:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: The blood test is more accurate because the blood provides a larger quantity of DNA, and it is less likely to be contaminated by other sources than a cheek swab. The only problem with the blood test is that it is more expensive, and it has to be done by a vet. If the OP just wants a quick test for fun, then the swab should work just fine. When I did Bella's test, I suited up like someone from CSI Miami with lab coat and nylon gloves, and poor Bella didn't have anything to eat for 12 hours previously, LOL! I was bound and determined to get the largest and purest DNA sample that I could with the cheek swab. The results were impeccable, like uncorking a bottle of fine wine ;).

Gotcha! Thanks for the explanation! :) I did not find the blood test to be cost prohibitive. I did it when I was at the vet anyway, so the cost for the visit was not considered part of the DNA test in my mind. The cost for the blood test was $130. Well worth it to me because I was just so curious as to what she was mixed with. It all made sense when I got the results.

I gave my opinion on blood test vs. cheek swab before I read on and saw your next post. The blood test is the best for accuracy, but like I said, I dressed up like a CSI detective for Bella's swab test :D. I also sent in cheek swabs (taken like a CSI detective :D) to a research lab to have Bella's DNA sequenced to see if they could identify the gene from Yorkies responsible for the progressive greying of coat color. Need to follow up on that--thanks for reminding me!

Yes, but most people won't do that. Then, many are disappointed with the results. I have seen some mighty wacky results from that swab test.

I always encourage people to spend the few extra dollars for the blood test. If they do the test, I don't believe they are doing it for fun...I think they really want to know. Why spend $75 for fun? To me it makes more sense to spend $60 more and get more accurate results...UNLESS they want to play CSI like you. :D

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: Absolutely! It is so easy to contaminate those cheek swabs with your own DNA or with DNA from food items, and once the DNA is contaminated, the results can be really wacky! As I recall, Minnie, the dog with short hair that looked more like a minpin, was tested using a blood sample drawn at the vet. She came back as a purebred Yorkshire Terrier, which left even me scratching my head. To be fair, her results showed her to be about as different from a standard Yorkshire Terrier that a dog could be and still be considered a Yorkshire Terrier. She was out there on the fringe of the Yorkie group. The test can only go back three generations, so that shows some of the limitations right there, but it is still the best test out there.

Does the blood test go back more than 3 generations, do you know?

I just took a look at the Wisdom Panel website, and their tests have changed since Bella was tested. The vet-administered breed test using a blood sample is now processed through Royal Canin. It is called Royal Canin Genetic Health Analysis (formerly called Wisdom Panel Professional DNA Test). Here is the website:

Discover | Genetic Health Analysis

Unfortunately, the Royal Canin website is not as user friendly as the Wisdom Panel website, but I watched the Royal Canin video at this link:

ROYAL CANIN® Genetic Health Analysis? - YouTube

It looks like the blood test still goes back only three generations and provides the same kind of report, but it also includes some genetic testing for heritable disease markers and adds 50 more breeds to the analysis.

Includes some genetic testing for heritable disease markers. I'm going to look and see if MVD/PVH is one of those tests. Thanks!!!

I'm trying to find that information too! So far, I can only find this vague comment:

"Screen your dog for genetic mutations that can predict specific health conditions. We currently test for 13 different mutations, with more added regularly."

I bet that more information is available to veterinarians, so if you can't find the information in the links I gave, call your vet and ask them. Then let us know what you find out!

Well, those websites aren't that informative about the inherited diseases they are able to locate in any give DNA test. Still, it's something to consider. I imagine anyone really interested could email them for further details of what they can potentially spot in say a Yorkshire Terrier in the way of hereditary medical conditions. I forgot whether you posted it or not, but did your Bella's test include any information on her tendency to develop LP or anything like that?

BTW, I hope Bella is doing well after her surgery and have meant to visit your thread to ask how her weight-bearing and stiffness in the joint are going? :)

Okay, Wisdom Panel has a THIRD test for breeders called Optimal Selection. Besides creating a database for your dog that will help you find the best matches in your breeding stock, it also checks for genetic diseases. Here is the link to the genetic diseases (and other traits) included in the test:

Disease and Trait Chromosome Chart - Disease and Trait Chromosome Chart | Wisdom Panel

Here is the link to general information about the Optimal Selection test:

Optimal Selection | Wisdom Panel

The test is a blood test, and it only costs $95 per dog, but its purposes are different from breed analysis.

Here is an article about this test:

http://www.wisdompanel.com/assets/1/..._chronicle.pdf

I just posted a list of the diseases tested :). No, Bella's test was the simple Wisdom Panel 2.0 test, and was just a breed analysis. Bella continues to improve, and the leg muscle in her operated leg is noticeably larger since I've been taking her on outdoor walks. She still treads more lightly on her operated leg, but she is much, much better, keeping her operated leg down for longer periods of time, and I'm beginning to believe that she will make a full recovery! Thanks for asking!

