Posts
The results are IN!
Rudy's DNA test results have come back.
What you thought he was
We asked you all to place your bets on what mix of breeds he might contains, and boy did you come to the party! Here's what the poll results say YOU think he is:
The 'Other' category included suggestions of: Collie, English Foxhound, Irish Setter, Galgo, Super cute curly tail hound (!), Glamour dog(!), Borzoi, Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen, Pomeranian and German Shepherd.
We know that he was picked up as a stray in a very rural/bush area as a four month old puppy. In that location, it's likely he was bred to be a hunting dog, and was bred from a line of dogs very similar to him. Both of Rudy's parent have been identified as being mixed breeds. This has meant the DNA test is not just a clear cut simple cross between two breeds, but a bit murkier to decipher.
*Drumroll*
With the highest 'relative strength' (undefined and unclear if this is supposed to be % of total dog, or % of the 50% unaccounted for, or some other strength) of 10.86 (again, 10.86 units of what, or out to a total available number of ##, is unclear) - is...
The Dobermann! I find this plausible. Dobermanns are certainly not unusual in Australia and I can see inclusion in a line of hunting-purpose dogs making sense to someone at some point, way back when. Rudy also has a wonderful mate who's a Dobe, so now they're totes cousins.
Now, our first surprise... coming in with strength of 10.55 - the Shetland Sheepdog! Ha! I would have been more convinced by a Rough Collie I think, but who knows, maybe Rudy's great great grandma was a house dog sheltie? It would explain those neck flares... This is nothing compared to the next couple!
An important note about this kind of test is that 321 markers are not that many. Other canine research (genotyping for whole genome analysis) can use 170,000 markers. Human ethinicity testing relies on 20,000 (to determine caucasian/non-caucasian) -700,000 markers.
321 markers provide a reduced scope of DNA marker testing, and they are comparing an unknown dog against a bank of typical groups of alleles that representatives for breeds, so the robustness of the test results should definitely be considered as a suggestion, more than an absolute truth.
By this, I mean there is a broad spectrum and range, all able to be mixed together in various combinations, over time. We've applied some values to the range (such as when blue becomes green, or orange moves into red) which we can think of as breeds.
So consider Rudy as being a light brown colour. The DNA test is essentially trying to determine the combination of colours that arrived at that shade of light brown. It's pretty sure there's some red and green in there, perhaps some yellow too. But because he's such a mixed up colour, it's harder to work out if there's also been orange (or was it a certain shade of red with a different shade of yellow?), white, a darker brown or even some bright blue included, and when they might have been mixed into him.
The computer program has presented his report with one possible combination of colours that arrived at his shade of light brown, but it's not the only possible combination to get there. And when I consider where he came from and the likely uses and sources of his forebears, I can be fairly sceptical about some of the results (I'm looking at YOU mop dog!).
For example, I would probably have believed fox hound over basset hound. Or rough collie over sheltie, and I'm not confident how well 321 markers can discriminate between low levels of these breeds in comparison to each other by using the database of 'typical representatives'. As time goes by and the databases are expanded, these tests become more reliable. For example, the test conducted this year is likely more correct than one done five years ago. If they extend the number of markers examined to 1,000 in the future, this would improve the accuracy again.
He is our dog. Much-loved family member, silly goose, and constant source of delight to our family. His breed heritage is not so important to us. We knew he was sighthound mix type of dog when we adopted him, and he still is. When I next get asked (as I always do!) "What IS HE?", I can now reply with a slightly more informed "He's a mix, mostly deerhound and greyhound, with little bits of a few other things in there too". He is certainly a dog.
Look forward to any comments and questions you might have,
Mia
Further reading:
van Rooy, D., Arnott, E. R., Early, J. B., McGreevy, P., & Wade, C. M. (2014). Holding back the genes: limitations of research into canine behavioural genetics. Canine Genetics and Epidemiology, 1(1), 7.
Hedrick, P. W., & Andersson, L. (2011). Are dogs genetically special?.Heredity, 106(5), 712.
McPhee, C. G. (2011). Advances in canine genetic testing—And what these tests mean for you. Veterinary Medicine, 106(12), 608.
© 2015 Mia Cobb | Do You Believe in Dog?
Rudy's DNA test results have come back.
 |
| Let's see what a DNA test can tell us about this mixed breed dog. |
What you thought he was
We asked you all to place your bets on what mix of breeds he might contains, and boy did you come to the party! Here's what the poll results say YOU think he is:
What the DNA test says he is
Not surprisingly, Rudy has been identified as having come from a line of mixed breed dogs.We know that he was picked up as a stray in a very rural/bush area as a four month old puppy. In that location, it's likely he was bred to be a hunting dog, and was bred from a line of dogs very similar to him. Both of Rudy's parent have been identified as being mixed breeds. This has meant the DNA test is not just a clear cut simple cross between two breeds, but a bit murkier to decipher.
