|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 8:15:59 GMT -5
www.wisdompanel.com/why_test_your_dog/faqs/#79Does Wisdom Panel® Insights™ test for "Pit-bull?" The term "Pit-bull" does not refer to a single or recognized breed of dog, but rather to a genetically diverse group of breeds. Pit-bull type dogs have historically been bred by combining guarding type breeds with terriers for certain desired characteristics – and as such they may retain many genetic similarities to the likely progenitor breeds and other closely related breeds. Due to the genetic diversity of this group, we cannot build a DNA profile for the Pit-bull. If a Pit-bull type dog was tested, we might anticipate that Wisdom Panel Insights test detect and report moderate to Minor amounts of one or more distantly related breeds to those used to breed the dog, it is possible that one or more of the following breeds might be detected at moderate to Minor amounts: the American Staffordshire terrier, Boston terrier, Bull terrier, Staffordshire Bull terrier, Mastiff, Bullmastiff Boxer, Bulldog and various small terriers like the Parson Russell. These breeds would be detected because some markers in these breeds have genetic identity at a minority of the markers Wisdom Panel Insights test uses to the breeds in our database. Some local communities in the United States have put restrictions on Pit-bull ownership. Mars Veterinary™ encourages dog owners and care providers to be fully aware of their local laws, which vary across the country. Guardian breeds? Really? Also, still doesn't explain why they test two of the breeds commonly referred to as "pit bulls", but not THE Pit Bull, the APBT. Hmmmmm? |
|
|
|
Post by suziriot on Apr 15, 2013 8:18:31 GMT -5
www.wisdompanel.com/why_test_your_dog/faqs/#79The term "Pit-bull" does not refer to a single or recognized breed of dog, but rather to a genetically diverse group of breeds. Pit-bull type dogs have historically been bred by combining guarding type breeds with terriers for certain desired characteristics – and as such they may retain many genetic similarities to the likely progenitor breeds and other closely related breeds. Guarding breeds?! Um, what? |
|
|
|
Post by suziriot on Apr 15, 2013 8:19:56 GMT -5
LOL, Mary we must have had a mind meld moment!
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 8:20:29 GMT -5
I'm curious:
If "pit bull" does NOT equal APBT, does....
"Lab" equal Labrodor Retriever?
"Golden" equal Golden Retriever?
"Shepherd" or "German Shepherd" equal GSD?
"Aussie" equal Australian Shepherd?
"Rottie" equal Rottweiler?
"Dobe" equal Doberman Pinscher?
These are all very or fairly common breeds that get mis-ID'ed all the time and show up in shelters pure or mixed or simply as unrelated look-a-likes.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 8:20:53 GMT -5
LOL, Mary we must have had a mind meld moment! LOL! I love it. |
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 8:59:13 GMT -5
For all of the breeds, Mars only included show lines. They did not include any working/field lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 9:05:33 GMT -5
As for "guarding" breeds, Mars is referring to the genetics research done by Ostrander, Boyko, et al that grouped dogs according to genetic similarities (as opposed to the AKC groupings). One of the groups that identified was referred to as "guarding" breeds. They are not saying those breeds are considered good "guard dogs in a modern sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 9:08:56 GMT -5
For all of the breeds, Mars only included show lines. They did not include any working/field lines. Interesting. So basically, they would incorrectly ID a bunch of dogs of breeds they supposedly can ID? Not being snarky, just - this makes me even more skeptical of them. Like if my hypothetical Czech-bred GSD was tested, it wouldn't come back as a purebred GSD? And this explains why game-bred-type APBTs don't come back as ASTs. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 9:10:26 GMT -5
As for "guarding" breeds, Mars is referring to the genetics research done by Ostrander, Boyko, et al that grouped dogs according to genetic similarities (as opposed to the AKC groupings). One of the groups that identified was referred to as "guarding" breeds. They are not saying those breeds are considered good "guard dogs in a modern sense. Ah, ok. SO they are considering the original Bulldog to be a guardian breed based on this research. Gotcha. |
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 9:19:18 GMT -5
I've spoken directly to the geneticists at Mars on several occasions, most recently January 2013 at the NAVC conference. They explained that they don't currently test for APBTs for several reasons. They said there are so many APBT bloodlines and they don't have enough samples to reliably capture all of them and whittle it down to a set of markers that could reliably identify them. For example, they collected samples from more than 6 bloodlines to arrive at the markers for Labrador Retrievers (and that's just for the show lines). By comparison, they said they'd need to test dozens and dozens of APBT bloodlines due to the significant variation within the breed. They also said that APBTs are not a closed gene pool in the sense that purebred show lines are. Because APBTs are not recognized by the AKC, they have to rely on other kennel clubs, which allow dogs to be outcrossed with other breeds and still have litters be registered as APBTs. This increases genetic variation even further, so they'd have to collect that many more samples. Mars also reported that the genetic testing that's been done on APBTs varies significantly from region to region (or from breeder to breeder). In some parts of the country, APBTs come back as x/y/z mixes; while in other areas they typically come back as a/b/c mixes (I'm oversimplifying this, you get the point!). It makes sense, if breeders are breeding more for function than for form, there will be greater genetic variance -- making DNA tests unreliable for APBTs. Please note, this is what Mars told me -- this is not my opinion or my guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 9:23:12 GMT -5
Kim, Mars is incorrect in a lot of what they are saying. UKC is CLOSED. ADBA is CLOSED insofar as they do not allow other breeds. AADR is CLOSED to other breeds as well, as far as I know. I think they are making excuses. Also, the breed really doesn't have much more variation (unless they are taking into account incorrect mutt-type variations which aren't APBTs anyway) than any other working dog breed.
