# Question on LUW



## cadavenc (Oct 19, 2021)

I am greatly interested in a litter from a reputable breeder and noticed LUW-0 for Sire and LUW-1 for Dam. I know LUW-0 is great. Could someone help me to understand LUW-1? One more thing, if one of the parents has HD-fast normal, will you think this litter is acceptable?

Thanks!


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

cadavenc said:


> I am greatly interested in a litter from a reputable breeder and noticed LUW-0 for Sire and LUW-1 for Dam. I know LUW-0 is great. Could someone help me to understand LUW-1? One more thing, if one of the parents has HD-fast normal, will you think this litter is acceptable?
> 
> Thanks!


I’m no expert but the article link here explains it pretty clearly: New Page 1

At the middle of the article it lists the two clinical incidents that can be caused, which is why I personally passed on a pup from a recent litter.

@Magwart may be a good reference here?

edit: if you look at the following link, Xenon Ja-He | Dog profile - information and data – working-dog
you’ll see the LUW-0 designation mid page next to ‘Lumbosakraler Ubergangswirbel’ which translates from German to ‘Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebra’; so I think the only question would be the severity level and amount of risk you might be accepting.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

First - HD Fast is acceptable. My girl has fast elbows. Her dam does as well. I asked a lot of questions on this when my girl came back with Fast elbows My boy's grandmother is OFA Fair - that line has produced good and excellent's. So.....Fast does not concern me. The breeding pair would concern me. I would want the other dog to have stellar orthos. 

The SV is grading LUW. I don't think they have really determined what to do with it yet. I'm not sure what a 1 means. You might want to look on the SV site for a grading explanation and what they feel is acceptable to breed, even contact USCA. They might be able to help. Just a note, anything I have found on LUW in humans is that it is congenital, not heriditary.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

From a second article, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.13380?af=R
here's what I can find on the levels: 

TraitTrait valuesDefinition of traitnLTV0-3LTV-classification (all types)LTV00-10=LTV types I-III, 1=LTV type 0LTV10-10=not LTV type I, 1=LTV type ILTV20-10=not LTV type II, 1=LTV type IILTV30-10=not LTV type III, 1=LTV type IIILTV230-10=not LTV type II/III, 1=LTV type II or III

And the breakdown is listed as this:

_Inclusion criteria for this study were met by 27,579 GSDs born between 2006 and 2015. Mean age of examined dogs was 16.0 months. Of the included dogs, 12,962 were male (47.0%) and 14,617 were female (53.0%). Normal anatomic lumbosacral transition (LTV type 0) was found in 21,017 dogs (76.2%). LTV type I, characterised solely by a separation of the spinous processes between the two most cranial sacral vertebrae, was detected in 4,145 of the dogs (15.0%). The prevalences of the symmetrical LTV type II and the asymmetrical LTV type III were very similar with 1,198 (4.3%) for type II and 1,219 (4.4%) for type III. _

It is something I'm going to have to become better acquainted with because I would hate to look over a good pup if it is as @Jax08 mentioned above. I just lacked enough information to proceed with the purchase at that time. Probably something my vet will need to help me with.

The one statement from the above article that got my attention was:

_Therefore, dogs with *LTV type I have*, compared with dogs with a normal lumbosacral junction, *a relatively increased risk to produce progeny with the more severe LTV types II and III. *_

It could all boil down to the purpose of the dog you plan to buy.


----------



## cadavenc (Oct 19, 2021)

Thanks for the info. What we're trying to do is to find certainty in this uncertain world


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Rionel said:


> It is something I'm going to have to become better acquainted with because I would hate to look over a good pup *if it is as @Jax08 mentioned above. * I just lacked enough information to proceed with the purchase at that time. Probably something my vet will need to help me with.


What does this mean? 

I said I didn't know what LUW-1 means.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

Jax08 said:


> What does this mean?
> 
> I said I didn't know what LUW-1 means.


I was referring to the 'congenital' vs 'hereditary' aspect of it, and that I would have to keep learning about what that meant in a practical sense (will it continue to be passed down thru breeding ?).