I was wrong about Optimal Selection testing for genetic diseases!
 

Sorry, I can't go back and edit my post--the time limit has expired. Optimal Selection does NOT check for genetic diseases. It is purely for checking optimal matings for different breeding pairs in its database. Sorry about that!!!! The link to the diseases on different chromosomes was purely for information purposes, as far as I can tell :(. The Royal Canin test DOES purport to test for 13 diseases, with more added over time, but you will have to check with your vet for the latest information on that.

Thanks for all of this. Not that much right now for Yorkshire Terriers but what they can find in the broader sense - if indeed they really can do this - is a good start, to my thinking. Incredible what may be down the road for us with these tests, isn't it?

On the other hand, I, like a lot of us, tend to question a lot of things I'm clueless about. I wonder if we can trust their findings of these breed hereditary conditions? Or where can we go check on their credentials on this aspect of the testing? Does anyone of repute double-check their science or test findings or is it rather buyer beware? And how do we know if their lab has contamination standards that prevent the tests from being adversely affected so as to avoid giving false or incorrect information? One hears so much about human DNA being cross-contaminated and improper handling/storage along the chain of evidence and/or laboratory standards for handling/storage and running the tests adversely affecting criminal or other legal cases on human DNA, improper assessment, etc., it gives one pause when dealing with any online or mail-in lab that performs canine DNA tests. I'm such a dummy at this and sorry for asking and you, pstinard, certainly don't need to answer as it's not your burden, I'm just interested and wondering out loud how we know any lab like this can do what they say they can in return for our hard-earned money.

Okay, got it. GTK.

When I was checking out testing for Bella, I did a lot of searching for this kind of information. The genetic testing done by Mars, Inc. was developed in-house, and is proprietary information, although in order to produce a marketable product, they have to produce results that are useful to veterinarians. After I'm finished with this post, I'll check the research literature again to see if Mars testing has been independently checked for accuracy. I do know that Mars labs are federally inspected, and that they maintain high standards. But then again, the federal government's inspection programs are tightly strapped for money, so it's hard to say how good a job federal inspectors can do.

Now for some good news :). I just got off the phone with the folks at Wisdom Panel, and they pointed me to the following link for up to date information on genetic diseases that can currently be tested for:

Information on Diseases & Conditions | Genetic Health Analysis

Note the following disclaimer:

"ROYAL CANIN® Genetic Health Analysis™ does not screen for any diseases or conditions. Our improved dog DNA test has the added capability of serving as a warning flag, allowing us to inform veterinarians through our report about potential health conditions that may exist in dogs with certain predisposed breeds in their background. It is then up to the veterinarian to confirm the existence of a condition through the appropriate canine diagnostic laboratories."

That means that the Royal Canin test does not actually test for genetic diseases, but the link I gave does give a list of diseases for which your vet can have DNA samples sent out for testing, and it gives a link to the labs that do testing for those particular diseases. This is a fantastic resource because it has all of the information about genetic diseases in one place, including references and links to other testing facilities.

The most recent article I can find about comparisons between Wisdom Panel testing and visual breed identification is here:

Comparison of Visual and DNA Breed Identification of Dogs and Inter-Observer Reliability

I think it is behind a pay firewall for most people, so I'll paste the most interesting conclusions here. (Parts that I left out are shown by dots like this ...) My conclusion from this is that DNA testing for breed analysis is currently about 85 to 90% accurate, but visual identification of breeds is much less accurate than that:

Abstract Until the recent advent of DNA analysis of breed composition, identification of dogs of unknown parentage was done visually, and visual identification is still the most common method of breed identification. We were interested in how often visual identification of dogs by people, assumed to be knowledgeable about dogs, matched DNA breed identification and how often these people agreed with each other (inter-observer reliability). Over 900 participants who engaged in dog related professions and activities viewed one-minute, color video-clips of 20 dogs of unknown parentage and were asked to identify the dogs’ predominant breeds. For 14 of the dogs, fewer than 50% of the respondents visually identified breeds of dogs that matched DNA identification. Agreement among respondents was also very poor. Krippendorf’s alpha was used to examine the reliability of the most predominant breed (selected across all dogs identified as mixed breeds) for all respondents, yielding alpha=0.23. For only 7 of the 20 dogs was there agreement among more than 50% of the respondents regarding the most predominant breed of a mixed breed and in 3 of these cases the most commonly agreed upon visual identification was not identified by DNA analysis.



...


1. Introduction


The breed by which a dog is identified has important implications and ramifications. Breed identification is used in public health journals, veterinary medical records, lost and found notices, licensing documents and animal shelter descriptions. How a dog is identified also influences how people interpret a dog’s behavior. World-wide, public and private regulations and restrictions have been enacted that regulate dog ownership, euthanasia, availability of liability insurance, and access to housing. These rules may specify specific breeds, mixes of these breeds, or any dog that resembles these breeds. We were interested in how often visual identification of dogs by people assumed to be knowledgeable about dogs matched DNA breed identification, and how often these people agreed with each other (inter-observer reliability).

