Inbreeds

[toomash]

We all know that people should diversify their gene pool in order to avoid certain genetic defects. If you want to preserve your purity, how deep should the inbreeding go?

Also, to what extent do you consider really small countries where partner choices are limited are inbreeding? (Iceland, Small towns around the world, rural Alabama)

I'm sure there are some advantages. I don't know what they are, but the European royal families seemed to see some benefits.

Most extreme and obvious case of inbreeding: the purest noble, King Charles II of Spain
Picture of Charles II
http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/upload/2009/04/how_inbreeding_killed_off_a_line_of_kings/CharlesII.jpg


His mother was his dad's niece. And his dad/great-uncle and Aunt/Gradma and mom/cousin were inbreeds themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain


Dating to approximately the year 1550, outbreeding in Charles II's lineage had ceased. From then on, all his ancestors were in one way or another descendants of Joanna the Mad and Philip I of Castile, and among these just the royal houses of Spain, Austria, and Bavaria. Charles II's genome was more homozygous than in an average brother-sister offspring. He was born physically and mentally disabled, and disfigured. Possibly through affliction with mandibular prognathism, he was unable to chew. His tongue was so large that his speech could barely be understood, and he frequently drooled. It has been suggested that he suffered from the endocrine disease acromegaly, or his inbred lineage may have led to a combination of rare genetic disorders such as combined pituitary hormone deficiency and distal renal tubular acidosis.


Not having learned to speak until the age of four nor to walk until eight, Charles was treated as virtually an infant until he was ten years old.

Family tree
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Carlos_segundo80.png


He had an over-sized tongue Is this where the Iberian Spanish lisp comes from?

[Fedex]

When I was in school I had a class mate that I think had the same problem, and he was from the Easter Island, a place with some inbreeding problems.

[Pallantides]

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/7030/consang500x331.jpg

[jonboyclem]

A perfect example of inbreeding, one of my old homeboys.

[EiCibaeño]

A perfect example of inbreeding, one of my old homeboys.

Is that picture circulated on the internet because I could have sworn I've seen it before.:lol:

[paulet]

Also, to what extent do you consider really small countries where partner choices are limited are inbreeding? (Iceland, Small towns around the world, rural Alabama)




i heard of medical treatment in near eastern countries to allow for healthy offsprings in cases of procreation with family members.

but it is just from hearsay

---------- Post added 2010-03-13 at 21:59 ----------


A perfect example of inbreeding, one of my old homeboys.

what is unhealthy about him?, he looks like a handsome young man telling from his face.

[sturmgewehr]

till what cousin is it considered Inbreeding???

ok Brother and sister definitely but then till what generation or cousin it is considered inbreeding???

[Decimator]

i heard of medical treatment in near eastern countries to allow for healthy offsprings in cases of procreation with family members.

but it is just from hearsay

---------- Post added 2010-03-13 at 21:59 ----------



what is unhealthy about him?, he looks like a handsome young man telling from his face.

To be honest I can see the inbreeding, he doesn't look like a handsome young man, more like a mental case dressed as a negro

[toomash]

till what cousin is it considered Inbreeding???

ok Brother and sister definitely but then till what generation or cousin it is considered inbreeding???

I think any #th-cousin on #th-cousin is inbreeding, but that happens all the time. Inbreeding between first cousins apparently doesn't pose that much greater of a risk...

[Excel]

Inbreeding can be great if you have attractive couples to start off with, as long as its balanced than why not?

[sturmgewehr]

I think any #th-cousin on #th-cousin is inbreeding, but that happens all the time. Inbreeding between first cousins apparently doesn't pose that much greater of a risk...

u can't say it is inbreeding if there r no genetic defects or if the offspring is born without defects.

that is the whole point of inbreeding that if u marry ur sister ur kids will be retarded or have a lot of disabilities and look like that king whatever his name was.

so till what cousin is it safe to marry???

ACCORDING TO THE ALBANIAN CODE, EVEN NOWADAYS IN PARTS OF NORTH ALBANIA AND NORTH KOSOVA IF U MARRY UR 6TH COUSIN U WILL BE DISOWNED AND KICKED OUT OF THE TRIBE OR CLAN.

[Excel]

ACCORDING TO THE ALBANIAN CODE, NOWADAYS IN PARTS OF NORTH ALBANIA AND NORTH KOSOVA IF U MARRY UR 6TH COUSIN U WILL BE DISOWNED AND KICKED OUT OF THE TRIBE OR CLAN.

What cousin marriage is not allowed?

[sturmgewehr]

What cousin marriage is not allowed?

