Temper And Colour

[Saffioraire]

The horse cat comparison is interesting. Why I never thought of it in dog terms I don't know - but I never feel comfortable on a Chestnut horse and will never own one again. My last one either had a brain tumor or was chemically imbalanced and was PTS after galloping through a fence. I watched him do it and right before he took off I saw his eyes roll back in his head, was like a scene out of a horror movie! All Chestnuts I have met have been a bit mad, but the ironic part is that I love grey's however the grey and chestnut genes are linked... ?!

The literature is interesting and I haven't had time to read it all. It's a tricky one. What I want to know is are there any original breeds (looking >100 years) that were actually bred with specific colour? Or is this something that become a part of the standard later on? I think while genetic technology cannot yet quantify these relationships, man has observed it and managed it for the time manipulated breeding has been in play. Good breeders used mistakes, instinct, eye and common sense to make evaluations and decisions and obviously they did a good job considering 99% of our breeds came about long before genetic technologies.

These days such intuition almost seems to be treated as voodoo. I'm all for Genetic don't get me wrong. I want to get a PhD in Genetics, but I think without common sense genetic knowledge can only take us so far.

[espinay2]

What I want to know is are there any original breeds (looking >100 years) that were actually bred with specific colour? Or is this something that become a part of the standard later on?

Pyrenean Mountain Dogs and many other related LGD breeds have 'always' been white. How they came to be white is lost in time though it does appear it was selected for. We are talking about a very old breed. Columella, the Roman agricultural historian, in a work entitled De Re Rustica published in the second century AD writes that "Sheep-herders insist on white guard dogs for their flocks, for otherwise a dog could be struck during an attack through being mistaken for a wolf". The first official standard for the breed was published in France in 1927 (written by fanciers and breeders, including the mountain shepherds who have traditionally bred and used them) although an earlier unofficial standard was published in 1897. Pyreneans made their first appearance in dog shows in France in the 1890's.

Edited March 17, 2012 by espinay2

[raineth]

I agree with Weasels in that IMO colour was something that 'went along for the ride' as particular dogs with other particular positive traits were selected for. A popular line, which happens to be a particular colour, then becomes more prolific.

Certianly many livestock guardian breeds are white, but many are also not. There is some conjecture that the white dogs were selected for in some places because the sheep in those locations were also predominantly white and the sheep therefore accepted the white dogs a lot easier. This also goes along with the conjecture that a darker coloured herding dog will be respected more by a flock. But these selections are really based on the temperament of the sheep and NOT the dogs as darker coloured livestock guardians with similar traits developed in other locations.

I believe thought that it's not so much coat colour, as skin colour that can affect temperament. There are dogs with light or white couloured coats that have darker skin underneath, which I think applies to the white LGD's? This may also be the case with the whote swiss shepherds?

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

As Jigsaw said take a look at the fox experiments and the hormones and melanin link everyone :)

Temple Grandin's discussion on white chickens is also very compelling.

[DobieMum]

I'm just *bumping* this conversation up, cause I find it fascinating. I can't help with a comment, cause I've done no research on this as I hadn't thought of it at all, but I will consider it all now.

[Weasels]

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

It isn't so much this, as each gene only encodes for one protein or RNA, but that the genes are grouped together as chromosomes and inherited as a block. Plus genes that are close together on a chromosome are less likely to get separated if a 'reshuffling' event occurs (what we call 'tightly linked') - therefore offspring are very unlikely to inherit one without the other.

For example if a gene for 'black' and a gene/genes that regulates dopamine or serotonin production are right next to each other on a chromosome it would be almost impossible to inherit one without the other and colour may well be linked to temperament. Since the dog genome has been mapped we could find this out fairly easily, but I'm just not sure how well the brain biochemistry genes that we understand actually correlate to a complicated thing like temperament. It could be studied though, by creating a panel of all the candidate genes and seeing which ones are more or less active in dogs with a certain temperament. I suspect though since it's likely to be a combination of genes, and then environment plays such a big part, it would be a tough one to nut out the statistics on.

[raineth]

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

It isn't so much this, as each gene only encodes for one protein or RNA, but that the genes are grouped together as chromosomes and inherited as a block. Plus genes that are close together on a chromosome are less likely to get separated if a 'reshuffling' event occurs (what we call 'tightly linked') - therefore offspring are very unlikely to inherit one without the other.

For example if a gene for 'black' and a gene/genes that regulates dopamine or serotonin production are right next to each other on a chromosome it would be almost impossible to inherit one without the other and colour may well be linked to temperament. Since the dog genome has been mapped we could find this out fairly easily, but I'm just not sure how well the brain biochemistry genes that we understand actually correlate to a complicated thing like temperament. It could be studied though, by creating a panel of all the candidate genes and seeing which ones are more or less active in dogs with a certain temperament. I suspect though since it's likely to be a combination of genes, and then environment plays such a big part, it would be a tough one to nut out the statistics on.

thanks Weasels that's a very easy to understand description :)

[voloclydes]

i guess the only slightly related thing with horses and cattle.

horses and cattle with excessive white around the eye they tend to get eye cancer more easily due to the lack of pigment. sun damages the cells and cancer is more likely. in fact our stallion had small growth removed before he was 3 yo.

cows with large white faces have the same issue. hence white is seen as a bad thing... it also the white effects the eye and lessor eye pigments also allow for sun damage. hence cancer is more likely.

greys tend towards melanomas... often not living as long as similar horses..although cancer and tumors in horses often move more slowly than in humans and the horses often have much better quality of life.

[BJean]

I know nothing about dogs and breeding but I know old timers superstitions say a white horse is weak or soft. (and that a black horse will always be hard to work with)

Do you think such colour issues have been passed down to dogs?

