YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community


Welcome to the YorkieTalk.com Forums Community - the community for Yorkshire Terriers.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You will be able to chat with over 35,000 YorkieTalk members, read over 2,000,000 posted discussions, and view more than 15,000 Yorkie photos in the YorkieTalk Photo Gallery after you register. We would love to have you as a member!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please click here to contact us.

Go Back   YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community > Yorkie News & Site Announcements
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar JavaChat Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-21-2009, 09:57 AM   #1
YT 6000 Club Member
 
fasteddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 6,233
Default [News] The Secrets Inside Your Dog's Mind

Brian Hare, assistant professor of evolutionary anthropology at Duke University, holds out a dog biscuit.

"Henry!" he says. Henry is a big black schnauzer-poodle mix--a schnoodle, in the words of his owner, Tracy Kivell, another Duke anthropologist. Kivell holds on to Henry's collar so that he can only gaze at the biscuit.

"You got it?" Hare asks Henry. Hare then steps back until he's standing between a pair of inverted plastic cups on the floor. He quickly puts the hand holding the biscuit under one cup, then the other, and holds up both empty hands. Hare could run a very profitable shell game. No one in the room--neither dog nor human--can tell which cup hides the biscuit.

Henry could find the biscuit by sniffing the cups or knocking them over. But Hare does not plan to let him have it so easy. Instead, he simply points at the cup on the right. Henry looks at Hare's hand and follows the pointed finger. Kivell then releases the leash, and Henry walks over to the cup that Hare is pointing to. Hare lifts it to reveal the biscuit reward.

Henry the schnoodle just did a remarkable thing. Understanding a pointed finger may seem easy, but consider this: while humans and canines can do it naturally, no other known species in the animal kingdom can. Consider too all the mental work that goes into figuring out what a pointed finger means: paying close attention to a person, recognizing that a gesture reflects a thought, that another animal can even have a thought. Henry, as Kivell affectionately admits, may not be "the sharpest knife in the drawer," but compared to other animals, he's a true scholar.
See TIME's photoessay "Color My Dog!"

It's no coincidence that the two species that pass Hare's pointing test also share a profound cross-species bond. Many animals have some level of social intelligence, allowing them to coexist and cooperate with other members of their species. Wolves, for example--the probable ancestors of dogs--live in packs that hunt together and have a complex hierarchy. But dogs have evolved an extraordinarily rich social intelligence as they've adapted to life with us. All the things we love about our dogs--the joy they seem to take in our presence, the many ways they integrate themselves into our lives--spring from those social skills. Hare and others are trying to figure out how the intimate coexistence of humans and dogs has shaped the animal's remarkable abilities.

Trying to plumb the canine mind is a favorite pastime of dog owners. "Everyone feels like an expert on their dog," says Alexandra Horowitz, a cognitive scientist at Barnard College and author of the new book Inside of a Dog: What Dogs See, Smell, and Know. But scientists had carried out few studies to test those beliefs--until now.

This fall, Hare is opening the Duke Canine Cognition Center, where he is going to test hundreds of dogs brought in by willing owners. Marc Hauser, a cognitive psychologist at Harvard University, recently opened his own such research lab and has 1,000 dogs lined up as subjects. Other facilities are operating in the U.S. and Europe.

The work of these researchers won't just satisfy the curiosity of the millions of people who love their dogs; it may also lead to more effective ways to train ordinary dogs or--more important--working dogs that can sniff out bombs and guide the blind. At a deeper level, it may even tell us something about ourselves.

Evolving Gifts

Hare suspects that the evolutionary pressures that turned suspicious wolves into outgoing dogs were similar to the ones that turned combative apes into cooperative humans. "Humans are unique. But how did that uniqueness evolve?" asks Hare. "That's where dogs are important."

The first rule for scientists studying dogs is, Don't trust your hunches. Just because a dog looks as if it can count or understand words doesn't mean it can. "We say to owners, Look, you may have intuitions about your dog that are valuable," says Hauser. "But they might be wrong."
See TIME's video "The New Frugality: Doggie Day Care."

