I'm getting a dna test done. Then what??

[Yorkiemommy1984]

She did make a full recovery. The only thing I noticed with her is she does shed some. Is this typical with all yorkies??

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by Yorkiemommy1984

She did make a full recovery. The only thing I noticed with her is she does shed some. Is this typical with all yorkies??

I'm glad she recovered. Minnie is looking good! Yorkies tend to shed much less than other breeds because they don't have a thick undercoat--at least that's the case with silky coats. I'm not sure about cotton coats. Since Minnie's hair is short, it looks like she might have a bit of an undercoat, so that could explain her shedding. Here is an article on Yorkies and shedding:

Do Yorkshire Terriers Shed? ? BunkBlog

[mimimomo]

Cotton soft haired Yorkies do not shed either. My Princess has seasonal allergies & she tends to leave clumps of hair on the bedding. It's not a lot, but she does leave clumps. I have to shave her down in the summer/ hotter months bc of that. It's different from shedding, that's when the (double coat) dog or cat leaves shedding hair everywhere.

[gracielove]

Originally Posted by Yorkiemommy1984

She did make a full recovery. The only thing I noticed with her is she does shed some. Is this typical with all yorkies??

I was just wondering if the breeder has seen recent pictures of your baby and if they have ever had any other pups with short hair like her's....or have you decided to let the whole issue drop?

[navillusc]

Originally Posted by pstinard

...


About the MARS test, it's not perfect..., but it's gaining acceptance in the scientific community....

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by navillusc

Why the sad face and question marks? If you do a google scholar search for research articles about the MARS test or Wisdom panel, you will find studies comparing visual recognition of dog breeds in mixed breed dogs with the results of Wisdom panel testing, concluding that the Wisdom panel testing is more accurate. It is what it is.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Why the sad face and question marks? If you do a google scholar search for research articles about the MARS test or Wisdom panel, you will find studies comparing visual recognition of dog breeds in mixed breed dogs with the results of Wisdom panel testing, concluding that the Wisdom panel testing is more accurate. It is what it is.

I think that that face means confused. I would like to know how extensive their DNA database is, and the credentials of the DNA used to provide a purebred data base. And how extensive it needs to be per breed to ascertain with a 95% probability that they can actually ascertain if a dog is pure-bred or not?

For example for our Rare Breed as far as I am aware the Mars/Wisdom panel has not reached out to either USA or CDN National clubs to provide DNA samples for these purebreds. How then could they ascertain if there is some mix of my breed in a sample provided to them for their analysis?

I suppose until we map the genome for each purebred dog we are going to be a ways away from determing purebred bred type by a Wisdom Panel test.

[navillusc]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Why the sad face and question marks? If you do a google scholar search for research articles about the MARS test or Wisdom panel, you will find studies comparing visual recognition of dog breeds in mixed breed dogs with the results of Wisdom panel testing, concluding that the Wisdom panel testing is more accurate. It is what it is.

If you 'hover' over that icon, it says "confused" and I highlighted the statement that "confused" me. Sorry if I confused you, too.

I would be interested in knowing 'why' the "scientific community" is 'allowing' testing it 'knows' is "not perfect" to gain "acceptance" in the first place...if you know the answer, though.

Is there concern in the "scientific community" that "acceptance" might lead to complacency as more and more in the "scientific community" begin to "accept" the test results, perhaps as fact, regardless of whether or not the test is proven to be accurate?

Just thinking in print...

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by gemy

I think that that face means confused. I would like to know how extensive their DNA database is, and the credentials of the DNA used to provide a purebred data base. And how extensive it needs to be per breed to ascertain with a 95% probability that they can actually ascertain if a dog is pure-bred or not?

For example for our Rare Breed as far as I am aware the Mars/Wisdom panel has not reached out to either USA or CDN National clubs to provide DNA samples for these purebreds. How then could they ascertain if there is some mix of my breed in a sample provided to them for their analysis?

I suppose until we map the genome for each purebred dog we are going to be a ways away from determing purebred bred type by a Wisdom Panel test.