LUW-1 apparently refers to the location, as I take it the from the second article as,,,

_"LTV type I, characterised solely by a *separation of the spinous processes between the two most cranial sacral vertebrae * " _viewed with the latter remark from the article_ "Therefore, dogs with LTV type I have, compared with dogs with a normal lumbosacral junction, a relatively _*increased risk to produce progeny with the more severe LTV types II and III. "*

After losing a dog last year with a debilitating disease, I'd like as much clarity as possible going forward, before buying another. I'm also looking for clarification.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Rionel said:


> I was referring to the 'congenital' vs 'hereditary' aspect of it, and that I would have to keep learning about what that meant in a practical sense (will it continue to be passed down thru breeding ?).


humans. I said that in humans everything I found said it was congenital. Congenital is not hereditary. It's how the embryo formed irregardless of genetics. But there is nothing to say that is true for dogs.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

Roger that.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

I try to remain cognizant of the fact that studies are limited in scope, though this seems to span several years and on thousands of dogs, and that their references to prior studies make the reading "dizzying" to lesser informed people like me. Definitely a good discussion for me to have with a veterinary radiologist (if there are any on this board, I would love to hear their take on it). Overall, the second article identifies heritability, but the next article I find might dispute it. Gotta love studies- lol.

Here's it is...

* CONCLUSION*

The results of the present study confirm the high prevalence and the genetic basis of LTV in GSDs. *The moderate heritability of LTV in GSDs enables an efficient reduction of their frequency and thereby of potentially correlated locomotor diseases through targeted breeding measures.* Data collected during the routine radiographic screening on CHD are providing a suitable basis for breeding analyses and selection purposes. _*Because positive additive genetic correlations between the different types of LTV indicate a shared genetic background, all types of LTV, including LTV type I, need to be considered for future breeding programmes and selection schemes. *_Although the use of EBVs has clear advantages over phenotypic selection, LTV phenotypes can serve as input for first-line breeding measures until breeding strategies based on EBVs are set. To enable both, LTV recording must become an integral part of the routine screening protocols of dog breeding.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

@Rionel 



Jax08 said:


> humans. I said that in humans everything I found said it was congenital. *Congenital is not hereditary. * It's how the embryo formed irregardless of genetics. But there is nothing to say that is true for dogs.


Apparently I am very wrong about that!!!!









Definition: "(of a disease or physical abnormality) present from birth."

Sorry for that bad information!


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

@Jax08, the way I see it, I learn more from your posts than I do from mine! You know how it is with articles and studies - there's always someone else in academia writing for their next monetary grant : ) I just try to find consensus and then make (hopefully) good decisions.


----------



## mnm (Jan 9, 2006)

LUW 0 means no Transitional Vertebrae. LUW 1 and 2 are still considered acceptable for breeding, but selection of breeding partnershould be better or 0.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

mnm said:


> LUW 0 means no Transitional Vertebrae. LUW 1 and 2 are still considered acceptable for breeding, but selection of breeding partnershould be better or 0.


I am curious if you've seen offspring of such pairings, where orthos of those dogs have been performed? I think unless a whole litter (and many litters) is/are screened for TV heredity, it wouldn't be of much use, either in promoting the practice or frowning on it (indefinitely). For now, I have to consider this an unconscionable practice by any breeder who knowingly does this. When you consider how many breeders jump on the "horrible BYB" lack of ethics, it makes it just that much more unsavory.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

@Rionel - checking for LUW is fairly new. My boy is 8. It was not a thing then. Faren is 3, it is a thing now. We literally will not know if it's making a difference for several generations as it took for information for HD/ED. I'm not even sure that OFA is even grading TV at this point, they were not when I sent in Faren's xrays to the SV. 

Here's the thing - you can't throw out all the dogs. If a dog is HD Fair - that's still breedable. My male's grandmother was fair. She produced only good's and excellent's. I would assume the same line of thinkng for LUW 1/2. It's the pairing that matters. LUW 2 should only be bred to LUW 0. DM at risk should only be bred to clear which will produce carriers but not at risk. Those dogs in turn can be bred to clear. and so on. 

