September 2015

Population analysis of the Tibetan Spaniel breed

Genetic analysis of the Kennel Club pedigree records of the UK Tibetan Spaniel population has been
carried out with the aim of estimating the rate of loss of genetic diversity within the breed and
providing information to guide a future sustainable breeding strategy. The population statistics
summarised provide a picture of trends in census size, the number of animals used for breeding, the
rate of inbreeding and the estimated effective population size. The rate of inbreeding and estimated
effective population size indicate the rate at which genetic diversity is being lost within the breed.
The analysis also calculates the average relationship (kinship) among all individuals of the breed born
per year and is used to determine the level of inbreeding that might be expected if matings were
made among randomly selected dogs from the population (the expected rate of inbreeding).

Summary of results

The analysis utilises the complete computerised pedigree records for the current UK Kennel Club
registered Tibetan Spaniel population, and statistics were calculated for the period 1980-2014.

1
 September 2015

Figure 1: a plot of number of registrations by year of birth, indicative of any changing trend in
popularity of the breed, followed by the yearly trend in number of animals registered (and 95%
confidence interval).

Breed: Tibetan Spaniel

Figure 1: Number of registrations by year of birth

Trend of registrations over year of birth (1980-2014) = -8.31 per year (with a 95% confidence
interval of -11.17 to -5.45).

2
 September 2015

Table 1: census statistics by year, including sire use statistics.

Table 1: by year (1980-2014), the number of registered puppies born, by the number of unique dams
and sires; maximum, median, mode, mean and standard deviation of number of puppies per sire;
and the percentage of all puppies born to the most prolific 50%, 25%, 10% and 5% of sires.

puppies per sire %puppies sired by most prolific sires

year #born #dams #sires
max median mode mean sd 50% sires 25% sires 10% sires 5% sires

1980 121 90 59 8 1 1 2.05 1.87 76.03 56.2 33.88 19.01

1981 358 164 83 25 3 1 4.31 4.59 83.24 60.61 34.08 21.23
1982 467 180 106 27 3 3 4.41 4.72 79.01 58.24 37.69 23.34
1983 471 170 89 32 3 3 5.29 5.57 80.25 57.32 36.94 21.44
1984 489 185 83 28 4 2 5.89 6.36 83.64 61.96 37.42 21.47
1985 450 166 84 35 3 3 5.36 5.66 81.11 59.33 34 22
1986 445 161 94 25 3 2 4.73 5.08 81.35 60.9 37.08 23.82
1987 398 144 84 19 4 2 4.74 3.89 78.89 54.27 28.39 15.83
1988 470 166 90 27 3 2 5.22 5.25 82.98 60.85 34.68 22.55
1989 518 160 90 20 4 3 5.76 4.89 79.92 57.72 29.15 17.95
1990 450 138 87 23 4 3 5.17 4.19 76.44 52 29.56 16.44
1991 462 139 82 26 4 2 5.63 5.11 79 57.79 31.39 18.4
1992 425 130 68 46 4 2 6.25 7.12 79.76 58.59 38.59 22.12
1993 361 116 71 30 3 3 5.08 4.91 80.06 57.62 31.58 22.44
1994 458 138 75 33 4 4 6.11 6.18 78.38 58.3 37.99 22.93
1995 422 124 76 28 4 2 5.55 5.27 80.09 56.4 34.36 21.56
1996 470 131 72 30 4 4 6.53 6.08 79.36 56.38 31.7 22.34
1997 351 106 55 24 4 4 6.38 4.93 77.78 54.42 28.49 15.95
1998 358 102 66 25 4 3 5.42 4.62 75.14 54.19 31.56 18.44
1999 384 108 73 18 4 3 5.26 4.03 77.08 52.08 27.08 16.41
2000 264 79 54 19 4 3 4.89 3.96 76.14 54.17 28.03 18.94
2001 248 84 56 19 4 1 4.43 3.71 77.42 51.61 31.45 19.35
2002 248 83 54 22 3.5 1 4.59 4.49 80.65 57.66 31.85 23.79
2003 303 95 57 33 4 1 5.32 5.45 80.86 57.76 34.32 22.11
2004 255 84 55 19 3 1 4.64 4.47 81.96 58.82 36.08 21.18
2005 272 81 61 13 4 4 4.46 2.97 75.37 48.9 23.16 12.5
2006 217 66 48 19 4 1 4.52 3.87 78.34 52.53 31.8 15.67
2007 275 79 54 28 4 1 5.09 4.76 78.55 56.36 30.18 21.09
2008 183 57 40 21 3 1 4.58 4.18 80.33 54.1 32.24 19.67
2009 243 71 48 19 4 2 5.06 4.13 77.78 53.91 30.04 14.4
2010 219 69 54 13 3.5 1 4.06 3.28 80.82 55.25 26.48 17.35
2011 257 78 55 16 4 1 4.67 3.65 78.21 52.53 29.96 17.9
2012 162 53 43 19 3 1 3.77 3.43 80.25 54.32 29.63 18.52
2013 131 43 38 10 3 1 3.45 2.23 73.28 47.33 24.43 15.27
2014 140 39 30 13 4 2 4.67 3.12 72.86 50 25 17.14

3
 September 2015

Generation interval: the mean average age (in years) of parents at the birth of offspring which
themselves go on to reproduce.