Take for instance the kiss a dog gives you when you come home. It looks like love, but it could also be hunger. Wolves also lick one another's mouths, particularly when one wolf returns to the pack. They can use their sense of taste and smell to see if the returnee has caught some prey on its journey. If it did, the licking often prompts it to vomit up some of that kill for the other members of the pack to share. The kiss dogs give us probably evolved from this inspection. "If we happened to spit up whatever we just ate," says Horowitz, "I don't think our dogs would be upset at all."

Horowitz and other scientists are now running experiments to determine what a behavior, like a kiss, really means. In some cases, their research suggests that our pets are manipulating us rather than welling up with human-like feeling. "They could be the ultimate charlatans," says Hauser.

We've all seen guilty dogs slinking away with lowered tails, for example. Horowitz wondered if they behave this way because they truly recognize they've done something wrong, so she devised an experiment. First she observed how dogs behaved when they did something they weren't supposed to do and were scolded by their owners. Then she tricked the owners into believing the dogs had misbehaved when they hadn't. When the humans scolded the dogs, the dogs were just as likely to look guilty, even though they were innocent of any misbehavior. What's at play here, she concluded, is not some inner sense of right and wrong but a learned ability to act submissive when an owner gets angry. "It's a white-flag response," Horowitz says.

While this kind of manipulation may be unsettling to us, it reveals how carefully dogs pay attention to humans and learn from what they observe. That same attentiveness also gives dogs--or at least certain dogs--a skill with words that seems eerily human.

Juliane Kaminski of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, began exploring the verbal gifts of dogs when she saw a television show about a border collie named Rico--an animal that to all appearances could fetch dozens of different objects in response to their names. Kaminski put Rico to a rigorous test and confirmed that the dog could learn names for more than 200 toys, balls and other items. "I think Rico is a highly talented dog," says Kaminski, "but we've also found new dogs that do what Rico did."

That doesn't mean that the dogs understand the words the way we think they do. When they hear "Frisbee," they may think only, Get the Frisbee. Unlike us, they may not be able to recognize that Frisbee is a word for a distinct object that can be combined with other words to create sentences like "Run away from the Frisbee."

Going to the Dogs

Some scientists acquired their fascination with dogs directly, but Hare's grew out of his research on chimpanzee cognition in the late 1990s, when he was part of a team of primatologists led by Michael Tomasello, now at Max Planck. A chimp can follow the gaze of other chimps and figure out what they can and cannot see. That's a skill that seems to be limited to great apes and humans. Tomasello and his team wondered if such a rare ability extended to hand gestures and tested chimps to see if they could understand pointing. To their surprise, the chimps did badly, able to learn the meaning of a pointed finger only after lots of training.

The apparent explanation for these results was that pointing--and the social smarts behind it--required a humans-only level of intelligence and evolved in our ancestors only after they branched off from the ancestors of chimpanzees some 7 million years ago. When Tomasello suggested this idea to Hare, however, Hare demurred. "I said, 'Um, Mike, I think my dogs can do that,'" Hare recalls.

Hare's later research revealed that while chimps and even wolves lack an innate ability to understand what pointing means, dogs come by the knowledge naturally. They're not limited to reading hands and fingers alone. Dogs understand what Hare means if he points with his foot or sets a piece of wood on top of a container with food inside. Even puppies understand, which means it can't be a skill they need to learn. "This is something that dogs just do," says Hare.
__________________
YODA & WINKY R ::: RIP Winky ::: RIP Yoda!
fasteddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Welcome Guest!
Not Registered?

Join today and remove this ad!

WidgetBucks - Trend Watch - WidgetBucks.com
Old 09-21-2009, 09:58 AM   #2
YT 6000 Club Member
 
fasteddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 6,233
Default

Foxy Dogs

To understand how dogs evolved this skill, Hare traveled to Siberia. In the 1950s, Soviet scientists set up an experiment on a farm outside the city of Novosibirsk to understand how animals were domesticated. They decided to study foxes, which are closely related to wolves and dogs.