How were they able to pin poin AST markers, ASTs have the exact same history as the APBT?
I'm not even playing devil's advocate, I'm really interested in this and would like to know. How accessible are these people? Maybe I can talk to someone at Mars directly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 9:24:49 GMT -5
Here's one of the many research papers they used. Hope this attachment works -- let me know if it doesn't come through. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 9:25:40 GMT -5
^Yup, it worked! I'll read over it a little later and report back  Thanks.  |
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 9:31:30 GMT -5
These are the breed groupings being referred to. The "mastifflike" group is synonymous with "guardian" or "guarding" breeds.   Also, this is another paper of interest re: this topic. I'm sure most of you have already read it, but attaching just in case. Dog Star Rising_2004.pdf (299.91 KB) |
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 9:41:11 GMT -5
For all of the breeds, Mars only included show lines. They did not include any working/field lines. Interesting. So basically, they would incorrectly ID a bunch of dogs of breeds they supposedly can ID? Not being snarky, just - this makes me even more skeptical of them. Like if my hypothetical Czech-bred GSD was tested, it wouldn't come back as a purebred GSD? And this explains why game-bred-type APBTs don't come back as ASTs. I can't answer that -- I'd have to ask them. I have seen numerous DNA test results from dogs pulled off fight yards(Mars, blood samples), and they've come back as a variety of different mixes and each one was different. But that makes sense, since those dogs were bred for function, not for confirmation. I've tested some of my own dogs, just out of curiosity. Sarge (cruelty case in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/Boxer/Boston Terrier mix. Junior (originally purchased from backyard APBT breeder in Philly) came back as mostly Stafford with some Am Staff. Martha (originally purchased from backyard APBT breed in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/American Bulldog/Bull Terrier. I contacted Junior's and Martha's previous owner, who told me where they purchased the dogs -- so that's based on their word, not my guess. I have not seen photos of Martha's parents, but I've seen a photo of one of her littermates -- he looked exactly like her. I've seen photos of both of Junior's parents. They look identical to him, just slightly larger. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 10:17:19 GMT -5
Interesting. So basically, they would incorrectly ID a bunch of dogs of breeds they supposedly can ID? Not being snarky, just - this makes me even more skeptical of them. Like if my hypothetical Czech-bred GSD was tested, it wouldn't come back as a purebred GSD? And this explains why game-bred-type APBTs don't come back as ASTs. I can't answer that -- I'd have to ask them. I have seen numerous DNA test results from dogs pulled off fight yards(Mars, blood samples), and they've come back as a variety of different mixes and each one was different. But that makes sense, since those dogs were bred for function, not for confirmation. I've tested some of my own dogs, just out of curiosity. Sarge (cruelty case in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/Boxer/Boston Terrier mix. Junior (originally purchased from backyard APBT breeder in Philly) came back as mostly Stafford with some Am Staff. Martha (originally purchased from backyard APBT breed in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/American Bulldog/Bull Terrier. I contacted Junior's and Martha's previous owner, who told me where they purchased the dogs -- so that's based on their word, not my guess. I have not seen photos of Martha's parents, but I've seen a photo of one of her littermates -- he looked exactly like her. I've seen photos of both of Junior's parents. They look identical to him, just slightly larger. Thanks, and thank you for sharing the DNA results you've gotten. A few of us here have tested as well. My papered AST came back as a purebred AST. Our little fight bust dog Sedona came back as an American Bulldog mix and Michele's gamey-looking little rescued stray (unknown ancestry) came back with results similar to Sedona. We are seeing some consistency, in other words. This stuff is so interesting to me. I'm reading the second article you posted now. The first I'll read while I get my car's oil changed over lunch. (OMG I'm sooo over-due **cringe**) |
