Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm posting this as a read for those interested in breeding, and as well as for those pet owners/buyers who like to stay informed.

The following url is to a summary page that links to a PDF (free download) which has a comprehensive list of the current DNA tests available for dogs - too many to list here so please click if you are interested.

Summary page: - http://www.springerlink.com/content/g0434425nv0314g0/

PDF: - http://www.springerlink.com/content/g0434425nv0314g0/fulltext.pdf

Of course lists like this become dated the day after they are created, and I know that there are also currently Episodic Falling and Dry Eye Curly Coat DNA tests for the Cavalier King Charles. If anyone knows of others to add, please do so.

The article also "discusses some of the considerations that should be taken into account to successfully translate scientific findings into robust and useful tools for the lay dog breeder to use, and in so doing it uses a few representative examples of DNA tests that are currently available."

Also mentioned is a higher disease mutation risk estimate for dogs, and humans, than I've seen before:

Recent data from the 1,000 genomes project revealed that humans carry, on average, between 250 and 300 recessive mutations and at least 50 mutations previously associated with inherited disorders, and it seems reasonable to assume the average dog will carry the same burden of disease-associated variants (Durbin et al. 2010). Expecting breeding dogs to be clear of all risk alleles, therefore, is unrealistic and will severely jeopardise breed diversity.

SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Very informative. But I got a little chuckle out of this...
Also mentioned is a higher disease mutation risk estimate for dogs, and humans, than I've seen before:

Recent data from the 1,000 genomes project revealed that humans carry, on average, between 250 and 300 recessive mutations and at least 50 mutations previously associated with inherited disorders, and it seems reasonable to assume the average dog will carry the same burden of disease-associated variants (Durbin et al. 2010). Expecting breeding dogs to be clear of all risk alleles, therefore, is unrealistic and will severely jeopardise breed diversity.

SOB
When was the last time humans were bred for coat or temperament? I think compairing dogs and humans in this aspect is a little unrealistic, but I'm not a geneticist so what do I know anyway. I'll shut up now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Very informative. But I got a little chuckle out of this...


When was the last time humans were bred for coat or temperament? I think compairing dogs and humans in this aspect is a little unrealistic, but I'm not a geneticist so what do I know anyway. I'll shut up now.
I don't understand why the comparison would be unrealistic, Cyric. Are you suggesting dogs, as a species, would start with more variants ..... less ......? . . . could you explain?

I did want to post another link to a list of tests, though, and it is the OFA link: http://www.offa.org/dna_alltest.html

SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Through forced evolution the dog has several variants in its genes, some by design and others as side effects.

Humans breed like rats (sorry) with little or no concern for genes.

I'm just saying that it is unrealistic to assume a similarity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,074 Posts
Very informative. But I got a little chuckle out of this...


When was the last time humans were bred for coat or temperament? I think compairing dogs and humans in this aspect is a little unrealistic, but I'm not a geneticist so what do I know anyway. I'll shut up now.

True, but if humans, a species who are basically "allowed" to breed indiscriminately have that many inherited disorders then imagine what a "controlled" group such as dogs, who's gene pools are closed off have? I agree, it is unrealistic to expect a breed to have 0 probs & I don't think we should try. If breeding carrier-carrier=carrier then it's not all bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
Through forced evolution the dog has several variants in its genes, some by design and others as side effects.

Humans breed like rats (sorry) with little or no concern for genes.

I'm just saying that it is unrealistic to assume a similarity.
I still have no clue what you are trying to get at here. What do you mean by saying that it is through 'forced evolution' that there are several variants on dogs genes?

What do you mean by 'forced evolution' and how would that increase or decrease variants?

Selection increases the incidense rate of similar genes pairing up in the same animal. Is that what you are referring to? If so this has nothing to do with the number of mutations (singular alleles) in the species to begin with. The mutation rate (the number of new mutations) in a species is not increased or decreased by selection.

The dog genome was in fact sequenced IN ORDER to help humans. We are all mammals. Genetically we work very similarly and share similar mutations with similar effects. It does not matter that we use different selection criteria to choose our mates.