What we expected
We always knew there would be sighthound in the mix! Fortunately, one grandparent on each side (e.g. his mother's mother and his father's father) have been identified as being a single breed. So the test says that Rudy is identified as one-quarter Scottish Deerhound and one-quarter Greyhound. This makes sense and fits with his physical appearance. |
| (Photo: source) |
 |
| (Photo: Sue Muir) |
 |
| Part of Rudy's DNA test results report |
What we weren't expecting
Because of Rudy's muddled up mixed breed lineage, the DNA test results offer us a further five breeds that have been identified as "the 5 next best breed matches which appeared in the analysis of your dog's DNA. One or more of these breeds could have contributed to the genetic makeup of the ancestors indicated by the mixed breed icon. The breeds are listed by the relative strength of each result in our analysis with the most likely at the top of the list". This is definitely where the fun starts!*Drumroll*
With the highest 'relative strength' (undefined and unclear if this is supposed to be % of total dog, or % of the 50% unaccounted for, or some other strength) of 10.86 (again, 10.86 units of what, or out to a total available number of ##, is unclear) - is...
The Dobermann! I find this plausible. Dobermanns are certainly not unusual in Australia and I can see inclusion in a line of hunting-purpose dogs making sense to someone at some point, way back when. Rudy also has a wonderful mate who's a Dobe, so now they're totes cousins.
 |
| Dobermann reportedly represented in Rudy with strength of 10.86 |
 |
| Shetland sheepdog reportedly in Rudy with a strength of 10.55 |
Oh hi there Puli, with a strength of 6.64. In a million blue moons, I would never have picked you in this line up! There are not that many Puli breeders in Australia, and to think that one was used to contribute to a farmer's hunting line seems... odd. But then, my personal favourite is still to come....
 |
| Puli reportedly in Rudy with strength of 6.64 |
...but we'll save it for last. Coming in with the second lowest strength of the five mixed breed contributors identified, we have the Irish Wolfhound. I know most of you thought this was going to be a leading contributor to Rudy's make up, but whatever strength represents, 3.28 doesn't seem like much of it. So now my favourite....
 |
| Irish Wolfhound identified in Rudy with a strength of 3.28 |
Basset Hound. I guess Rudy gets his leg from the other side of the family, right?! With a strength of 1.63, it's the final and lowest reported strength identified in Rudy's report.
 |
| Basset Hound reportedly in Rudy with a strength of 1.63 |
 |
| Part of Rudy's DNA test results report |
The science behind mixed breed DNA tests
So how did the results end up like this? DNA tests for mixed breed dogs vary between providers. We used the Australian Advance/Waltham test which is 'powered by Wisdom Panel', validated against Australian dog populations. This test examines the 321 markers from the DNA against a database of DNA markers for over 200 representative (NB: not comprehensive!) breeds of dogs and a computer program evaluates and returns a probable 'pedigree tree' reaching back three generations. Every possible combination the computer program arrives at is scored and the tree with the highest score is deemed most probable and presented in the report.An important note about this kind of test is that 321 markers are not that many. Other canine research (genotyping for whole genome analysis) can use 170,000 markers. Human ethinicity testing relies on 20,000 (to determine caucasian/non-caucasian) -700,000 markers.
321 markers provide a reduced scope of DNA marker testing, and they are comparing an unknown dog against a bank of typical groups of alleles that representatives for breeds, so the robustness of the test results should definitely be considered as a suggestion, more than an absolute truth.
Another way to think of it
The best analogy (that may be over simplified, but I think is still useful) that I have been able to come up with to help explain this test in relation to mixed breed dogs is to think of dogs as colours.By this, I mean there is a broad spectrum and range, all able to be mixed together in various combinations, over time. We've applied some values to the range (such as when blue becomes green, or orange moves into red) which we can think of as breeds.
 |
| Image: Dean Russo |
The computer program has presented his report with one possible combination of colours that arrived at his shade of light brown, but it's not the only possible combination to get there. And when I consider where he came from and the likely uses and sources of his forebears, I can be fairly sceptical about some of the results (I'm looking at YOU mop dog!).
For example, I would probably have believed fox hound over basset hound. Or rough collie over sheltie, and I'm not confident how well 321 markers can discriminate between low levels of these breeds in comparison to each other by using the database of 'typical representatives'. As time goes by and the databases are expanded, these tests become more reliable. For example, the test conducted this year is likely more correct than one done five years ago. If they extend the number of markers examined to 1,000 in the future, this would improve the accuracy again.
So - what is Rudy?
Look forward to any comments and questions you might have,
Mia
Further reading:
van Rooy, D., Arnott, E. R., Early, J. B., McGreevy, P., & Wade, C. M. (2014). Holding back the genes: limitations of research into canine behavioural genetics. Canine Genetics and Epidemiology, 1(1), 7.
Hedrick, P. W., & Andersson, L. (2011). Are dogs genetically special?.Heredity, 106(5), 712.
McPhee, C. G. (2011). Advances in canine genetic testing—And what these tests mean for you. Veterinary Medicine, 106(12), 608.
© 2015 Mia Cobb | Do You Believe in Dog?
