in all but one dog it was determined to be an inherited condition and the one dog was basically undetermined because not enough was known re the pedigree. Certainly the dogs from the old English lines that were studied, inherited AND passed on and continue to pass on the disease. As Blitzen noted we do not even know if this is something that requires inheritance from both parents - it may not. Besides being a threshold multi factored problem it may be combined with something like incomplete penetrance or dominance. Since it is multi factored it could be complicated by either or both dominance (Dominance is not inherent. One allele can be dominant to a second allele, recessive to a third allele, and codominant to a fourth - wikipedia) or epistasis (Epistasis ["epi + stasis = to sit on top"] is an interaction between alleles at two different gene loci that affect a single trait, which may sometimes resemble a dominance interaction between two different alleles at the same locus....Classical genetics considered epistatic interactions between two genes at a time. It is now evident from molecular genetics that all gene loci are involved in complex interactions with many other genes (e.g., in metabolic pathways may involve scores of genes), and that this creates epistatic interactions that are much more complex than the classic two-locus models.-Wikipedia) Under penetrance Wikipedia notes this about polygenic traits "Most biological traits (such as height or intelligence in humans) are multifactorial, influenced by many genes as well as environmental conditions and epigenetic expression. Only a statistical measure of association is possible with such polygenic traits." The bolding is mine. See also info on polygenes.

The bottom line is that we just don't know yet. I would like to suggest that a fund be established in Dr. Malcom Willis' name to fund a study similiar to what he did where the affected dogs were bought and used for test breedings but also using more recent advances in molecular genetics to see if some answers can be teased out. The Aussie people did something similiar w/ a problem within their breed and the affected dogs were homed by old time breeders who saw the value of stopping a problem. The dogs were loved , the progeny responsibly dealt with (when necessary put down with love and care). If nothing else lets start with a database of affected pedigrees - but this MUST be done on a highly ethical verified basis - no web "suspected" carrier inclusion. One of the breed clubs or in the UK I believe you have a health organization could organize this and require veterinary documentation and if necessary DNA proof of parentage before a dog and his pedigree is entered into a database. The database would not be proof that the particular dog had an inherited problem as sometimes by pedigree it can look to be inherited when some other mechanism is going on ( damage from a virus, or uv radiation etc tho even here the suspicion raised is that individual may have a genetic predisposition that got triggered). But a verified pedgree database for known epileptics with information such as sex, age of onset, response to treatment could possibly give us very important information.

Sunshine, Lets put the myth that Germans don't use close linebreeding  or inbreeding to bed. they do, they have. Just look back at the first 30 -40 years of the breed and you wil see an astounding amount of both. You can find it in virtually any decade. It is less common today but still happens. Usually treated today as if it was an oops breeding and they get special despensation to register the dog with pink papers.

What has been lost to the detriment of the breed, is the preservation and use of "off " lines ( alternative, less popular). In the early days of the breed the SV actually had an open stud book which allowed any active herding dog to be entered into the registry. I believed that was allowed until at least 1938 and possibly as late as the 50s. If Silbersee still posts perhaps she can check with her SV friends about that for us. Von Stephanitz and his successors also made a point of preserving alternative or secondary lines ( giving lower places at the Sieger show but keeping them in the fold) so that when a "fix" was needed there was a place to go to find the traits needed. In fact at one point they stopped giving numeric places and merely grouped  dogs by their rating - all v's all sg's, because too much attention and breedings were focused on the top winners ignoring lower placed., just as worthy dogs. I believe but well may be wrong - feel free to correct me- that the last use of a secondary line was when Volker v Zollgrenzschutz Haus was made sieger in 1959 and 60.  Certainly it was not used during the Martin brother era and I suspect not during Dr. Funk's reign either.

By the way re the suggestion of 7 generations of inbreeding resulting in a "clone", a real live example of incredibel constant inbreeding for multiple generations was the horse Hambletonian and the result was a new breed of horse - the Standardbred. I picked up an old book years ago the had a huge pedigree of the horse folded in the back with some incredible # of gnerations and it stunned me to see how inbred each and every generation was.

Hello TIG nice to see you posting again.  After reading your above post I believe there has already been something started with accumulation of pedigrees and other health related information;  something that Margaret did a lot a homework on this site.  I will try to find the info and bring it to this forum again.  Hope I can find it.  Great day  Nan

Bubba and Blitzen have both said what I was thinking.  My husband has idiopathic epilepsy (or "had", he's been on medication and hasn't had a seizure in probably 6 years) and FWIW it's not like we're planning to never have a family. He started having grand mal seizures when he was about 26 years old. I know the dog/human comparison isn't always fair, but, just sayin. I'm not sure how accurately one can even claim that "idiopathic epilepsy" is "genetic" since idiopathic means the cause isn't known.  Epilepsy just describes the condition - seizures.  I don't disagree there aren't genetic links (my parents are good friends with a family that has four boys and one by one they have ALL developed epilepsy after a certain age and have grand mal seizures), but I think we have to be very careful not to start writing off dogs and lines from breeding because some of these things pop up here and there.  Unfortunately the breed is rather unhealthy so doing so would leave us with very little, if any dogs to be bred.