The Sequencing of the Canine Genome: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/guide/dog/

Sequencing the dog genome will facilitate the identification of genes that may provide explanations for the vast range of mammalian variation and help us to better understand the genetic basis of diseases common to both human and dog. The breed chosen for sequencing is the boxer, which is one of the breeds with the least variation in its genome.

The Canine Genome: http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full

The dog has emerged as a premier species for the study of morphology, behavior, and disease.

LUPA: Unravelling common human diseases using dog genetics: http://www.eurolupa.org/

"Dogs to help cure humans"

Canine cancer research benefits pets and humans: http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/health-science/item/142-canine-cancer-research-benefits-pets-and-humans

So we believe that when we can find and develop, identify agents that can be used safely in client owned animals and they have a benefit in those dogs then we believe that they're most likely to have a beneficial effect in humans as well.
- Nicola Mason, University of Pennsylvania Veterinary School


SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,406 Posts
Thanks. A good list to have. I'm glad they've taken Juvenile Renal Dysplasia off the list for Aussies. They offered that test at Nationals one year (so got a pretty good sample of dogs of more used lines) and every single dog tested (of lines from working to show) came back affected/affected. Now if that is true, Aussie puppies should be dropping like flies from kidney failure. They aren't. I think there have been two diagnosed cases in the breed. So, there must be another gene which allows or doesn't allow expression of this gene. The thing is, DNA testing can be a wonderful tool, but the technology is still in its infancy. It's important to also look at the test versus the real life data. For instance, if a breed has PRA, and affected/affected dogs start showing signs at 14 or 15, is that a major problem? It's also important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The Basenji people learned that the hard way http://www.asca.org/advancedarticles/badgenes note that this is an old article, it appears there is either a test now for Fanconi, or coming out - not sure what the asterisk means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,406 Posts
True, but if humans, a species who are basically "allowed" to breed indiscriminately have that many inherited disorders then imagine what a "controlled" group such as dogs, who's gene pools are closed off have? I agree, it is unrealistic to expect a breed to have 0 probs & I don't think we should try. If breeding carrier-carrier=carrier then it's not all bad.
Breeding carrierxcarrier could equal normal/normal, normal/affected (carrier) or affected/affected. Ever hear of a Punnett square? http://anthro.palomar.edu/mendel/mendel_2.htm
Smarter than breeding carrierxcarrier would be breeding normal/carrier or even an exceptional dog who is affected to a normal, though it would take more generations to breed all normal dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Through forced evolution the dog has several variants in its genes, some by design and others as side effects.

Humans breed like rats (sorry) with little or no concern for genes.

I'm just saying that it is unrealistic to assume a similarity.
The genetic variants that control the variable appearance and behaviors of dogs are only very, very small part of the total genome.

What SOBs quote means is NOT that the humans for whom we have complete genomes are affected by all these disease related genes and mutations, but that they carry them. Mutations and defective genes are a normal part of being a living, biological being. Dogs are, likewise, living biological beings, and there is no reason at this time to conclude they do not also have a similar genetic load. The difference between humans and most Western dogs, is that dog breeds are bred within closed systems, so dogs are far more likely to be affected by deleterious genes because they are inbred, they are doubled up on these bad genes. Closed (or mostly closed) populations of humans where interrelated marriage is common also show higher rates of hereditary disease than outbreeding humans.

Jess
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I don't understand why the comparison would be unrealistic. They aren't. I think there have been two diagnosed cases in the breed. So, there must be another gene which allows or doesn't allow expression of this gene. The thing is, DNA testing can be a wonderful tool, but the technology is still in its infancy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
It's strange that dog breeders in the past 200 years have concentrated on artificially creating so many different "pure" dogs, instead of one ultimate doggiest dog with superior health, intelligence and versatility. Maybe this will change as we slowly begin to unravel the mysteries of DNA (we're at about 0.1% now).