The Russians began by breeding a group of foxes according to one simple rule: they would walk up to a cage and put a hand on the bars. Foxes that slunk back in fear and snapped their teeth didn't get to breed. Ones that came up to the scientists did. Meanwhile, the scientists also raised a separate group of foxes under identical conditions, except for one difference: they didn't have to pass a test to mate.

More than 40 generations of foxes have now been bred in Novosibirsk, and the results speak for themselves. The foxes that the scientists bred selectively have become remarkably doglike. They will affectionately run up to people and even wag their tails. In 2003, Hare traveled to Novosibirsk and ran his pointing test on baby foxes. The ordinary ones failed miserably. As for the doglike ones, "they did just as well as puppies right out of the box," Hare says. As the animals were bred for their affability, a new side of their social intelligence was apparently awakened.

If foxes are a guide, dog evolution may have begun with a similar shift in personality. Ancestors of dogs could cooperate to hunt, but the cooperation had limits. Wolves are fiercely competitive, as each one tries to claw its way to the top of the pack. Hare proposes that aggressive wolves evolved to have an easygoing personality thanks to a new opportunity: trash.

As humans became better at hunting, they left scraps around their gathering spots. When they departed, the ancestors of dogs could move in. At first, when humans and wolves came into contact, many of the animals ran away. Others lashed out and were killed. Only the affable animals had the temperament to become camp followers, and their new supply of food let them produce affable puppies. "They selected themselves," says Horowitz.

Once dogs became comfortable in our company, humans began to speed up dogs' social evolution. They may have started by giving extra food to helpful dogs--ones that barked to warn of danger, say. Dogs that paid close attention to humans got more rewards and eventually became partners with humans, helping with hunts or herding other animals. Along the way, the dogs' social intelligence became eerily like ours, and not just in their ability to follow a pointed finger. Indeed, they even started to make very human mistakes.

A team led by cognitive scientist Josef Topál of the Research Institute for Psychology in Hungary recently ran an experiment to study how 10-month-old babies pay attention to people. The scientists put a toy under one of two cups and then let the children choose which cup to pick up. The children, of course, picked the right cup--no surprise since they saw the toy being hidden. Topál and his colleagues repeated the trial several times, always hiding the toy under the same cup, until finally they hid it under the other one. Despite the evidence of their eyes, the kids picked the original cup--the one that had hidden the toy before but did not now.

To investigate why the kids made this counterintuitive mistake, the scientists rigged the cups to wires and then lowered them over the toy. Without the distraction of a human being, the babies were far more likely to pick the right cup. Small children, it seems, are hardwired to pay such close attention to people that they disregard their other observations. Topál and his colleagues ran the same experiment on dogs--and the results were the same. When they administered the test to wolves, however, the animals did not make the mistake the babies and dogs did. They relied on their own observations rather than focusing on a human.

One question the research of Topál, Hare and others raises is why chimpanzees--who are in most ways much smarter than dogs--lack the ability to read gestures. Hare believes that the chimps' poor performance is one more piece of proof that the talent is rooted not in raw intelligence but in personality. Our ape cousins are simply too distracted by their aggression and competitiveness to fathom gestures easily. Chimps can cooperate to get food that they can't get on their own, but if there's the slightest chance for them to fight over it, they will. For humans to evolve as we did, Hare says, "We had to not get freaked out about sharing."

Deeper understanding of the mind of the dog will come with more testing, and Hare and other researchers are planning it--on a grand scale. They're designing new experiments to compare different breeds and to search for genes that were transformed as the animals' social intelligence evolved. Plenty of dog owners are signing up for the studies Hare will be launching this fall. "We'd be happy with thousands," he says.

The biggest challenge to the new experiments, Hare says, will be not the giant pack of dogs he'll be studying but their anxious owners. "When a puppy does badly, people get upset," says Hare. "You have to emphasize that this is not the SATs."

Perhaps that's the most telling sign of just how evolved dogs are. They have us very well trained.

