Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T20:46:32.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Practical Solutions to Welfare Problems in Dog Breeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

P D McGreevy  and
F W Nicholas
P D McGreevy
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
F W Nicholas*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reviews the history of the establishment of dog breeds, summarizes current health and resultant welfare problems and makes some positive suggestions for their resolution. Some breed standards and selection practices run counter to the welfare interests of dogs, to the extent that some breeds are characterized by traits that may be difficult to defend on welfare grounds. Meanwhile, little selection pressure seems to be exerted on some traits that would improve animal welfare and produce dogs better suited to modern society. Unfortunately, the incidence of certain inherited defects in some breeds is unacceptably high, while the number of registered animals of certain breeds within some countries is so low as to make it almost impossible for breeders to avoid mating close relatives. There are several constructive ways to overcome these challenges. Breed associations can ensure that reduction of welfare problems is one of their major aims; they can review breed standards; they can embrace modern technology for animal identification and pedigree checking; they can allow the introduction of ‘new ‘ genetic material into closed stud-books; and they can encourage collaboration with geneticists in identifying and using DNA markers for the control of inherited disorders. There should be a concerted effort to produce and evaluate as companion animals first-cross (F1) hybrids from matings between various pairs of breeds. Finally, geneticists must learn to communicate their science better and in a language that non-geneticists can understand.

