|Barked: Thu Apr 12, '12 2:43pm PST |
|Does having a large population size, preclude the usage of the word "hybridization"?
It depends on the population size and how homozygous the breeding individuals are. That is the point.
Breeding two mainly heterozygous individuals together to create another heterozygous individual will not create a 'hybrid'.
I wrote the PennHIP sentence not implying that someone had actually said that on this thread, but to take that as a generalized concept and to apply it to the too-oft simplified benefits of outcrossing"
I know and it IS that generalized concept that I find is the straw man that often comes up when the term 'hybrid vigor' is being discussed by those in dogs.
I really don't like that straw man argument as it is totally bogus and distracts from the truth. It is dishonest and therefore it gets under my skin.
The claim is, by those on the side of the argument that wants to poopoo the idea of hybrid vigor, that people claim 'hybrid vigor' takes care of all.
Then the argument is made that it doesn't.
No one claims 'hybrid vigor' guarantees anything. Arguing that hybrid vigor doesn't guarantee anything is a non-argument. It is a distraction from the point.
Most, if not all, know that already. I have yet to meet a single breeder or person who believes their dog is invisible from health maladies because it is a crossbreed.
That hybrid vigor cannot guarantee good health, however, does not mean there is no such thing as it applies to dogs.
It is very easy to state, if the point needs to be made, that hybrid vigor cannot guarantee good health. Claiming that it does not exist for dogs, however, discredits those making the claim.
At the same time please mention that health testing and line knowledge often is not enough to guarantee good health either as that is a belief I come across MUCH more often.
Edited by author Thu Apr 12, '12 2:56pm PST
|my posts | my page | msg me | gift me | become pals|| [notify]|