The Secrets Inside Your Dog's Mind - TIME
__________________
YODA & WINKY R ::: RIP Winky ::: RIP Yoda!
fasteddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2009, 09:59 AM   #3
YT 6000 Club Member
 
fasteddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 6,233
Default

Foxy Dogs

To understand how dogs evolved this skill, Hare traveled to Siberia. In the 1950s, Soviet scientists set up an experiment on a farm outside the city of Novosibirsk to understand how animals were domesticated. They decided to study foxes, which are closely related to wolves and dogs.

The Russians began by breeding a group of foxes according to one simple rule: they would walk up to a cage and put a hand on the bars. Foxes that slunk back in fear and snapped their teeth didn't get to breed. Ones that came up to the scientists did. Meanwhile, the scientists also raised a separate group of foxes under identical conditions, except for one difference: they didn't have to pass a test to mate.

More than 40 generations of foxes have now been bred in Novosibirsk, and the results speak for themselves. The foxes that the scientists bred selectively have become remarkably doglike. They will affectionately run up to people and even wag their tails. In 2003, Hare traveled to Novosibirsk and ran his pointing test on baby foxes. The ordinary ones failed miserably. As for the doglike ones, "they did just as well as puppies right out of the box," Hare says. As the animals were bred for their affability, a new side of their social intelligence was apparently awakened.

If foxes are a guide, dog evolution may have begun with a similar shift in personality. Ancestors of dogs could cooperate to hunt, but the cooperation had limits. Wolves are fiercely competitive, as each one tries to claw its way to the top of the pack. Hare proposes that aggressive wolves evolved to have an easygoing personality thanks to a new opportunity: trash.

As humans became better at hunting, they left scraps around their gathering spots. When they departed, the ancestors of dogs could move in. At first, when humans and wolves came into contact, many of the animals ran away. Others lashed out and were killed. Only the affable animals had the temperament to become camp followers, and their new supply of food let them produce affable puppies. "They selected themselves," says Horowitz.

Once dogs became comfortable in our company, humans began to speed up dogs' social evolution. They may have started by giving extra food to helpful dogs--ones that barked to warn of danger, say. Dogs that paid close attention to humans got more rewards and eventually became partners with humans, helping with hunts or herding other animals. Along the way, the dogs' social intelligence became eerily like ours, and not just in their ability to follow a pointed finger. Indeed, they even started to make very human mistakes.

A team led by cognitive scientist Josef Topál of the Research Institute for Psychology in Hungary recently ran an experiment to study how 10-month-old babies pay attention to people. The scientists put a toy under one of two cups and then let the children choose which cup to pick up. The children, of course, picked the right cup--no surprise since they saw the toy being hidden. Topál and his colleagues repeated the trial several times, always hiding the toy under the same cup, until finally they hid it under the other one. Despite the evidence of their eyes, the kids picked the original cup--the one that had hidden the toy before but did not now.

To investigate why the kids made this counterintuitive mistake, the scientists rigged the cups to wires and then lowered them over the toy. Without the distraction of a human being, the babies were far more likely to pick the right cup. Small children, it seems, are hardwired to pay such close attention to people that they disregard their other observations. Topál and his colleagues ran the same experiment on dogs--and the results were the same. When they administered the test to wolves, however, the animals did not make the mistake the babies and dogs did. They relied on their own observations rather than focusing on a human.

One question the research of Topál, Hare and others raises is why chimpanzees--who are in most ways much smarter than dogs--lack the ability to read gestures. Hare believes that the chimps' poor performance is one more piece of proof that the talent is rooted not in raw intelligence but in personality. Our ape cousins are simply too distracted by their aggression and competitiveness to fathom gestures easily. Chimps can cooperate to get food that they can't get on their own, but if there's the slightest chance for them to fight over it, they will. For humans to evolve as we did, Hare says, "We had to not get freaked out about sharing."

Deeper understanding of the mind of the dog will come with more testing, and Hare and other researchers are planning it--on a grand scale. They're designing new experiments to compare different breeds and to search for genes that were transformed as the animals' social intelligence evolved. Plenty of dog owners are signing up for the studies Hare will be launching this fall. "We'd be happy with thousands," he says.