Mean generation interval (years) = 4.22

Figure 2: a plot of the annual mean observed inbreeding coefficient (showing loss of genetic
diversity), and mean expected inbreeding coefficient (from ‘random mating’) over the period
1980-2014. ‘Expected inbreeding’ is staggered by the generation interval and, where >2000
animals are born in a single year, the 95% confidence interval is indicated.

Figure 2: Annual mean observed and expected inbreeding coefficients

4
 September 2015

Estimated effective population size: the rate of inbreeding (slope or steepness of the observed
inbreeding in Figure 2) is used to estimate the effective population size of the breed. The
effective population size is the number of breeding animals in an idealised, hypothetical
population that would be expected to show the same rate of loss of genetic diversity (rate of
inbreeding) as the breed in question. It may be thought of as the size of the ‘gene pool’ of the
breed.
Below an effective population size of 100 (inbreeding rate of 0.50% per generation) the rate of
loss of genetic diversity in a breed/population increases dramatically (Food & Agriculture
Organisation of the United Nations, “Monitoring animal genetic resources and criteria for
prioritization of breeds”, 1992). An effective population size of below 50 (inbreeding rate of 1.0%
per generation) indicates the future of the breed many be considered to be at risk (Food &
Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, “Breeding strategies for sustainable management
of animal genetic resources”, 2010).
Where the rate of inbreeding is negative (implying increasing genetic diversity in the breed),
effective population size is denoted ‘n/a’.

Estimated effective population size = 43.7

NB - this estimate is made using the rate of inbreeding over the whole period 1980-2014

5
 September 2015

Table 2: a breakdown of census statistics, sire and dam usage and indicators of the rate of loss of
genetic diversity over 5 year periods (1980-4, 1985-9, 1990-4, 1995-9, 2000-4, 2005-9, 2010-14).
Rate of inbreeding and estimated effective population size for each 5-year block can be
compared with the trend in observed inbreeding in Figure 2.

Table 2: by 5-year blocks, the mean number of registrations; for sires the total number used,
maximum, mean, median, mode, standard deviation and skewness (indicative of the size of the ‘tail’
on the distribution) of number of progeny per sire; for dams the total number used, maximum,
mean, median, mode, standard deviation and skewness of number of progeny per dam; rate of
inbreeding per generation (as a decimal, multiply by 100 to obtain as a percentage); mean generation
interval; and estimated effective population size.

years 1980-1984 1985-1989 1990-1994 1995-1999 2000-2004 2005-2009 2010-2014

mean #registrations 381.2 456.2 431.2 397 263.6 238 181.8
Total #sires 219 238 210 200 162 152 148
Max #progeny 104 82 107 91 63 58 49
Mean #progeny 8.6804 9.563 10.238 9.9 8.1296 7.8224 6.1284
Median #progeny 4 4 5 5 4 5 4
Mode #progeny 1 2 4 3 1 1 1
SD #progeny 13.595 13.331 14.251 14.168 10.736 8.9591 7.1412
Skew #progeny 3.951 2.8226 3.5365 3.4044 2.6006 2.4525 2.5754
Total #dams 553 559 486 418 326 275 231
Max #progeny 15 15 19 17 15 19 15
Mean #progeny 3.4376 4.0733 4.4342 4.7392 4.0399 4.3236 3.9264
Median #progeny 3 4 4 4 3 4 3
Mode #progeny 1 3 4 3 1 4 1
SD #progeny 2.4451 2.5965 2.703 2.9926 2.8189 3.0734 2.842
Skew #progeny 1.4554 1.1914 1.2852 1.1599 1.3048 1.5887 1.2932
Rate of inbreeding 0.038893 0.022644 0.001139 0.01499 0.01951 -0.00785 -0.0213
Generation interval 3.8117 4.0783 4.1519 4.2045 4.5691 4.7201 3.9753
Effective pop size 12.856 22.081 438.85 33.355 25.627 n/a n/a

6
 September 2015

Figure 3: a histogram (‘tally’ distribution) of number of progeny per sire and dam over each of the
seven 5-year blocks above. A longer ‘tail’ on the distribution of progeny per sire is indicative of
‘popular sires’ (few sires with a very large number of offspring, known to be a major contributor
to a high rate of inbreeding).

Figure 3: Distribution of progeny per sire (blue) and per dam (red) over 5-year blocks (1980-4 top,
2010-14 bottom). Vertical axis is a logarithmic scale.

7
 September 2015

Comments
As with most breeds, the rate of inbreeding was at its highest in this breed in the 1980s and 1990s.
This represents a ‘genetic bottleneck’, with genetic variation lost from the population. However,
since the mid-1990s the rate of inbreeding has slowed and even declined slightly, implying
maintenance and even some replenishment of genetic diversity (possibly through the use of
imported animals).
It appears that the extensive use of popular dogs as sires has eased a little (the ‘tail’ of the blue
distribution shortening in figure 3).
It should be noted that, while animals imported from overseas may appear completely unrelated,
this is not always the case. Often the pedigree available to the Kennel Club is limited in the number
of generations, hampering the ability to detect true, albeit distant, relationships.