# How the standard translates to structural soundness?



## cirrutopia (Mar 8, 2010)

First, apologies if this is not on the right forum--it seemed the most appropriate place to me, but please move it if it isn't?

So I'm really trying to work out my breeding goals and I've been reading the AFMRA standard (which I'm not new to, but am mentioning because it's where I'm drawing from in this post).

I should also mention that I come from the world of AKC dog shows and breeding. The AKC standards, at least in my breed, are written so that dogs that conform to them will be structurally sound... not exhibiting flaws in structure or movement that could potentially result in pain and other problems for the dogs, as well as less graceful aging. My breed's standard also reflects the job these dogs have historically done, and continue to do, and strives to ensure that future generations of the breed will still be physically and mentally capable of such work. Anyway, so that's where I'm coming from...

So there are some things in the AFMRA standard where I definitely see the link between what the standard requests and how this would produce the healthiest and most capable mice. Let's start with ears. Here's the standard's text:


> *EARS *- The ears should be large and thin, almost transparent, carried high on the head and facing forward, giving the expression of alert inquisitiveness. They should stand erect and be free from folds, creases, or nicks. There should be plenty of width between the ears, but not so much as to lose the proper expression.
> http://www.afrma.org/stdsmse.htm


Okay, so large ears... I certainly see how this would benefit a mouse... large, properly shaped ears, as opposed to the dinky, curled, and almost "rosebud" ears that you often see on pet store mice, are going to better capture sound and allow the mouse to hear better... a clear cut benefit to what the standard says. As a prey animal, I'll take all the hearing I can get! 

Tailset, as described in the standard, also makes sense to me.


> *TAIL *- The tail should come out of the back and be thick at the root, tapering gradually to a fine point, and is to be free from kinks. The junction with the backbone should form the apex of a well-defined triangle, based on the hips. In length, the tail should equal that of the body or be slightly longer.
> http://www.afrma.org/stdsmse.htm


A mouse with this sort of tail is going to be better able to use that tail as a mobility aid than a tail that's just sort of "stuck on" and doesn't taper so nicely from the body.

Unless I'm missing something, though, the standard doesn't seem to say much about structure as it relates to the rest of the body except for what is briefly mentioned in the "Type" section:


> *TYPE *- The general appearance should be one of sleekness and alert attention and be pleasing to the eye. The body should be long and slim, racy in appearance, yet show strong bone. The loin is to be well arched.
> http://www.afrma.org/stdsmse.htm


Okay, so this to me is a bit more vague (though the pictures do help). I do believe I understand what they're after in this, but I'm not so sure I'm always sure of why. Can someone help me understand the benefits to what they've described?

Another mention in the "Type" section (it was in a picture caption) was of the arched loin that is desirable. I _do _see how this is beautiful, but I want a better understanding of how this sort of arch makes for a healthier and more structurally sound animal. Also, I've seen it discussed on this board that _too much of an arch_ is a problem, and can create an unsound mouse. While I understand in general how many things, when too exaggerated, can cause an unsound animal (many US German Shepherds, for instance...), I don't think my understanding of mouse anatomy is complete enough to grasp exactly what repercussions too much of an arch can have, as well as what repercussions too little of an arch can have.

I'm hoping some of you folks more experienced than I can help me better understand... and any pictures you might have would be most welcome, as well.


----------



## Rhasputin (Feb 21, 2010)

> The AKC standards, at least in my breed, are written so that dogs that conform to them will be structurally sound... not exhibiting flaws in structure or movement that could potentially result in pain and other problems for the dogs


Actually, as of now, the AKC does not disqualify dogs who have disabilities due to their breeding, as long as they conform to the standards. Cavalier king charles spaniels are a good example, in that they can have severe brain problems (I forget the name specifically of the problem) which causes seizures and severe pain. Champion dogs are known to have this problem, but it does not affect their ability to win (and be bred and make more ill dogs). German Shephards are another breed where they are massively deformed for show. Some shephards have very bad wobbles in their gait, and are simply pushed to the limit for their trademark stance.

Mice, are very health oriented. Think of the large tails, large bodies, and large ears as showing how healthy the mouse is. It is healthy enough to expend enough energy to grow these body parts and keep them healthy. 
Health is a big deal in mouse shows, at least here. Even a wobbly mouse could be disqualified.