The biggest challenge to the new experiments, Hare says, will be not the giant pack of dogs he'll be studying but their anxious owners. "When a puppy does badly, people get upset," says Hare. "You have to emphasize that this is not the SATs."

Perhaps that's the most telling sign of just how evolved dogs are. They have us very well trained.

The Secrets Inside Your Dog's Mind - TIME
__________________
YODA & WINKY R ::: RIP Winky ::: RIP Yoda!
fasteddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2009, 09:44 PM   #4
Senior Yorkie Talker
 
Ice Lady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boyne Lake, Alberta
Posts: 76
Default

Very Interesting article. It will be interesting to see the final analysis of these experiments.

__________________
Joan and The Heartbreaker Trio:
Little Paws Leave Big Prints
Ice Lady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 03:13 PM   #5
YorkieTalk Newbie!
 
JeffC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Novato, CA USA
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Lady View Post
Very Interesting article. It will be interesting to see the final analysis of these experiments.
I agree it is an interesting article, and I, too, would be interested in the results. However, I would hope they are more careful with their experimentation and their conclusions than the description of the experiment with "guilt" because their experiment did not support their conclusions.

What they were trying to prove was whether or not dogs feel guilt. They note that a dog will slink when it is scolded for doing something wrong. To test if this has to do with guilt, they scolded a dog when it did nothing wrong. Since it also slinked then, they conclude that a dog slinks when it is scolded and that this, therefore, means that the dog is not slinking because of guilt.

With all due respect, "Duh!"

Let us say we conduct a different experiment. In the first test, you get punched in the arm when you can see it coming. It is observed that you flinch. In the second test, you, again, get punched in the arm, but this time you can't see it coming. It is again observed that you flinch. Does the fact that you flinch whether or not you see it coming prove that flinching only has to do with actually getting hit? No. You cannot possibly draw that conclusion because the experiment always results in you getting the same stimulus, getting hit. Thus, the only valid conclusion you can draw from this experiment is that getting punched causes flinching. Whether or not flinching results from other stimulus cannot be determined from this experiment.

Similarly, in both cases in the "guilt experiment," the dog was scolded whether it did anything wrong or not. Thus, the only thing that that experiment proves is that you can get a dog to slink if you scold it. Whether or not a dog will slink from different stimulus, guilt for example, was never tested.

At its most basic, guilt is recognition of having done something wrong. It doesn't matter whether this recognition is the result of higher cognitive functions resulting from concepts of universal rights and wrongs from religious or philosophical principles or as basic as an understanding of having violated socially acceptable behavior (as would be the case for a dog). But it is more than just a recognition of having done something wrong. The concept of guilt also includes an anticipation of consequences. Because of this, the experiment failed to prove that dogs don't have a concept of guilt.

To prove that a dog understands it did something wrong, you have to prove that it anticipates consequences for its actions. In our arm-punch experiment, the equivalent would be to simulate a punch when the person can see you, but not actually strike the person, and see if they do still flinch. Because they still flinch, you can conclude that flinching can also result from a person anticipating the consequence of the punch, not just the results of the actual punch.

But since you cannot directly cause a dog to do something and expect him to feel guilt, this would likely not be an easy experiment experiment to setup. This is especially compounded by the fact that the dog will only understand his connection to an action for a relatively short time. That is, just like it is counter-productive to give a dog negative consequences for a behavior that occurred hours ago because the dog will not make the connection, you can't expect a dog to feel guilty about a behavior it did hours ago. You have to catch him doing something he knows he should not be doing.

