Bloodline certificate

[dizzyfish]

I'm beginning to see bloodline certificates offered with certain koi. There is a picture of the koi and a couple of dates, and most of the information is in Japanese characters. Does this certificate list the pedigree of both the female and the male(s) used to produce this particular koi? Can two different males be used to produce a fish that gets a bloodline certificate? I'm not exactly sure what a bloodline certificate tells us.
Mitch

[RayJordan]

Hi Mitch,
The koi breeder bloodline certificates I have seen have a photo of the koi and the date and lenght of the koi when the photo was taken. Also the date the koi was hatched. Usually but not always gives the name of the female parent koi but not usually the male/s used. Some recently show a KHV and SVC test date/s for the breeders/dealers facility. They seem to be getting more popular with the higher end breeders and koi.

I don't know if some certificates might be more detailed. To me these certificates are nice records for your koi especially the ones that show photos at Tosai and Nisai stages for you to study development. Personally, I wouldn't spend 2 or 3 times more just for a koi with a certificate. Buy the koi not the breeder or the bloodline, or the certificate.

[dizzyfish]

Thanks Ray,
I think the bloodline certificate would be nice to have, but I would like to know who both parents were. For example it would be nice to know if your koi came from the exact same pairing that produced a fish like Jessia Rose or if it was a somewhat less successful pairing. Perhaps this will be something the breeders will be willing to share in the future.
Mitch

[aquitori]

Bloodline Certs, state who the male and female parents are, but honestly they dont guarantee anything as far as the fishes development. You might end up paying more just for the cert.

[bekko]

My impression was that they usually use several males just in case one of them is shooting blanks.

The most important reason to use a particular bloodline and pairing is to increase the percentage of acceptable offspring and increase the likelihood of a couple of exceptional offspring. It's a numbers game.

Since there is a possibility/probability that the koi will not turn out as well as you hope, the certificate could turn around and bite the breeder. Some things are best forgotten.

-ste

[dizzyfish]

I can understand multiple males when experimenting with new pairings........however. Do the better breeders have DNA tests done to fine out which male produced the best progeny with a certain female? With the modern technology available and the large sums these top fish can command, why not find out which male fathered the best of the bunch? Why not just use that male for the next spawn? Sure seems like it would save a bunch of culling.
Mitch

[KoiCop]

is rough sex. In the wild, carp flock spawn -- that's why injuries and deaths are common.

In a controlled spawn, the males have to corner, pin and batter the female to get her to release the eggs. The danger of using one big male is that they can kill the female while one small male can seldom get the job done.

That's the reason why two, smaller males are usually used. It's a physical thing. Don

[bekko]

There is so much variation in offspring that it is possible to get an exceptional koi from just about any pairing. However, it is impossible to statistically validate that one pairing is better than another because of the high degree of variability and the fact that very few offspring are raised to an advanced age. What separates a good breeder from a bad breeder are relatively small differences in the percentage of acceptable offspring and the culling expertise to recognize an acceptable offspring at a young age and quickly discard the rest. Logistical constraints (rearing space and time) force the breeder to operate on gut instinct. It's more art than science.

-stev

[dizzyfish]

Quote: Originally Posted by bekko What separates a good breeder from a bad breeder are relatively small differences in the percentage of acceptable offspring and the culling expertise to recognize an acceptable offspring at a young age and quickly discard the rest. Logistical constraints (rearing space and time) force the breeder to operate on gut instinct. It's more art than science. -stev

I understand the points made by Don and Steve, however science might be able to play a role in giving one breeder an edge over another. Say you were trying to improve a certain quality (like shiro), and wanted to use males from different lineage to breed with a promising female. You might spawn them normally and cull down to the most promising 200 or so that you want to growout to the nisai size. At the nisai size grade these fish from the best to the worst. Now you would DNA test these nisai to see which of the male parent koi produced the highest quality. Perhaps you could test the DNA at the tosai stage and take good photographs, so these fish could be sold as part of the two year old harvest. The results might tell you that you did not want to use one of the males for parent koi again with that female. Anything that gives you an edge in a competitive business is worth considering.
Mitch

[bekko]

Well, maybe - some day.

They say that the cost of a DNA fingerprint will soon be down to about $50. However, you also have to pay someone to interpret the results. This will probably remain the most expensive part of the process.

Line breeding is known to increase the probability of getting offspring which resemble the parents and line breeding is fairly common on koi farms. Thus, the suspect oya may be difficult or impossible to differentiate.

The technology is not quite there yet. This provided by our friend, Google....

WE DESCRIBE THE USE OF MICROSATELlite DNA markers, previously developed for common carp, to investigate a forensic case involving ornamental koi carp. Two South African breeders offered koi strains for sale, which a thirdbreeder claimed were taken illegally from his ponds. Screening of four microsatellite markers provided polymorphic results for koi, demonstrating their applicability for forensic studies. Amplification product sizes were comparable to those published for common carp at three of the four loci. We observed higher allelic diversity among koi carp than had been reported for a panel of inbred common carp. Coefficients of population differentiation showed no significant differences between the populations involved. Consequently, our analyses could not convincingly prove or disprove foul play. The latter ambiguity was most likely the result of sampling constraints rather than the suitability of the markers. Our results provide a foundation for future application of microsatellite markers for forensic investigation, marker-assisted breeding, and population diversity analysis in koi.