...

Our personal observations of discrepancies among people who attempt to visually identify the breed composition of dogs prompted this study. We were interested in how often visual identification by people assumed to be knowledgeable about dogs was in agreement with DNA identification, and how often people agreed with each other (inter-observer reliability). We felt this was important because of the potential ramifications of misclassification of dog breeds in published databases which drive public and private policies as well as people’s perceptions of the behavior of individual dogs.
People who engage in professions or services that involve dogs are one source of identification of dogs of unknown parentage. They are in a position to provide their opinion to owners about the possible breed or predominant breed of their dogs. They may also directly assign a breed identity to dogs and enter their opinions on office forms and/or records. Either way, these identifications have the potential to be entered into national databases which are used for prevalence statistics on dogs’ breeds.

...

2.2. Source of Dogs


Twenty privately-owned dogs of unknown parentage were selected for the study from a pool of dogs that had been volunteered by their owners to participate in dog breed identification studies[26]. Forty of 50 volunteered dogs met the entrance criteria of being mature enough to have fully erupted canine teeth, having been obtained from a shelter, rescue, animal control or similar adoption agency, and being available on a specific day to be videotaped and have blood drawn.
...

2.3. DNA Analysis


Two ml samples of heparinized blood from each dog were immediately refrigerated and sent on the same day on cold packs by overnight shipment to MARS VETERINARYTM Lincoln, Nebraska for DNA analysis. There were 130 American Kennel Club (AKC) registered purebreds in their database and the laboratory reported “an average of 84% accuracy in the first-generation crossbred dogs of known parentage”[22],[23]. Contributions of ancestral breeds less than 12.5% were not reported.


...

3.2. Comparison of Visual Identification and DNA Breed Identification


The DNA analysis indicated none of the dogs were purebreds and most respondents identified the study dogs as mixed breeds. See Table 3. However, 7 of the 20 dogs were visually identified as probably purebreds by ten percent or more (range 10% - 25.4%) of the respondents. An average of 9.2 % (1701/18408) of the responses were “yes” to the question “Do you think this dog is probably a purebred?”.


...

3.3. Inter-Observer Reliability of Visual Identification of Most Predominant Breed of Dogs Identified as Mixed Breeds


Agreement among the respondents was also very poor, see Table 5 and see appendix. There was agreement among more than 50% of the respondents regarding the most predominant breed of a mixed breed for only 7 dogs and for 3 of these dogs the visual identification did not match any (either major or minor) DNA breed identification

...

4. Discussion


This study reveals a wide disparity between DNA and visual identification of the predominant breeds comprising a dog. It also indicates a low level of agreement among people regarding breed composition. Those of us in the animal care services have always remarked on the differences of opinions regarding what breed a dog is but few are aware of how little agreement there is or how often one’s own opinion could be wrong.
The wide range of responses by the participants are compatible with research and theories pertaining to judgments of probability based on partial information[36-42]. Identification of the breed composition of a dog requires recognition and recall, both of which are influenced by a multitude of variables, such as perception, knowledge base, memory, recent or salient experiences with the subject matter, and cognitive abilities involving categorization, sorting, matching and recombination of features.
Identification is affected by what features (stimuli) a person notices and how much weight the person attributes to those features. For example, some people may attend to the hair coat and color pattern of a dog, while others focus on size, shape of head, or whether or not the tail is curled. The ease with which people notice a feature enhances recall and increases the weight that is placed on that feature. For example, so much significance is placed on any black pigmentation of a dog’s tongue that, regardless of the morphology of the dog, it is usually identified as a Chow Chow or Chow mix. The frequency with which people are exposed to the names of specific breeds of dogs and their perception of the population of specific breeds will also influence prediction. Interestingly, the literature indicates that well educated professionals are as susceptible to judgmental biases as are the lay public[36],[37],[43],[44].
The low percentage of agreement between visual and DNA identification may be partially explained by perception biases. However, DNA identification of the proportion of purebred breeds in mixed breed dogs is not perfect either, nor do the laboratories that provide such analyses claim to be infallible. The average accuracy of identification of the breeds in an individual dog can be expected to decrease as the heterogeneity of its ancestors increases. Canine HeritageTM states that their accuracy of identification of known registered purebred dogs is 99%[45]. Wisdom PanelTM currently reports a 90% average accuracy of identification ofF1 crosses of known registered purebred dogs[46].

...

5. Conclusions

The disparities between visual and DNA identification of the breed composition of dogs and the low agreement among people who identify dogs raise questions concerning the accuracy of databases which supply demographic data on dog breeds, as well as the justification and ability to implement laws and private restrictions pertaining to dogs based on breed composition.