Anyhoo, the subject of in-breeding dogs made me remember a NYTimes article my friend told me about a couple years ago. It’s a (if I do say so myself) damn interesting article about the huge number of genetic defects in the dog population brought about by unscrupulous in-breeding of dogs to bring out recessive traits such as blue-tinged fur or extremely small size (basically wanting dogs which resemble anime characters). It’s rather awful, particularly this paragraph:

“The breeder told Mr. Sasaki that he had bred a dog with three generations of offspring — in human terms, first with its daughter, then a granddaughter and then a great-granddaughter — until Keika was born. The other four puppies in the litter were so hideously deformed that they were killed right after birth.”

Here’s the link to the article in full:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/28/business/28dogs.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Had mutts all my life. Love ’em!

YAY!! First post ever!

Anyway just wanted to say what a Damn Interesting :P article this sure is and just as interesting if not more so reading your comments.
I look forward to hopefully having a valueable contribution one day.

-Scott

oh and i think im number 69 :S

It’s more than just appearances; I heard a guest lecturer at the U of Utah talk about their remarkable genetic plasticity, far more than that of cats. Apparently, a lot of the variability comes from a tendency to form a lot of repeat sequences in regulatory genes; these repeat sequences affect development more than had previously been suspected. The reason for the tendency to repeat tendency wasn’t known when the guy came by a year ago or so– thus no, I don’t think anybody knows where it comes from. I can’t track down the lecturer’s name, but he sure was excited about pigeons. Apparently they are also putty in breeder’s hands.

A few other points, sorry, I’m not going to bother quoting:

-Bacteria reproduce asexually. They mutate quickly. A clonal population will soon diverge– you can literally watch evolution in a test tube.

-I have heard that Chihuahuas and Great Danes, although labeled the same “species”, cannot interbreed, and not just for mechanical reasons. Sperm and egg in a dish won’t create a viable embryo.

-“Subspecies ” does not yet have a formal definition. For bacteria, it’s “serovar”; for plants, it’s “cultivar”. I have no idea what it is for dogs.

-I lived in Norway for two years (Mormon mission) and I seem to recall meeting one of these dogs. It had the cute helical tail. The owner didn’t tell me all the stuff in this article, but he said that they were part fox– which is pure balderdash.

-BJL

“Reputable” dog owners, which are also similarly rare, will research a breed before they buy one so they know about its temperament, size, activity and grooming requirements, as well as any health-related issues.”

The Master Race Comment was a bit tongue and cheek. But the attitudes I have encountered with some people and there “Pure Breeds” is similar.

As far as Dog owners, that is my point part of my point that many do not. As far and genetic diseases that are common to certain pure breeds. Take a look at this link they all have long lists.

http://www.petdoc.ws/BreedPre.htm

And this site about interbreeding very common in the Pure bred world in order to keep them pure and meet physical standers no matter what the cost

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/vet00/vet00056.htm

Great site. I can see a lot of wasted time online in my future…well, not really wasted.

About the dog: it’s possible the extra toes showed up in one dog, who was then used to breed more by the observant humans around him. Animal husbandry has been going on a long, long time now, and in ancient times was surprisingly (to us moderns) sophisticated.

For anyone interested in reading about genetics, evolution etc. I can HIGHLY recommend Stephen Jay Gould’s works. The late professor at Harvard had a real touch for explaining science in an interesting way. He wrote a monthly column for Natural History magazine for many years, and collections of these are readily available. He also proposed, with a colleague, the concept of Punctuated Equilibrium in evolution. It is quite fascinating.

On breeders: it is not only some dog breeders who are breeding for traits that can harm the animal; cat breeders and horse breeders are doing it too. Persian cats with their noses so smushed in that they have respiratory and jaw problems; Siamese that are so anorexic-looking it seems their spines should collapse; race horses with small hooves and thin hocks and legs who suffer from shattered hooves and legs…..

The people who engage in this are not altruistic animal lovers; they like power over other living things, and they like to make money from animals. Yes, I’ve heard them protest that they love the dogs or the cats or the horses, but really, actions do speak louder than words. If they continue to breed animals to conform to standards of appearance and performance rather than good health, then I cannot agree they love or respect their animals as individual inhabitants who share the planet with us.

That’s my two cents worth! Was it worth two cents?

Alan Bellows: keep up the great work! Love this site!!

Again, wow, you take quite an extreme view! “master race”?!?! LOL

James said: …I have owned a few pure bred dogs and in every case with the exception of my cocker spaniel they have had problems that were the result of genetic problems (found out later to me) that is just common of this type of breed or that breed. So yes I have had to watch dogs of mine struggle with problems that were caused by “reputable” dog breeders.

“Reputable” dog owners, which are also similarly rare, will research a breed before they buy one so they know about its temperament, size, activity and grooming requirements, as well as any health-related issues.