However, anecdotally at least, there are some fairly good indications that dogs do have the sense of anticipation of consequences, and therefore, a sense of having done something wrong. One does not have to own a dog for very long to run across a situation where you come in the door or come around a corner and the first thing you notice is your dog slinking or hanging its head even before you see the puddle on the floor or wet spot on the carpet, the scraps of food that used to be the sandwich you left on the counter, the shredded paper on the floor that used to be in the trash, and so on. Since you observed his reaction before you saw the cause of his reaction, he is anticipating your displeasure, not reacting to anything you are doing. This is a fairly good indication that he knows what he has done is socially unacceptable behavior and is anticipating negative consequences. In other words, he is reacting to a sense of guilt, not an unpleasant stimulus.

I suppose the experiment would have to be doing something like setting a temptation on a counter for a dog that knows the counter is off-limits and leaving him by himself and observing him until he gives into the temptation and takes it. Then, either as he is in the middle of the action or right as he gets down, come in without reacting and observe his reactions. In my experience, the dog will give indications he knows he should not have done what he did and react in anticipation of negative consequences.

Regardless, whether you could ever prove a dog does or does not have anything resembling a sense of guilt, the experiment they did doesn't even begin to address the concept of guilt. So I would hope that they are more careful in their methods and conclusions in further studies.
JeffC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2009, 10:39 AM   #6
♥ love my girls!! ♥
Donating Member
 
bellasmomok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: OKC area
Posts: 1,140
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Similarly, in both cases in the "guilt experiment," the dog was scolded whether it did anything wrong or not. Thus, the only thing that that experiment proves is that you can get a dog to slink if you scold it. Whether or not a dog will slink from different stimulus, guilt for example, was never tested.
Very good point!! It's always amazing to me when when researches describe something incorrectly as causative, rather than (correctly) as correlative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
However, anecdotally at least, there are some fairly good indications that dogs do have the sense of anticipation of consequences, and therefore, a sense of having done something wrong. One does not have to own a dog for very long to run across a situation where you come in the door or come around a corner and the first thing you notice is your dog slinking or hanging its head even before you see the puddle on the floor or wet spot on the carpet, the scraps of food that used to be the sandwich you left on the counter, the shredded paper on the floor that used to be in the trash, and so on. Since you observed his reaction before you saw the cause of his reaction, he is anticipating your displeasure, not reacting to anything you are doing. This is a fairly good indication that he knows what he has done is socially unacceptable behavior and is anticipating negative consequences. In other words, he is reacting to a sense of guilt, not an unpleasant stimulus.
Great description!! If a dog does something they "know" they are not supposed to do, his reaction before you even saw the cause may not be the same "guilt" feeling you and I have....could be more like having learned the consequences for that action and so showing the "sorry" or "defeated" look. Personally, I think it's probably more likely showing feelings of guilt....but you have to consider that we cannot see what they're feeling. Which, of course, you already know.
Great job spotting their error in thinking!!!
__________________
Tara
Bella's & Maya's mommy
bellasmomok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 10:36 AM   #7
Senior Yorkie Talker
 
Ice Lady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boyne Lake, Alberta
Posts: 76
Default

This is an interesting point. Personally, I think that dogs are a lot more intelligent than we give them credit for. Here is a little antidote to demonstrate my point.

My little Sugar Princess, who will be 15 yrs old in 6 weeks, has ridden in my semi with me for her whole life. In all the years that she has been with me she has never once chewed up a bill of lading. But, she will take an envelope out of my purse and shred it, she shreds kleenex and paper towels every chance she gets. A newspaper or magazine, well it's party time! I always know when she is angry with me because she shreds the garbage. Yes, she can open a step-on can. When she shreds and spreads the garbage all over, she gives me a look that says "You have made me angry. This is YOUR punishment." I don't know how she can tell the difference between bills of lading and other papers, as the bills of lading are printed on regular bond paper.

Co-incidentally, I had a vet, years ago, that told me that a dog that spent a great deal of time with humans would develop intelligence levels equivelant to that of a 6 year old child. I tend to believe this after all my years with Sugar.

Have a Great Day!
__________________
Joan and The Heartbreaker Trio:
Little Paws Leave Big Prints
Ice Lady is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Google
 

SHOP NOW: Amazon :: eBay :: Buy.com :: Newegg :: PetStore :: Petco :: PetSmart


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2013 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157