1ST, 2ND, 3RD, 4TH, 5TH, 6TH

i said if u marry ur 6th cousin u will be disowned let alone 2nd or 3rd

[EiCibaeño]

Is that picture circulated on the internet because I could have sworn I've seen it before.:lol:

I knew I saw that picture before:

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/tedrules23/wigger.png

[Grynda]

1ST, 2ND, 3RD, 4TH, 5TH, 6TH

i said if u marry ur 6th cousin u will be disowned let alone 2nd or 3rd

It must be difficult to keep track of that many, I haven't a clue who my 5th or 6th cousins are. Actually I only know my first and second cousins.

I think imbreeding could cause a medical problem only as far as second cousins go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

[JaM]

Sturmgewehr (and Grynda), inbreeding is not the same as incest. I know it more or less says so on wiki, but it's wrong. However, a continuing practice of incest may lead to inbreeding. Inbreeding (long term) as such does not require any kind of incest, however.

(I read a bit about that Wiki article in the comments section, and it's apparently prone to vandalism!. It's certainly one of the worse Wiki articles, and that says a lot.)

[ludim]

1ST, 2ND, 3RD, 4TH, 5TH, 6TH

i said if u marry ur 6th cousin u will be disowned let alone 2nd or 3rd

I know what you mean about inbreeding not being a moral which I also follow you with but we have to remember that some cultures do this which is not a unusual thing for them. :)

[Rochefaton]

Also, to what extent do you consider really small countries where partner choices are limited are inbreeding? (Iceland, Small towns around the world, rural Alabama)

Partner choices are not as limited here as you seem to think. For example, Alabama has 4.7 million inhabitants, whereas Montana has 980,000. We are not as small of a population as you seem to believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population

Alabama has the 23rd largest population out of the 50 US states. I've lived here for over 25 years and have only met three people that openly claim to be inbred. Inbreeding may have been common in Alabama early in the state's history, but it is very uncommon in today's modern world.

[tomi4m10]

I live in area with lot of inbreds(kashubia), there is a few people with mental disorders on my street(about 20 homes).
I lived in block before in completely different area(45 flats) and there was noone

[sgh]

It must be difficult to keep track of that many, I haven't a clue who my 5th or 6th cousins are. Actually I only know my first and second cousins.

I think imbreeding could cause a medical problem only as far as second cousins go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

It's an interesting system though. Although you can't marry them, it does force you to keep track/maintain some contact with distant relatives to prevent a mishap. It probably strengthens clan ties to some extent.

[Agwuka]

In Igboland members of whole villages the size of towns are forbidden to intermarry, even 'brother' communities are forbidden to intermarry. There were/are so many taboos, especially with marriage and child birth.

[Suum Cuique]

Sturmgewehr (and Grynda), inbreeding is not the same as incest. I know it more or less says so on wiki, but it's wrong. However, a continuing practice of incest may lead to inbreeding. Inbreeding (long term) as such does not require any kind of incest, however.

(I read a bit about that Wiki article in the comments section, and it's apparently prone to vandalism!. It's certainly one of the worse Wiki articles, and that says a lot.)
Perhaps the word inbreeding is used for close relative marriage because it is a more concrete term. Incest has as many different meanings as there are cultures. For you, marrying your mother's sister's daughter might be incest and for millions of others that arrangement is acceptable or even ideal. The results of continuous unions of that sort can be agreed upon as inbreeding.

[JaM]

Perhaps the word inbreeding is used for close relative marriage because it is a more concrete term. Incest has as many different meanings as there are cultures. For you, marrying your mother's sister's daughter might be incest and for millions of others that arrangement is acceptable or even ideal. The results of continuous unions of that sort can be agreed upon as inbreeding.

Inbreeding has nothing to do with marrying, but it can somehow be the result:p. Incest is differently defined in different cultures, as you say. What Sturm writes just isn't only about inbreeding as such in a biological sense.

He does have a point, though, in asking about "how closely related" you have to be, but unfortunately the genetic reality isn't alway defined by the simple this and that distant cousin. You can have an inbred population where the breeding of a known distant cousin (in the recent lines) will produce an inbred result genetically, such as when there is a small founding population. In fact, there's always been a lot of inbreeding among human populations in the past, for various reasons. So, we're actually all inbred at some point.

Of course, it's different when we talk about domestic animals, here the inbreeding can be the process. If that is the case, and if that is the only definition of inbreeding, well, humans aren't bred like that, technically, and thus never in-bred.:cool:

In Saudi Arabia, where cousin marriages are common, FIRST cousin, the result is that there may be problems with the survival of fetuses. It seems like that somehow there may be a natural regulator of sorts, so a very inbred population of few individuals may end up as unable to have viable offspring. A natural limit to how much inbreeding that's possible.