I know for a fact that the DNA samples for their purebred reference database for US purebreds have to be AKC registered, and the AKC pedigrees provided to them. I'm not sure about their UK database. You are correct, not every single rare breed is in their database yet. If you are associated with a rare breed club and can provide pedigreed DNA samples to MARS, you could approach them and ask them if they could add your rare breed to their database. That is what happened in the case of Biewers, and they are recognized only as an emerging breed by the AKC Foundation Stock Service at present. I also know for a fact that their Yorkshire Terrier reference set includes several hundred DNA samples. I'm not sure about other common breeds, but I imagine that they also include several hundred samples per breed at least. But you are correct, if there is a rare breed in the ancestry of a dog's DNA sample sent to MARS, the results would either not detect it, or give the result as the most closely related breed to the rare breed.

[navillusc]

Originally Posted by gemy

I think that that face means confused. I would like to know how extensive their DNA database is, and the credentials of the DNA used to provide a purebred data base. And how extensive it needs to be per breed to ascertain with a 95% probability that they can actually ascertain if a dog is pure-bred or not?

For example for our Rare Breed as far as I am aware the Mars/Wisdom panel has not reached out to either USA or CDN National clubs to provide DNA samples for these purebreds. How then could they ascertain if there is some mix of my breed in a sample provided to them for their analysis?

I suppose until we map the genome for each purebred dog we are going to be a ways away from determing purebred bred type by a Wisdom Panel test.

Makes you wonder at what point data collection will begin, and what will have happened within the breed by then that might skew test results forever.

I suppose, ideally, genome mapping and DNA testing from the initial start of the development phase of a new breed onward would be good. Even so, there would forever be unknowns about the previous generations of the foundation breed stock, wouldn't there? Especially if there are any oops matings that resulted in puppies who were 'visual representations of the breed' but carrying altered DNA...and if those were used as breed stock...???

I am merely interested and curious, not a breeder, so I could easily be soooo wrong...

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by navillusc

If you 'hover' over that icon, it says "confused" and I highlighted the statement that "confused" me. Sorry if I confused you, too.

I would be interested in knowing 'why' the "scientific community" is 'allowing' testing it 'knows' is "not perfect" to gain "acceptance" in the first place...if you know the answer, though.

Is there concern in the "scientific community" that "acceptance" might lead to complacency as more and more in the "scientific community" begin to "accept" the test results, perhaps as fact, regardless of whether or not the test is proven to be accurate?

Just thinking in print...

Sorry, I didn't hover over the icon, LOL! I just read one of the papers I referred to, by the way, to see how they describe the accuracy of the MARS test, and they stated that it is 99% accurate for purebred dogs and 90% accurate for mixed breed dogs. That's based on testing dogs of known pedigree. So long as the papers state the degree of accuracy of the MARS test, that's a sufficient disclaimer, and I don't think it will cause scientists to become complacent about the accuracy of the test.

[navillusc]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Sorry, I didn't hover over the icon, LOL! I just read one of the papers I referred to, by the way, to see how they describe the accuracy of the MARS test, and they stated that it is 99% accurate for purebred dogs and 90% accurate for mixed breed dogs. That's based on testing dogs of known pedigree. So long as the papers state the degree of accuracy of the MARS test, that's a sufficient disclaimer, and I don't think it will cause scientists to become complacent about the accuracy of the test.

A picture is not always 'worth a thousands words"...

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by navillusc

Makes you wonder at what point data collection will begin, and what will have happened within the breed by then that might skew test results forever.

I suppose, ideally, genome mapping and DNA testing from the initial start of the development phase of a new breed onward would be good. Even so, there would forever be unknowns about the previous generations of the foundation breed stock, wouldn't there? Especially if there are any oops matings that resulted in puppies who were 'visual representations of the breed' but carrying altered DNA...and if those were used as breed stock...???

I am merely interested and curious, not a breeder, so I could easily be soooo wrong...

Once you're at the point of foundation stock, and use only certified dogs from the foundation stock for breeding, DNA breed testing should give you reasonably uniform results. Unless, of course, there is an "oops" mating that slips through. But then again, that's a problem with purebreds in any breeding program. The good thing is that DNA testing of parents and offspring is becoming more common place, and can definitely be used to remove any doubt about "oops" matings. Note: DNA parentage tests are different from the breed testing done by MARS and are much simpler and more accurate since all you are asking is "did these two parents give rise to this puppy?"