Last time anyone tried promoting racial purity with humans, it was the nut that started WW2. Just sayin' . .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
54 Posts
First, it was the British and French who started World War II when they declared war on Germany. Second, there have been many, many attempts at "selective breeding" among humans over the centuries, particularly among nobility (and it sometimes led to health problems because of inbreeding.) As to why breeders have developed purebred dogs, until the past 50 years or so, dog breeds were developed for specific purposes. I have a Golden Retriever who was bred to retrieve ducks shot over water. Pointers were bred to point game birds and herding breeds were bred to herd while hounds were bred to trail. In short, all dog breeds were developed for a specific purpose until the American Kennel Club started sponsoring dog shows.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
54 Posts
We used Wisdom Panel to test two of our three dogs (the other is purebred.) While there have been a lot of criticisms of DNA tests because people didn't get the results they expected, in our case with both dogs the test came back that they were predominantly Chow, which we already knew. There were some other breeds shown that we hadn't expected, particularly in our male who we thought was mixed with Golden, as did our vet. It showed no Golden at all but showed Shih Tzuz, which was a shock, and four other breeds that we'd never heard of. We thought our female was mixed with Finnish Spitz or Shiba Inu but the test showed German Shepherd and Cocker. Considering that they got the Chow right, I'd say the tests are fairly accurate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
We used Wisdom Panel to test two of our three dogs (the other is purebred.) While there have been a lot of criticisms of DNA tests because people didn't get the results they expected, in our case with both dogs the test came back that they were predominantly Chow, which we already knew. There were some other breeds shown that we hadn't expected, particularly in our male who we thought was mixed with Golden, as did our vet. It showed no Golden at all but showed Shih Tzuz, which was a shock, and four other breeds that we'd never heard of. We thought our female was mixed with Finnish Spitz or Shiba Inu but the test showed German Shepherd and Cocker. Considering that they got the Chow right, I'd say the tests are fairly accurate.
How much do those generally cost when you really only want to know breed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,186 Posts
It's strange that dog breeders in the past 200 years have concentrated on artificially creating so many different "pure" dogs, instead of one ultimate doggiest dog with superior health, intelligence and versatility. Maybe this will change as we slowly begin to unravel the mysteries of DNA (we're at about 0.1% now).

Last time anyone tried promoting racial purity with humans, it was the nut that started WW2. Just sayin' . .
Read up on eugenics, it was terribly popular in the US after WWII.

As to the ultimate doggiest dog- for what? Hunting? Police work? Disabled assistance? Herding? Companionship?

Beagles are perfect for what they do, the right ears, nose, coat, size, drive, intelligence. Beagles would make terrible police dogs. Chihuahuas make fantastic companion animals, but I've yet to see one hunting rabbits.

Second, there have been many, many attempts at "selective breeding" among humans over the centuries, particularly among nobility (and it sometimes led to health problems because of inbreeding.)
Sometimes? No, all the time. Hemophilia is one of many genetic diseases European royalty were subject to.

Today, the people of the Gaza Strip are being forced to inbreed. They're holding the line at first cousins marrying first cousins, but due to their inability to leave Gaza or get anyone else in, the entire population is related. One of the results of that forced inbreeding is a bizarre genetic condition in which children are born without a definitive sex. There is literally no way to tell what sex they are until they hit adolescence, which is wreaking havoc in the population for obvious reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
We got the ones we used from Amazon and the price was quite a bit lower than if you purchase them elsewhere. The normal cost is around $75.00. I think we paid around $59.00 apiece.
Alright, thanks!

Read up on eugenics, it was terribly popular in the US after WWII.

As to the ultimate doggiest dog- for what? Hunting? Police work? Disabled assistance? Herding? Companionship?

Beagles are perfect for what they do, the right ears, nose, coat, size, drive, intelligence. Beagles would make terrible police dogs. Chihuahuas make fantastic companion animals, but I've yet to see one hunting rabbits.



Sometimes? No, all the time. Hemophilia is one of many genetic diseases European royalty were subject to.

Today, the people of the Gaza Strip are being forced to inbreed. They're holding the line at first cousins marrying first cousins, but due to their inability to leave Gaza or get anyone else in, the entire population is related. One of the results of that forced inbreeding is a bizarre genetic condition in which children are born without a definitive sex. There is literally no way to tell what sex they are until they hit adolescence, which is wreaking havoc in the population for obvious reasons.

Wow. That's pretty eye-opening. I've never heard anyone bring that up before, and definitely not in high school. That's pretty scary.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top