|
|
|
Post by Kim Wolf on Apr 15, 2013 10:21:27 GMT -5
I can't answer that -- I'd have to ask them. I have seen numerous DNA test results from dogs pulled off fight yards(Mars, blood samples), and they've come back as a variety of different mixes and each one was different. But that makes sense, since those dogs were bred for function, not for confirmation. I've tested some of my own dogs, just out of curiosity. Sarge (cruelty case in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/Boxer/Boston Terrier mix. Junior (originally purchased from backyard APBT breeder in Philly) came back as mostly Stafford with some Am Staff. Martha (originally purchased from backyard APBT breed in Philly) came back as an Am Staff/American Bulldog/Bull Terrier. I contacted Junior's and Martha's previous owner, who told me where they purchased the dogs -- so that's based on their word, not my guess. I have not seen photos of Martha's parents, but I've seen a photo of one of her littermates -- he looked exactly like her. I've seen photos of both of Junior's parents. They look identical to him, just slightly larger. Thanks, and thank you for sharing the DNA results you've gotten. A few of us here have tested as well. My papered AST came back as a purebred AST. Our little fight bust dog Sedona came back as an American Bulldog mix and Michele's gamey-looking little rescued stray (unknown ancestry) came back with results similar to Sedona. We are seeing some consistency, in other words. This stuff is so interesting to me. I'm reading the second article you posted now. The first I'll read while I get my car's oil changed over lunch. (OMG I'm sooo over-due **cringe**) You're welcome! I have dozens of other papers, too, if you're interested. I couldn't attach anything over 1 MB in size. Just shoot me any email at kimtwolf@gmail.com if you want them. I've been working at the University of Florida so I have full access to their library system, and I've taken full advantage of it while I'm here . |
|
|
|
Post by michele5611 on Apr 15, 2013 10:44:19 GMT -5
Thanks for the info Kim.
I am pretty confident that my gamey looking Harley is all APBT so I was not surprised when she came back with no Am Staff. I just pulled her results and as Mary said she came back as mixed breed crossed with American Bulldog. Some of the other breeds listed were Boston Terrier, and Bulldog.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 11:13:22 GMT -5
I hope people read the articles Kim posted, but I just wanted to pull out this snippet of info from the second article, "Dogstar Rising":
"...the average genetic distance
between breeds, as calculated from SNP data, is FST
= 0.36 . These observations demonstrate the reality of
the breed barrier and are in striking contrast to the
much lower levels of genetic differentiation (5–10%)
that are reported for human populations."
Also.....:
"...As molecular information for the dog becomes increasingly
available, and the number of success stories like
that of Chase et al. increase83, canine geneticists will
almost certainly turn their attention to the most challenging
of mapping studies, the identification of genes
associated with behaviour88. Initial studies will focus on
the identification of genes important in aberrant
behaviour patterns such as the obsessive–compulsive
tail-chasing behaviour seen in bull terriers89,90. Beyond
that, Overall has suggested that dogs present naturally
occurring models for many of man’s psychiatric illnesses
including separation anxiety, impulse control
disorders, panic disorder and cognitive dysfunction91.
Understanding the contribution of genes to such behavioural
disturbances in the dog will certainly have strong
implications for human psychiatric illnesses.Among the
most difficult, and certainly most controversial, behaviours
to study will be aggression92. The legal and social
implications are significant, and there are strong arguments
both for and against whether such studies should
even be undertaken93."
And:
"...breed-specific behaviours:
why do herding dogs herd, pointers point and retrievers
retrieve? Such behaviours are clearly ‘hard-wired’...."
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Apr 15, 2013 15:20:32 GMT -5
C'mon peeps, let's get this thread moving! We've all got a lot to say, I know for a fact. Also, feel free to invite to the forum anyone you think would be interested in having their say in this thread. |
|
Thanks. 
I look forward to learning much here