Keywords

animal welfarebreedingdefectsdoggeneticshybrids
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 8 , Issue 4: Special Issue: Genetics and Animal Welfare , November 1999 , pp. 329 - 341
Copyright
© 1999 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clark, R D and Stainer, J R 1983 Medical and Genetic Aspects of Purebred Dogs. Veterinary Medicine Publishing Company: Edwardsville, USAGoogle Scholar
Coppinger, R and Coppinger, L 1998 Differences in the behaviour of dog breeds. In: Grandin, T (ed) Genetics and the Behaviour of Domestic Animals pp 167–202. Academic Press: San Diego, USAGoogle Scholar
Coppinger, R and Schneider, R 1995 The evolution of working dog behaviour. In: Serpell, J (ed) The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour and Interactions with People pp 21–47. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Dodman, N H, Schuster, L, White, S D, Court, M H, Parker, D and Dixon, R 1998 Use of narcotic antagonists to modify stereotypic self-licking, self-chewing and scratching behaviours in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 193: 815–819Google Scholar
Falconer, D S and Mackay, T F C 1996 Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 4th edition. Longman: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, S and Shelton, G D 1998 ‘Twitchiness’ in miniature wirehaired Dachshunds. Veterinary Record 143: 204Google ScholarPubMed
Foley, C W, Lasley, J F and Oswelier, G D 1979 Abnormalities of Companion Animals. Iowa State University Press: Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Goddard, M E and Beilharz, R G 1982 Genetic and environmental factors affecting the suitability of dogs as guide dogs for the blind. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 62: 97–102CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goddard, M E and Beilharz, R G 1983 Genetics of traits which determine the suitability of dogs as guide dogs for the blind. Applied Animal Ethology 9: 299–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, M E and Beilharz, R G 1985 A multivariate analysis of the genetics of fearfulness in potential guide dogs. Behaviour Genetics 15: 69–89CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodwin, D, Bradshaw, J W S and Wickens, S M 1997 Paedomorphism affects visual signals of domestic dogs. Animal Behaviour 53: 297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J B S 1927 A mathematical theory of natural and artificial selection. Part V. Selection and mutation. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 23: 838–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, D 1995 This noble breed. Country Life (March 16): 34–37Google Scholar
Hancock, D 1998 Breeding for the next millennium. Dogs Monthly 16(8): 10–13Google Scholar
Herrtage, M E, Seymour, C A, White, RAS, Small, G M and Wight, D G D 1987 Inherited copper toxicosis in the Bedlington terrier: the prevalence in asymptomatic dogs. Journal of Small Animal Practice 28: 1141–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, N G 1998 Canine genetic disease: the beginning of the end? The Veterinary Journal 155: 1–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Houpt, K A 1991 Domestic Animal Behavior for Veterinarians and Animal Scientists. Iowa State University Press: Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Karjalainen, L, Ojala, M and Vilva, V 1996 Environmental effects and genetic parameters for measurements of hunting performance in the Finnish Spitz. Journal of Animal Breeding & Genetics - Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie 113: 525–534Google Scholar
Kirk, R W 1986 A catalogue of congenital and hereditary disorders of dogs (by breed). In Current Veterinary Therapy. IX. Small Animal Practice pp 1281–1285. W B Saunders: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Klinckmann, G, Koniszewski, G and Wegner, W 1986 Light microscopic investigations on the retinae of dogs carrying the merle factor. Journal of Veterinary Medicine, Series A 33: 674–688CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolosi, J and Gunn, I M 1997 An international gene bank for guide dogs: organization, utilization and potential. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 12: 145–148Google Scholar
Lemonick, M D and Smith, R 1995 A terrible beauty. Time (23 January): 37–42Google Scholar
Liinamo, A E, Karjalainen, E, Ojala, M and Vilva, V 1997 Estimates of genetic parameters and environmental effects for measures of hunting performance in Finnish Hounds. Journal of Animal Science 75: 622–629CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorenz, K 1965 Evolution and Modification of Behaviour. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Mellersh, C S, Langston, A A, Acland, G M, Fleming, M A, Ray, K, Wiegand, N A, Francisco, L V, Gibbs, M, Aguirre, G D and Ostrander, E A 1997 A linkage map of the canine genome. Genomics 46: 326336CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morley, F H W 1954 The importance and genetic control of undesirable recessive genes in livestock. Journal of the Australian Institute of Agricultural Science 20:143-150Google Scholar
Nicholas, F W 1996 Introduction to Veterinary Genetics. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Nicholas, F W 1998 International livestock breeding - implications of inherited diseases, and the risks and benefits for Australia. In: Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Production, Technology Transfer Field Day, 14 January 1998, Armidale, Australia pp 40–45Google Scholar
On-line Mendelian Inheritance in Animals (OMIA). Department of Animal Science, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia. http://www.angis.org.au/Databases/BIRX/omia/Google Scholar
Overall, K L 1997 Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Small Animals. Mosby: Missouri, USAGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D F 1974 A catalogue of hereditary diseases of the dog. In: Kirk, R W (ed) Current Veterinary Therapy. V. Small Animal Practice pp 61–75. W B Saunders: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D F 1977 A catalogue of genetic disorders of the dog. In: Kirk, R W (ed) Current Veterinary Therapy. VI. Small Animal Practice pp 73–88. W B Saunders: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Peyer, N and Steiger, A 1998 The assessment of breed defects in dogs in relation to animal welfare. Schweizer Archiv für Tierheilkunde 140: 359–364Google Scholar
Podberscek, A L and Serpell, J A 1996 The English Cocker Spaniel: preliminary findings on aggressive behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 47: 75–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, R 1990 Genetics for Dog Breeders, 2nd edition. Pergamon Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Schmutz, S M and Schmutz, J K 1998 Heritability estimates of behaviors associated with hunting in dogs. Journal of Heredity 89: 233–237CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, J P and Fuller, J L 1965 Genetics and the Social Behaviour of the Dog. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Ubbink, G J, Vandebroek, J, Hazewinkel, HAW, Rothuizen, J 1998 Cluster analysis of the genetic heterogeneity and disease distribution in purebred dog populations. Veterinary Record 142: 209–213CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuzbasiyan-Gurkan, V, Blanton, S H, Cao, Y Y, Ferguson, P, Li, J P, Venta, P J, Brewer, G J 1997 Linkage of a microsatellite marker to the canine copper toxicosis locus in Bedlington terriers. American Journal of Veterinary Research 58: 23–27Google Scholar
Wegner, W 1979 Genetic deficiencies relevant to animal welfare in dogs and cats. Tierärztliche Praxis 7: 361–366Google Scholar
Wegner, W 1995 The applicability of animal protection law for the prevention of crippling breeding methods. Der Praktische Tierarzt 76: 11Google Scholar