An expose by CBC Marketplace, with two American and two Canadian companies, seemed to call into question the accuracy of testing doggie DNA to determine its pedigree. Half the companies failed to identify a human sample, one company seemed to call most samples “a village dog” regardless of its actual breeds.
Thoughts? Have you ever had a dog tested using its DNA?
I’ve done it with my dog about ten years ago, just for fun, knowing it’s probably not all that accurate. He was adopted as a pit bull mix from the pound. When we got our results back we got … pretty much all breeds that fall under the “pit bull” umbrella.
We got: 25% AmStaff, 12.5% Bull Terrier, 12.5% Bullmastiff 12.5% Staffordshire Bull Terrier, 37.5% Other (Breed Groups: Terrier, Herding, Guard.)
So, yeah, looks like it hit pretty much all the “pit bull” breeds, and some unidentified ones. It seemed pretty legitimate to me.
I’m shocked, shocked that a commercial lab that isn’t held to any verification standards would cut corners and provide fraudulent results! Who would have thought it possible?
Stranger
It’s pretty shocking. Henry Kissinger said that “corrupt politicians make the other ten percent look bad”. But I’ll bet he didn’t say it in Cambodia.
We did it a few years ago for a puppy we adopted from a foster who said he was a “Terrier.” According to the test, he’s 23% German Spitz, 4% Pomeranian, 26% Chihuahua, 19% Beagle, 13% Siberian Husky, 12% English Springer Spaniel, and 3% Pyrenean Shepherd. It doesn’t really matter to us too much either way, but it’s fun to tell people what an absolute mutt he is.
We used Wisdom Panel. Embark sounds like absolute garbage.
We got a DNA test for one of our rescues for free. 50% corgi, 25% chihuahua, 25% other (sporting).
We think mom was a corgi and dad was a chiweenie.
Same here for the results above. They even updated the results a few years later when they updated their analysis. The results I posted are largely the same as the original, but the original had some breed guesses the updated one didn’t. The new results are more general for that 37.5% “other” category in my dog.
It has been my experience that shelters’ guesses are pretty much a stab in the dark. My brother’s sister-in-law adopts older dogs from shelters, one at a time as they pass on. One she was told was a Newfoundland Retriever/Labrador Retriever cross. We took one look and said, “Newfie, all right (lookit the size of him) but there’s no Lab there.”
DesertRoomie and I had to study him for about five minutes then came to the same conclusion simultaneously: Flat Coat Retriever. I keyed on the head shape and she on the coat. I suspect any sizeable black dog gets tagged as Black Labrador.
Yes, my daughter’s dog. It was a lease requirement at her apartment complex. All dogs were DNA tested so that any poop found on the premises could be sent for comparison. Violations brought fines and/or eviction. It was not an idle threat; they actually evicted tenants for not scooping behind their dogs. The management office kept the results on file so we never saw details about pedigree, nor were we interested in them.
We have a yellow lab mix. One of his siblings was tested and the result was “yellow lab mix” essentially. Biggest component was lab, with some American Staffordshire Terrier (pitbull), chow, and some other minor stuff. I think all rescues have some pitbull. Chow makes sense – his skin is definitely loose for a yellow lab. So, maybe it was accurate?
We did the test for our former dog just for fun. Part Dalmation? LOL, that dog was a true mutt, so the test didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already suspect. My wife wants to do a test for our current dog rehomed to us, as we recently learned she could be a Kelpie (type of Australian herding dog). But I am refusing on the grounds it is a waste of money, after judging the results for our other dog. It’s not like we’re going to give her up at this point if she’s not, and breeding her is out since she’s spayed. We can safely go around telling people who ask that she’s a Kelpie (which is fun to say in it’s own right) and no one will know we are guessing, which is pretty much all the DNA test is - a guess.
Ours seemed pretty sensible. CraigsList rescue dog, looked very Golden Retriever, came back 7/8 Golden and 1/8 German Shepherd. Then we observed his hair was somewhat shorter than most Goldens, and his ears were a bit pointy, and he had some aggression issues. So at least from our observations, we had no cause to doubt the result.
Reminds me of a famous quackery case involving chiropractor Ruth Drown, who claimed to be able to identify various illnesses from small blood samples (pselling her expensive, worthless gadgets to use in “treatment”). One time she diagnosed chickenpox and mumps in children’s blood samples - which were actually blood from a turkey, sheep, and pig submitted as part of a sting operation.
“Live blood analysis” is a type of quackery practiced to this day.
The fact that it failed to identity the human sample might be less shocking than the fact that the analysis of dog samples seems to be basically meaningless. PCR is very sensitive, it’s likely just sample contamination.
The program (surely available on “CBC Gem” for free for those very interested) said a picture of the dog was included with samples, and in some cases just using computers to guess the dog species produced the same results as the reported results. PCR is indeed accurate if actually done, and profits higher if not done (well). Yes, companies blamed contamination and it is not impossible. Choose your doggie DNA company carefully.
They do. Even when there are no other characteristics of a Black Lab other than color of their fur. My buddy Duke was listed as a Norwegian Elkhound mix at a shelter, he might have some of that in him, but they were looking at his curling tail that is common among all Spitz dogs. He has no other physical characteristics of an Elkhound. But then again dog breeds were rather arbitrarily designated in the first place, and all of the breeds emerged from the broad mix of genes that all dogs have already.
I’d be interested to find out what basis there is to believe that dog DNA can reliably indicate a dog’s genetic heritage at all.
I have no stake in Embark other than being a past customer. I didn’t get the sense that their testing was garbage from that article. I could easily see free roaming dogs from Central Asia pre-dating our current breed system and can imagine that they correctly identified the region those dogs were from as a plus.
In the example of my dog, a known Australian Shepherd purebred, they correctly identified him as well as identifying close genetic matches with several known relatives from the region (and a few surprise relatives as well). Additionally, their testing matched the results of the standard genetic defect testing commonly done on Aussies to identify susceptibility to some common breed problems.
Yeah, I was being pretty harsh. I’ve never used Embark, and I don’t know much about how DNA tests work. But that one company coming back with so many 100% results seems suspicious.