What goes into an AnimalTrace pairing check
A useful breeding check should do more than give a pair a score. It should show which risks were evaluated, what evidence supports the calculation, and what remains unknown. That is how we built AnimalTrace’s pairing tools: around the information a breeder needs to make and explain a decision.
Start with both animals’ results
For a condition with a known recessive variant, the two parents’ results tell you the chance of each offspring inheriting zero, one, or two copies. If both parents carry the variant for fragile foal syndrome type I, for example, each foal has a 25% chance of inheriting two copies. UC Davis Veterinary Genetics Laboratory explains that inheritance pattern in its FFS test guidance.
AnimalTrace uses the lab carrier results on record for both animals when it checks a condition. The result names the condition and shows the chances of clear, carrier, and affected offspring. A result for only one parent is not a result for the pair: the missing side remains a gap to resolve before relying on that condition’s prediction.
Read the pedigree beside the genetic tests
A disease test answers a question about a particular variant. A pedigree answers a different question: how closely related are the proposed parents? AnimalTrace calculates an offspring pedigree inbreeding coefficient (COI) and shows the shared ancestors behind it. That lets a breeder investigate the number instead of treating it as a verdict.
Pedigree depth matters. Ancestors that are absent from the record cannot contribute to the calculation, so a low figure from a short or incomplete pedigree needs context. Our guide to pedigree and genomic COI explains why two methods can produce different figures.
Keep the reasoning with the decision
A pairing assessment draws on records that can change: a new lab result may arrive, a parentage link may be corrected, or a previously missing ancestor may be added. AnimalTrace records the inputs and calculation rule behind a simulation, so a later check can detect when the current records no longer match that assessment. The decision journal lets a breeder record the choice and add the outcome later.
That history matters when a program reviews a season. You can see what was known when a mating was planned, which conditions had results for both animals, and which questions still needed an answer. It makes the next conversation with a veterinarian, breed adviser, or buyer more concrete.
A search result can help build a shortlist, but it cannot establish the risk of a mating by itself. The pairing check needs the records for the two animals being considered.
What we learned building this
The hardest part of a useful prediction is keeping its scope clear. A 25% risk is meaningful for a specified recessive variant and a specified pair. It is not a summary of the animal’s entire health. A pedigree COI is meaningful for the ancestry on record; it does not fill missing branches of the family tree. A ranking reflects the goal the breeder set; it is not a universal definition of the best mate.
AnimalTrace puts those pieces together without hiding the gaps. Use a pairing check to compare candidates, decide which records to obtain next, and retain the reasoning behind the choice. The breeder still makes the decision.
See AnimalTrace’s breeding tools, or start with our guide to recessive risk in a pairing.