EDIT: As for the arch, I haven't seen a mouse yet, which has been hindered by the arch. Most mice don't really have one, but those that do, even the extreme examples, I have yet to see an un-healthy, and un-stable one.


----------



## cirrutopia (Mar 8, 2010)

Rhasputin said:


> > The AKC standards, at least in my breed, are written so that dogs that conform to them will be structurally sound... not exhibiting flaws in structure or movement that could potentially result in pain and other problems for the dogs
> 
> 
> Actually, as of now, the AKC does not disqualify dogs who have disabilities due to their breeding, as long as they conform to the standards. Cavalier king charles spaniels are a good example, in that they can have severe brain problems (I forget the name specifically of the problem) which causes seizures and severe pain. Champion dogs are known to have this problem, but it does not affect their ability to win (and be bred and make more ill dogs). German Shephards are another breed where they are massively deformed for show. Some shephards have very bad wobbles in their gait, and are simply pushed to the limit for their trademark stance.


I mentioned GSDs in my post.  I know what you're talking about in Cavaliers, but I can't remember the name either. This isn't the case in my breed--I suppose I'm lucky for that.

Anyway, back to mice...



Rhasputin said:


> Mice, are very health oriented. Think of the large tails, large bodies, and large ears as showing how healthy the mouse is. It is healthy enough to expend enough energy to grow these body parts and keep them healthy.
> Health is a big deal in mouse shows, at least here. Even a wobbly mouse could be disqualified.


I suppose I get that, but... I think I'm looking for more information on structure... like... what is it in mice that would make them "wobbly" and what signs does one look to breed away from to prevent this, even if you're not seeing that your mice are "wobbly" yet? I'd obviously want to keep my line free of that and be able to pick up that it might be headed there before the mice are actually wobbly.


----------



## Rhasputin (Feb 21, 2010)

Generally a wobbly mouse is a sign of neurological problems. It's common in x-brindle mice, but very rare in other breeds of mice. I have had one mouse who was not x-brindle, and had wobbles. It's not related to their body structure itself, but related to neurological balance problems.


----------



## cirrutopia (Mar 8, 2010)

Rhasputin said:


> Generally a wobbly mouse is a sign of neurological problems. It's common in x-brindle mice, but very rare in other breeds of mice. I have had one mouse who was not x-brindle, and had wobbles. It's not related to their body structure itself, but related to neurological balance problems.


Oh, I've heard of that. I couldn't decide if that's what you were referring to, or if you just meant that the mouse didn't walk very well. For some reason I decided the latter, when that was clearly not the case--oops!


----------



## Rhasputin (Feb 21, 2010)

S'ok!


----------



## Kingnoel (Apr 23, 2011)

From an anatomical standpoint the arch COULD allow for a greater body cavity with possibly larger diaphragm and lungs. An increase in stamina might be possible. I'm not sure if this is the case, some other more experienced breeders may have thoughts.


----------



## moustress (Sep 25, 2009)

Does the 'arched loin' mean the rear quarters are a bit higher than the front? with a gentle curve from the midpoint rising to a place right over the hips? That's how I interpret that; and the 'raciness' is like the sportscar, a little slimmer in the front, with a well defined midline and muscles on the torso?


----------



## SarahY (Nov 6, 2008)

In the wild, large ears would be very susceptible to frostbite and would be easier for predators to spot.  In the wild, mice need to be agouti in order to blend into their surroundings. They also need to be small and timid, because this helps them survive. But show mice don't have to survive in the wild, so none of that matters.

Show mice are bred to be big, fit, beautiful, and as far from wild-type as possible. The standard does not induce people to breed for anything structurally unsound. The loin arch you mention is merely caused by having a longer body than a wild or pet-type mouse. It makes no difference to health or soundness of the mouse. The required thick, long tail is an outward sign of inward health. Unhealthy mice typically have very thin tails.

I think horses are a better comparison to mice than dogs, as dogs are so wildly different to wolves and have been bred for a huge amount of different tasks and tastes. Think of Przewalski horses compared to thoroughbreds. The thoroughbred is a far more attractive animal than the wild horse, and in my opinion is the pinnacle of the wonders of selective breeding. Their limbs are slimmer and longer than a wild horse, but are not any more likely to break. They are very different, but are certainly not structurally unsound.


----------



## WillowDragon (Jan 7, 2009)

Agreed with Sarah. Totally agreed.


----------