When breeding pedigree early generation animals, the problem with undesirable genetics can be solved by simply killing the "problematic" offspring and keeping the more viable ones. An un-natural selection. That does not apply to humans today -but in the past it also applied in some cases, I suppose.

[Grynda]

It's an interesting system though. Although you can't marry them, it does force you to keep track/maintain some contact with distant relatives to prevent a mishap. It probably strengthens clan ties to some extent.

Yes you're right in that. It's funny I've researched and know my ancestors all the way back to the 1500s, but I don't know my distant cousins. I only know my family vertically not horizontally so to speak.

[Suum Cuique]

Inbreeding has nothing to do with marrying, but it can somehow be the result:p. Incest is differently defined in different cultures, as you say. What Sturm writes just isn't only about inbreeding as such in a biological sense.

He does have a point, though, in asking about "how closely related" you have to be, but unfortunately the genetic reality isn't alway defined by the simple this and that distant cousin. You can have an inbred population where the breeding of a known distant cousin (in the recent lines) will produce an inbred result genetically, such as when there is a small founding population. In fact, there's always been a lot of inbreeding among human populations in the past, for various reasons. So, we're actually all inbred at some point.

Of course, it's different when we talk about domestic animals, here the inbreeding can be the process. If that is the case, and if that is the only definition of inbreeding, well, humans aren't bred like that, technically, and thus never in-bred.:cool:

In Saudi Arabia, where cousin marriages are common, FIRST cousin, the result is that there may be problems with the survival of fetuses. It seems like that somehow there may be a natural regulator of sorts, so a very inbred population of few individuals may end up as unable to have viable offspring. A natural limit to how much inbreeding that's possible.

When breeding pedigree early generation animals, the problem with undesirable genetics can be solved by simply killing the "problematic" offspring and keeping the more viable ones. An un-natural selection. That does not apply to humans today -but in the past it also applied in some cases, I suppose.
I agree with you that inbreeding and incest are two different terms. I was just trying to justify why wikipedia associates inbreeding with what you would consider incest. Inbreeding is biological, incest is cultural and also highly variable. Perhaps I didn't make my point clear enough, but I was not arguing against you.

[Grynda]

Inbreeding has nothing to do with marrying, but it can somehow be the result:p. Incest is differently defined in different cultures, as you say. What Sturm writes just isn't only about inbreeding as such in a biological sense.

He does have a point, though, in asking about "how closely related" you have to be, but unfortunately the genetic reality isn't alway defined by the simple this and that distant cousin. You can have an inbred population where the breeding of a known distant cousin (in the recent lines) will produce an inbred result genetically, such as when there is a small founding population. In fact, there's always been a lot of inbreeding among human populations in the past, for various reasons. So, we're actually all inbred at some point.

Of course, it's different when we talk about domestic animals, here the inbreeding can be the process. If that is the case, and if that is the only definition of inbreeding, well, humans aren't bred like that, technically, and thus never in-bred.:cool:

In Saudi Arabia, where cousin marriages are common, FIRST cousin, the result is that there may be problems with the survival of fetuses. It seems like that somehow there may be a natural regulator of sorts, so a very inbred population of few individuals may end up as unable to have viable offspring. A natural limit to how much inbreeding that's possible.

When breeding pedigree early generation animals, the problem with undesirable genetics can be solved by simply killing the "problematic" offspring and keeping the more viable ones. An un-natural selection. That does not apply to humans today -but in the past it also applied in some cases, I suppose.

Well, imbreeding or whatever it's called, what I was talking about is the fact that having a child with your first cousin doubles the risk of having a child with a congenital or genetic disorder.

"For anyone, the risk of having a child affected by a genetic condition is comparatively low. According to birth incidence data, the risk of having a child with a congenital or genetic (including recessive) disorder is about 2 per cent. The risk doubles to about 4 per cent for first-cousin couples, mainly because of the increased risk of recessive disorders.

(Recessive disorders are associated with inheriting two copies of an identical mutation; cousins are more likely to inherit an identical mutation because of sharing a pair of grandparents, one of whom might carry a mutation that they could pass on to their children and grandchildren.)

There is a further approximately 2 per cent risk for first-cousin couples where there is also a history of consanguineous marriage in the family. Even so, a cousin couple is far more likely to have a child unaffected by recessive disease than to have an affected child.

The identification of a recessive disorder in a child has reproductive implications for the parents, who, as unaffected carriers each carrying a single copy of the mutation, have a one in four risk of having further affected children. It also has particular genetic implications for families in which consanguineous marriage is preferred, as it raises the possibility that other members of the families are unaffected carriers, who risk having affected children themselves if marriages have taken place or are planned between them."

http://genome.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTD020975.html