VKGSDs - I found the last part of your post 10th April a little worrying.  You said "but I think we have to be very careful not to start writing off dogs and lines from breeding because some of these things pop up here and there.  Unfortunately the breed is rather unhealthy so doing so would leave us with very little, if any dogs to be bred.

The things that are detrimental to the breed and pop up here and there are exactly what should be avoided.  The rather unhealthy things that we see in the breed today have left a very limited gene pool due to the constant inbreeding that has taken place and, particularly in the showlines.  Until breeders collectively make a serious effort to eradicate the problems the situation will continue to get worse.   However, sadly, the good old greenback prevails above all else.

To widen the gene pool there needs to be a good deal of contribution from grey dogs, bi-colour's and blacks together with the use of working dogs who are anatomicaly very good.  The problem is that breeders will not take this route because of the differances between the different factions.  It was Hermann Martin and his cohorts that are primarily responsible for the situation that we have today.  I find it absolutely astounding that when, in Hermann Martin's time as President, the senior Judges and Koermeisters abrogated their responsiblities towards the breed  by failing to put the President under pressure for a policy which together with the fake pedigrees have led us to where we are today.

In an earlier post I listed dogs who are known producers of epilepsy.  These males clearly passed on the problem of epilepsy.  Ludwig of Charavigne was the sire of Ramacon Philander who in turn sired Ramacon Swashbuckler.  The sire of Syrious Norge was Quadrille of Eveley whose sire, Vondaun Quebec, was sired by Ludwig of Charavigne.  It is clear that epilepsy was inherited and god only knows how many more epileptics were produced because apart from the secrecy surrounding the problem we do not know how far forward the disease was transmitted.

Mackenzie

 

Mackenzie, by your post, it seems to me that you're misunderstanding VKGSDS' post/point. 

Yes, missed my point.  I was talking about IDIOPATHIC epilepsy.  If you know of dogs that have confirmed genetic causes, then by all means do NOT breed them!!

I totally get widening the gene pool.  When we bred my new up-and-coming dog, he was a big outcross (WGSL to western European WL) so I totally get the importance of avoiding the bottleneck and am probably willing to take that much farther than most people on this forum.

Information post for UK members of PDB who may not have seen

what follows in the dog press:

 

There are ways of helping with the research work on Epilepsy

and other GSD health issues. One is to donate money to the

GSD Information Group, c/o Dorothy Cullum ('Cermar').

Another is the Animal Health Trust;  as well as funding they

need samples from dogs, in some cases affected and unaffected

cases, in their Idiopathic Epilepsy research programme they have asked

for DNA swabs from fitting dogs.  Owners should contact Chris Hazell,

GSD UK Breed Health Co-ordinator, email:  c.hazell@tiscali.co.uk

 

                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

BTW, to clear up a confusion which seems to  have arisen on this thred:

The term 'Idiopathic Epilepsy' is used to describe Epilepsy which is thought

to be of polygenetic origin.  So although it is pretty certain genetics are

involved (as distinct from other kinds of Epilepsy originating in other known

causes ), it IS still 'idiopathic'  because the exact causal factors - which of

the genes are involved, how they work together to produce the illness - are

still unknown.

 

Maybe the best way to combat Epilepsy, until we pin it down better, is to

do as Malcolm Willis suggested:  to not allow a build-up of particular dogs on

a pedigree.  We need more research, we need more owners to 'stand up and

be counted', we need Stud owners to be careful about which bitches they

allow their boy to mate, where there are any known fitters behind him or those

bitches put to him.

VKGSDs - I am well aware of the thrust of your comments, however, IMO the part that I have drawn attention to can imply something else.  It seems to suggest that as long as things only pop up here and there then it is OK to continue using those animals in the hope that the gene pool does not shrink any further.  That approach is, of course, not what we want.

As an example, many years ago when hip dysplasia was rife in Germany and they started to x-ray the dogs, Chris Rummel decided to introduce "noch zugelassen (acceptable for breeding)" into the grading system.  The reason at that time was because to use only fast normal and normal grades would have had a devastating effect on the gene pool.  The problem is that so many years later the system is still in use today at a time when  one would think hips should be better than they actually are now.  Why should this be so?  Anwer, breeders ignored the problem and abused the system by the continued use of the noch zugelassen grade which extended from fast normal to almost no hips at all.

Lets face it, problems should be dealt with when they pop up here and there and not once the problem has escalated to the proportions that HD has.

Mackenzie