Bitza Test

[Nekhbet]

the reason the test fails is because it relied on them taking samples from different breeds, and seeing which markers for features were common to that breed. Problem is they're all dogs, and breeds can share markers.

Have a dog that doesnt fit the lines/samples they used and you get what you see above great novelty scam

[poodlefan]

Save your money and post some pics here. We all love 'guess the breed mix' threads.

You've got a crossbred. Knowing for sure what's in the mix won't change your dog or help you find one just like her. Enjoy them for the unique individuals they are.

[KismetKat]

Yes if the dog is a true mutt, of mutt parents, they won't find anything. I did the test and they only found 'distant" (great-grandparents or beyond) for my dog.

I think it would only be handy when your supposed first-cross maltese/mini-poodle ends up the size of a GSD (like the one around the corner from me) and you want to make a point with the 'breeder' *cough*.

[mutt lover]

Ok I'll play sounds like fun what would you say this little cutie mutt is? Vet has her down as JRT which Is no where near right, I have my ideas but lets see wot you come up with, I was going to get the doggie DNA done at pet stock a while ago but as was $150 thought she can just stay a lady for that price.

Edited December 11, 2009 by mutt lover

[KismetKat]

dunno about the dog (maltese cross??) but am pretty sure that is a dead cow underneath her.

[mutt lover]

dunno about the dog (maltese cross??) but am pretty sure that is a dead cow underneath her.

Nope is purely synthetic cow! You are half right with dog -will find better pick where she's got hair.

[Tassie Tortoise]

Have a look http://www.janandjessie.net/

His BITSA result reported a 'statistically significant' marker for Tibetan Spaniel

When I picked myself up off the floor some time later and perused the rest of the 'report', to be fair, this 'statistically significant' amount was just barely significant. The value for his obvious breed heritage was significant enough for them to report him as 25% or 'secondary' of that breed. A total of 57 breed markers were 'identified', nearly their entire database! Everything from Alaskan Malamute to Whippet.

I had been advised by others prior to submitting his swabs that the science just isn't there yet in terms of pinpointing breeds but did it mainly, because I could and for a bit of a giggle and after a second person suggested he had Cattle Dog in him (yes, but 'statistically insignificant'). It certainly provides a laugh at parties and bbqs, 'meet my Tibetan Spaniel, Caesar!'

My theory was that all dogs would probably return quite a few breed markers albeit in miniscule amounts just because of human interference throughout history; I would be interested to know more results for supposedly 'purebred' dogs.

My fella is a rescue dog, have had him in my life 2 years now and wouldn't trade him for anything. I always reckoned he was a product of bad backyard breeding and not 'pure' so I guess this test confirms that but that's about all.

[Border Lover]

I just sent my Bitsa test in for my chihuahua in my signature.

I ended up with him after fostering - the person I got him off said they got him as a stray when he was about 4 months old, and they had him for 4 years, so no idea of the breed history. Some people tell me he looks pure chihuahua, others tell me his coat is too thick and tail too curly. So we will see what BITSA comes back as. Perhaps all the people that think he is my border collies puppy might be right, and he might be primary border collie. haha

What do you guys think he is???

I think results will take up to 14 days, so will be sure to post the results when I get them back!!!

[RallyValley]

My results took closer to a month and I sent of both dog's kit's but I asked them to cancel Toby's test and refund me the $99 after I got Lilly's results.

[WoofnHoof]

I'd like to do it on my chi find out how much chi there is, too poor though . The hard part with true bitzas is that they might have a whole chunk of something which makes them look a certain 'breed' but that chunk of DNA may not contain any of the known markers, whereas a tiny bit of another breed which may be way back might contain the marker for that breed so you will get a funny looking result but the science is still valid (regardless of whether it is just a novelty anyway). Not only that because of the way the genes interact to change the way the dog looks as soon as you move away from selected traits (as in pure breds) you get a dog that looks nothing like either parent but may look something entirely different. Before my chi lost his nuts he got to my sister's shih tsu x maltese and the resulting pups all came out looking like something different, I still see one and as an adult it has the weirdest conformation and the colouring is nothing like either parent, looks nothing like any of the contributing breeds, so a few markers is not necessarily going to coincide with the dog in front of you, what it will do is add to the database and hopefully if enough people do it there may be more siginficant results come through. But due to the high variance you would need a LOT of results!

[vnv]

Here is Willow - part Boston Terrier, part Golden Retriever according to BITSA

[Border Lover]

I guess Bitza has been used for some good though.

Apparently there was a dog seized due to Dangerous dog laws as a Pit Bull(seized on looks), and they did a Bitza test and it came back Golden Retreiver x Rottweiler, and the dog was returned to its owners! Thats good!!

[sugclasco]

dunno about the dog (maltese cross??) but am pretty sure that is a dead cow underneath her. ;)

Nope is purely synthetic cow! ;) You are half right with dog -will find better pick where she's got hair.

she looks a fare bit like my boy cisco so i will say jrt x silky ;)

[Asalei]

I got my results back last week while I was away from work and the result is: Primary - Beagle x Beagle

What a relief, my beagle is a beagle!

I'm still not sure about the whole thing.