[gemy]

Originally Posted by navillusc

Makes you wonder at what point data collection will begin, and what will have happened within the breed by then that might skew test results forever.

I suppose, ideally, genome mapping and DNA testing from the initial start of the development phase of a new breed onward would be good. Even so, there would forever be unknowns about the previous generations of the foundation breed stock, wouldn't there? Especially if there are any oops matings that resulted in puppies who were 'visual representations of the breed' but carrying altered DNA...and if those were used as breed stock...???

I am merely interested and curious, not a breeder, so I could easily be soooo wrong...

And here-in lies the historical and current rub. Historically and currently still as you are probably aware, the authenticity of a breed in a very large part is predicated on the honesty and accurate reporting of the breeder when they register their litter. It is our "job" to keep our females safe from accidental breedings, and in fact to orchestrate breedings to designated sires. So if as a breeder you have a litter of pups beneath your feet, that seem somehow off, or if you somehow "lost" track of your gal in heat, you are duty bound to DNA test that litter, which obviously means all males in your household need to be DNA'd if they have not been already. It is an expensive mistake, but there ya go. Now conservatively speaking how many breeders will do this?

As a breeder you research thoroughly to whom you want to mate with, but at the ultimate end it does predominately rest on trust. And that trust is given to the current breeder.

Submission of DNA per registered dog either in Canada/USA or Europe is currently on a voluntary basis, other for some discrete circumstances. DNA at these registries is only used to confirm parenthood, not to confirm breed type.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a high likelihood across almost all breeds that somewhere in their history there have been oops matings, that the breeder was either un-aware of, or decided to turn a blind eye too.

So for me, I would like to see some scientific mathematical formulae that takes into account these "mismatches" over the years. I would also like to see genome mapping starting with the most populous breeds, say GR, and GSD and YT and Rottweilers. What is different in the genome of a Rottie to a GSD? In human terms that would mean have we come so far we can tell the difference from a Purebred Chinese person, to a purebred Japanese person? Can we know and map a Germanic person from a Canadian person?

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by gemy

And here-in lies the historical and current rub. Historically and currently still as you are probably aware, the authenticity of a breed in a very large part is predicated on the honesty and accurate reporting of the breeder when they register their litter. It is our "job" to keep our females safe from accidental breedings, and in fact to orchestrate breedings to designated sires. So if as a breeder you have a litter of pups beneath your feet, that seem somehow off, or if you somehow "lost" track of your gal in heat, you are duty bound to DNA test that litter, which obviously means all males in your household need to be DNA'd if they have not been already. It is an expensive mistake, but there ya go. Now conservatively speaking how many breeders will do this?

As a breeder you research thoroughly to whom you want to mate with, but at the ultimate end it does predominately rest on trust. And that trust is given to the current breeder.

Submission of DNA per registered dog either in Canada/USA or Europe is currently on a voluntary basis, other for some discrete circumstances. DNA at these registries is only used to confirm parenthood, not to confirm breed type.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a high likelihood across almost all breeds that somewhere in their history there have been oops matings, that the breeder was either un-aware of, or decided to turn a blind eye too.

So for me, I would like to see some scientific mathematical formulae that takes into account these "mismatches" over the years. I would also like to see genome mapping starting with the most populous breeds, say GR, and GSD and YT and Rottweilers. What is different in the genome of a Rottie to a GSD? In human terms that would mean have we come so far we can tell the difference from a Purebred Chinese person, to a purebred Japanese person? Can we know and map a Germanic person from a Canadian person?

The first two bolded sections are the points I was trying to make, but you worded it better .

In human terms, your last two sentences are a little scary, because it shouldn't matter. I know that there are online DNA test kits that purport to tell you which part of the world your ancestors came from. We are at the point where an individual's DNA can be completely sequenced for a few thousand dollars. The same could be done for dogs if the money is there and if there are good reasons to do so. I'm sure it will become more commonplace as the cost of DNA sequencing continues to fall.