Most litters do not have entire litters xrayed. We can only go by the information we have. And many dogs get xrayed, come back bad and are never sent to OFA or SV so that official information is never entered. 

To be fair - a reputable breeder is not going to breed a dog with a bad TV. I already know some that have washed nice dogs in every other way for it.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

Agreed, you can't throw out all the dogs, but probably the majority aren't screening for this. With the history of HD in the breed, I hope more breeders will actively do the spine evaluations, in order not to exacerbate an issue. I think ideally, breeders that own dogs with TV, that they just can't eliminate from the gene pool, should be breeding control litters specifically, and not sell any of those dogs until they prove these things out thru generational spine studies. To do otherwise once they know is reckless. If offspring were consistently tracked and reported, some definitive progress could be made. That's what the study posted above suggests. It probably won't be done by USA breeders because of the financial loss. But, to also be fair, a lot of dogs get washed out for a variety of factors that don't cripple them later on in life. It's a concerning thing on both sides of the argument.

I posted a vid from a Swedish breeder, on the "Look For Balance" thread, who talks about how crappy their initial breeding stock was, and how far forward their lines moved over a 16 year period. It takes time, effort, financial backing and honesty to do that.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I think reputable breeders are screening for this. They are doing the xrays. it's now a mainstream thing to do. It's just that it's a new thing. And I hate to break it to you but if a European litter comes up with bad orthos - you don't know it. I've been told thru legit sources of entire litters being destroyed. So I wouldn't jump on the "USA sucks" bandwagon. That's a huge assumption that a breeder here would not wash a dog for bad orthos. I know that happens. Christina O'Kane just washed one of her breeding females because a few offspring came back with bad orthos.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

I'm really not on a "USA Sucks" bandwagon. The truth is (and I reference it on my earliest post above) that I passed on a litter recently because of a LUW1 rating on one of the dogs.. That's one of those litters where the breeder has jacked up his price overnight, and he's in the USA. People just have to know where they draw the line for their own comfort. If that means they look forward to dogs wearing wheels on their hind ends one day, well that's up to them. Kudos to Ms. O'Kane, else we end up with a market that breeds dogs with three ears because their pups come out with two ; ) I hear ya. I would never knowingly breed or buy a dog with spine anomallies- full stop.


----------



## Rionel (Jun 17, 2020)

This article from the SV is interesting and does a better job of describing the types. It looks like by the time type 1 is indicated, abnormalities are present : http://www.germandogs.com/images/LUW_English.pdf

The way it describes it is that the first location of the sacrum (S1) should be fused with the remaining sacrum locations, and with type 1 it is not.

So I don’t know how anyone could see this as a positive condition for breeding. Apparently it’s just a voluntary screening.


----------



## LuvShepherds (May 27, 2012)

Jax08 said:


> I think reputable breeders are screening for this. They are doing the xrays. it's now a mainstream thing to do. It's just that it's a new thing. And I hate to break it to you but if a European litter comes up with bad orthos - you don't know it. I've been told thru legit sources of entire litters being destroyed. So I wouldn't jump on the "USA sucks" bandwagon. That's a huge assumption that a breeder here would not wash a dog for bad orthos. I know that happens. Christina O'Kane just washed one of her breeding females because a few offspring came back with bad orthos.


My first breeder dumped a whole line after getting unexpected elbow dysplasia. She Speutered and gave them away as pets, or retired them and kept them as her own pets. She did surgery on any that needed it.


----------



## mnm (Jan 9, 2006)

I spayed and placed a really nice female whose ortho's came back as passing in every area, but was lowest ratings on all, so was spayed and placed into a wonderful home. Recently, my young female, with good ortho clearances, titles, super temperament, gorgeous, but came down with severe allergies right about 2 years old. Waiting to spay for a couple months yet, because she just came out of heat. Then will be looking for a great home for her. She's doing great on allergy meds. But a littermate sister also has severe allergies, and I heard from another breeder who used the same male, that their litter of pups also had several with severe allergies. Doing the right thing is not easy, but must be done, for the breed. Some are not willing to admit the health issues in their lines.


----------