With horses, white hooves are softer and not as durable as dark hooves ...

perhaps this is where the superstition comes from?

[Saffioraire]

I know nothing about dogs and breeding but I know old timers superstitions say a white horse is weak or soft. (and that a black horse will always be hard to work with)

Do you think such colour issues have been passed down to dogs?

With horses, white hooves are softer and not as durable as dark hooves ...

perhaps this is where the superstition comes from?

Possibly. I know that the Chinese will not buy grey horses (or so I was told) as they believe it is bad luck. Perhaps the melanoma risk also?

[Saffioraire]

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

It isn't so much this, as each gene only encodes for one protein or RNA, but that the genes are grouped together as chromosomes and inherited as a block. Plus genes that are close together on a chromosome are less likely to get separated if a 'reshuffling' event occurs (what we call 'tightly linked') - therefore offspring are very unlikely to inherit one without the other.

For example if a gene for 'black' and a gene/genes that regulates dopamine or serotonin production are right next to each other on a chromosome it would be almost impossible to inherit one without the other and colour may well be linked to temperament. Since the dog genome has been mapped we could find this out fairly easily, but I'm just not sure how well the brain biochemistry genes that we understand actually correlate to a complicated thing like temperament. It could be studied though, by creating a panel of all the candidate genes and seeing which ones are more or less active in dogs with a certain temperament. I suspect though since it's likely to be a combination of genes, and then environment plays such a big part, it would be a tough one to nut out the statistics on.

Thanks very much for writing that. A REALLY terrific way of putting it. It would be a really interesting project to map out although I worry that once these types of questions were answered definitively would that spell the end of certain colours and potentially unbalance other genes causing new health/conformation/temperament issues?

I have a lot of reading to do!

[RuralPug]

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

It isn't so much this, as each gene only encodes for one protein or RNA, but that the genes are grouped together as chromosomes and inherited as a block. Plus genes that are close together on a chromosome are less likely to get separated if a 'reshuffling' event occurs (what we call 'tightly linked') - therefore offspring are very unlikely to inherit one without the other.

For example if a gene for 'black' and a gene/genes that regulates dopamine or serotonin production are right next to each other on a chromosome it would be almost impossible to inherit one without the other and colour may well be linked to temperament. Since the dog genome has been mapped we could find this out fairly easily, but I'm just not sure how well the brain biochemistry genes that we understand actually correlate to a complicated thing like temperament. It could be studied though, by creating a panel of all the candidate genes and seeing which ones are more or less active in dogs with a certain temperament. I suspect though since it's likely to be a combination of genes, and then environment plays such a big part, it would be a tough one to nut out the statistics on.

This.

Also bearing in mind that genes are not wedded to specific chromosones but can drift - therefore in one line you may have the serotonin strength of production gene complex next door to to the melanin depth of production gene complex as per the above example, where in another line these two genes amd their modifiers are on separate chromosones or further apart on the helix because the reshuffle has, against the odds, broken the tight link.

Where the first formation is more common in a particular breed, then you will get that anecdotal wisdom that says "in this breed blacks are smarter and have a higher drive than goldens or tris" but the second will also occur in a different line so you will have someone else say "No way - I have a black that is the most laid back one I have ever known." And when it turns out that laid-back blacks are quite the norm in that line, then you have a fair inkling that it is more likely to be a gene reshuffle than environment. But you need big samples over quite a few generations to come to that conclusion.

[Saffioraire]

1332419478[/url]' post='5772410']

1332109767[/url]' post='5767931']

1332104515[/url]' post='5767877']

From what I remember it is because the idea of a specific gene for a specific trait isn't accurate, so when you change a gene that affects colour, it also probably affects quite a few other things as well.

It isn't so much this, as each gene only encodes for one protein or RNA, but that the genes are grouped together as chromosomes and inherited as a block. Plus genes that are close together on a chromosome are less likely to get separated if a 'reshuffling' event occurs (what we call 'tightly linked') - therefore offspring are very unlikely to inherit one without the other.

For example if a gene for 'black' and a gene/genes that regulates dopamine or serotonin production are right next to each other on a chromosome it would be almost impossible to inherit one without the other and colour may well be linked to temperament. Since the dog genome has been mapped we could find this out fairly easily, but I'm just not sure how well the brain biochemistry genes that we understand actually correlate to a complicated thing like temperament. It could be studied though, by creating a panel of all the candidate genes and seeing which ones are more or less active in dogs with a certain temperament. I suspect though since it's likely to be a combination of genes, and then environment plays such a big part, it would be a tough one to nut out the statistics on.

This.

Also bearing in mind that genes are not wedded to specific chromosones but can drift - therefore in one line you may have the serotonin strength of production gene complex next door to to the melanin depth of production gene complex as per the above example, where in another line these two genes amd their modifiers are on separate chromosones or further apart on the helix because the reshuffle has, against the odds, broken the tight link.

Where the first formation is more common in a particular breed, then you will get that anecdotal wisdom that says "in this breed blacks are smarter and have a higher drive than goldens or tris" but the second will also occur in a different line so you will have someone else say "No way - I have a black that is the most laid back one I have ever known." And when it turns out that laid-back blacks are quite the norm in that line, then you have a fair inkling that it is more likely to be a gene reshuffle than environment. But you need big samples over quite a few generations to come to that conclusion.

It's fascinating though that if you did have those sample numbers over time, that one could look in the litter box and if there is no difference on a Volhard Test between pup A and pup B, decide to choose pup A because it is black and if the pups have bred true to genetics without recombination, choose knowing the colour is an indication of drive!