Inbreeding and Genetic Manipulation
Posted: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
by DAREN WARD
dogshrink
It is not difficult to realize, even for those not directly involved with canines and their evolution, that the activity of artificially reproducing an animal would, at some stage have the emergence of at least some health issues.
Most people can picture what would happen, and what has happened, when humans inbreed, which has been seen in some cultures. But this has been the practice for quite some time in agriculture, and to great effect, the artificial selection of certain crops and livestock has, undoubtedly, improved the quality and efficiency of yields and livestock. Here we can already see a clear advantage and the reasons behind it, the production of a better, healthier product, but agricultural artificial selection constantly uses outbreeding, to ensure greater quality, and bring those two subjects together in order to establish those desired characteristics.
It is no surprise that almost all dogs we see today are the cause of numerous cross breeding' from similar breeds that existed for centuries, to arrive at the so called "pure breeds" we have today, I have not seen myself in any dog breed encyclopedia a history of any breed that did not list several others as its ancestors. If this is true, then the term "pure breed" when we look at the numerous terriers or mountain breeds or any other for that matter bar a very few, is completely erroneous, they are in fact crosses, albeit some time in the past, but the fact remains their DNA is a mix of several lines of dog, not a "pure" blood line in any sense.
The topic of closed breed registers and the hot debate between those opposing and those within the particular kennel clubs, is always at the fore in many a dog publication, and at no other time does the debate heat up than at the date of the dog's finest moment "Crufts". Recently the debate has hit national headlines, and one discussion in particular was printed in the Telegraph newspaper
"Sadly, health concerns seem to be close to the bottom of the show dog agenda for the canine governing bodies in Britain and America . In just over 200 "pure" breeds in Britain more than 150 have significant hereditary diseases. At the moment in the U.K. , health testing is purely a matter of personal conscience, most people believe the beautiful dogs at Crufts and the like are healthy, I am afraid they are anything but."
It remains a fact that Kennel clubs are financial institutions, and run from the receipt of fees for the registering of litters, and no dog that has not had its parents both registered can get onto this register. It is also fact that the breed register does not insist on health checks for hereditary diseases, this is a matter of choice, and what tests are strongly recommended are neither policed nor checked upon. This allows the use of sires and dams that can, in effect pass on congenital diseases for as long as the breeder wishes to continue to participate.
"There are now more than 30,000 genetic defects in dogs, as well as inevitable inbreeding which is caused by the cult following of pedigree dogs, fashions and foibles in the show world has attempted to carry on "improving" the appearance of breeds. This has lead to the Bulldog, its massive head permanently calling for caesarian births, the tiny legs of the daschund and long backs ending in spinal difficulties, and the Chow whose tiny eyes cause the removal painful in growing eyelashes, show judges favoring these characteristics."
As it is clear, certain characteristics in breeds have lead to congenital diseases, the proliferation of hip dysphasia in many working and sporting breeds, a disease that can be scanned for but still is one of the most prominent problems, just the availability of so many "joint supplements", and their rather high price tags are evidence of this.
;
"One of the problems facing breeders of pedigree dogs is the lack of diversity in a closed gene pool. Restricting the gene artificially or refusing to recognize certain naturally occurring colours in a breed's gene pool is not always wise. I find it illogical and unjustifiable to remove from the gene pool some of the natural coat colours in a breed, quality not colour should decide breeding material."
It goes to explain that this process of artificial selection has gone too far in the quest of the perfect beautiful specimen, the eradication of a particular negative trait is one thing, but isn't that the purpose of Darwin's' theories, that the strongest survive and the less so do not ? Many agree that 130,000 and some years ago that is exactly how wolves and their ancestors came to live in co-existence with humans, those that lost their fear and aggression could survive close to humans. But now we believe we are the ones to decide what is naturally correct in the dog? It appears to me that natural selection has a better hand at that, I agree that mans attempt at eugenics is one that has produced many examples of excellent achievements in many organisms, not only dogs, but to breed for a coat colour because of particular desire at the time is tantamount to interfering with nature, a subject fiercely fought in other arenas.
It is plainly obvious to those that absolutely care for the welfare of the domestic dog that these cult pursuits, that have been ongoing for many years, to have a short nose in the bullmastiff and only certain colours and an unnaturally sloping back in the German shepherd dog, are just that, a fashion characteristic that did not exist in the natural form of the particular breed. The fact that these characteristics have emerged countless cases of hereditary diseases seems to have been accepted by those that carry the hallowed "stud register."
www.dogshrink.co.uk
This Article has been viewed 285 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.