Comparison Chart
| Head | Tail | Size | Ears | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| > ¾ English buck | F |
G |
G |
G |
| ¾ English buck | G |
FP |
G |
FP |
| ½ English doe | F |
G |
F |
G |
| ¼ English buck | G |
G |
F |
G |
| > ¼ English doe | G |
F |
F |
G |
*Ratings given when compared to mice with no traceable English lineage.
So what does this chart show? The ideal is that a mouse where the parents have been carefully selected for that pairing can be just as good if not better than a mouse with a higher percentage of English. The ¾ English buck, while a good sized animal with a nice head, actually had very small ears and a very short tail. This buck was line bred from 100% English stock with BIS wins in the pedigree. This same buck had a littermate who had better ears, better tail, better head, but smaller size.
There is more to type than what was looked at in this example, but this gives an idea of what can be accomplished. The mouse that was less than ¼ English was selectively bred using two very nicely typed mice that had a traceable history of English lineage that was not present in a 4 generation pedigree.
So when choosing mice for breeding, the percentage of English in the pedigree does not necessarily guarantee that the mouse will be better typed. Remember, genetically the poorer type of the animal crossed to the English (assuming it is a show typed English to begin with) can be inherited just as easily as the nicer type.
Some photos of English and % English mice:

1/2 English doe
100% English buck

99.9% English buck
100% English buck
100% English doe
>1/4% English doe (way less... but still won over a 1/2 English doe at a show)
1/2 English doe (this is the doe the other doe beat at the show)

3/4 English buck at 6 weeks old
Alternate Location: SEFMA Newsletter Vol. 1 Iss. 1


