Is Temperament 100% Genetic?

[Salukifan]

I can see out the window from my desk here, some friends of the people across the road have tail chasing GSD, I have seen the dog several times.......I am watching this dog now continually circling around on the front lawn and wondering if spinners were in the pedigree of this dog from a genetic perspective.......it looks like well structured showline black and tan?

Or maybe it's just under exercised and bored rigid. A dog bred to work needs an outlet. Fail to give it one and problem behavior can be a result. I'd look at the home before writing the problem off as genetic.

[Aidan3]

"We would not ask how much musicians and how much instruments contribute to music; we would not ask how much the water and how much the temperature contribute to evaporation; and we would not ask how much males and how much females contribute to copulation. Similarly, we shouldn't ask how much genetic and experiential factors contribute to behavioral development." Pinel, "Biopsychology" Chapter 2, 2011.

Pinel asks us [students of biopsychology] to consider three things, 1. neurons become active long before they are fully developed 2. the course of their development depends greatly on their activity, much of which is triggered by external experience, and 3. experience continuously modifies genetic expression.

[alpha bet]

One very interesting study by the Hungarian Family Dog Project was when a litter of wolves was raised individually by a group of research fellows who had also raised the individuals from a litter of domestic dogs. This allowed comparisions to be drawn. Initially things where fairly similar but as time progressed the gap widened.

For anyone interested here is the link to the Wolf/Dog Comparision Study. http://familydogproject.elte.hu/research.html

Perhaps one possible observation we could draw from this study could have been that the inbuilt temperament of these wolf pups override the environment - strong support to consider that the temperament is likely to be genetic.

Personally I feel that the Temperament is genetic however the environment can enhance or suppress some of these personality traits. Hence why I prefer to meet the stud dogs I plan to use in my breeding program first as it helps to get a feel for what they might have to offer as far as temperament goes.

[Steve]

What statistically significant and repeatable breeder's results?

O.K. You asked.

Well lots of us have actually documented ,methods and results and kept stats etc of the results of our choices in our breeding programs and differences in how we manage our breeding girls,puppies etc. Many of which are being repeated with the same results - some of us old birds have been doing this for a couple of decades.

You see this is a puzzle.Lets look at Labs for a minute. Someone like Goddard - smart man - scientist - never bred a dog works out that you can select for certain traits in a guide dog [more specifically labs and goldens] and makes recommendations regarding selection and breeding programs for guide dogs. He tells us we can and should select for such things including temperament and and shows evidence as to how he has worked out this is possible - correlates some things related to suitability and ease of training to left handedness etc. Its a study by a professor sponsored by a uni probably costs a stack of money so its credible but surely its common knowledge- So what of someone like Dr Lesley Levins PHD Sc Ed who has been breeding Labs - mainly for guide dog work for around 30 plus years. I believe Sandgrubber has a Phd in something similar as well and breeds labs, there are at least two other Lab breeders Im aware of who have PHDS in NSW - what an untapped resource and why is it less credible because its coming from someone who breeds dogs,why would anyone think that at least some of the people who breed dogs don't approach it in a scientific manner ? Pauline Gill Tapua who is a well educated intelligent lady - selecting for working labs isn't just watching two dogs mate and doing the mechanics of producing a pup - she couldn't have the level of success she has had with her pups in such high demand for service and working labs if she didn't keep records and stats know the chances of her results being altered or repeated and making educated science based decisions on what comes next.

When someone who is making puppies of one breed for a long time and knows the repeatable or avoidable results taking into account the variability of different environments and different owner impact says based on their data, studies and research of what they have produced they believe something is the case its not counted,even if they have documented their methodology, their results and conclusions which are being tested and repeated - because its just a breeder - not a scientific study done through a traditional educational institution. Then its a study so it must be right ,laws change, ideologies change, systems change based on the findings and conclusions even though another study in a couple of years shows it isn't right or there is a variable they forgot to include in the testing, which changes everything.

One or two studies show its better for a pup to be put under stress , pushed and poked while its still a brand new baby even though the bitch works really hard to eliminate that influence if she has a choice so everyone starts pushing and poking all of their puppies instead of testing it themselves in case its different for their breed or the study has missed something re variables etc - and everyone who reads it tells us they know this stuff and we should do it because they read it in a study - how odd.

One study will look at differences between pet shop puppies and breeder puppies and determine its about socialisation which a registered breeder gives to their puppies but it could just as easily be about the fact that one group of breeders is more likely to put more work into selecting the parents and less likely to sell their puppies to pet shops or it may be that people who buy puppies from pet shops are less likely to put the time and work needed into ensuring they have good manners or that it all works better when a dog is predictable and more able to be chosen to suit an owner's lifestyle, or it may be that its a breed or cross breed things skewing the data. The assumption is that registered breeders socialise their puppies more before they go home - so where is the study that proves that?

Ill stop now but part of what I see is written and articulated breeder's individual breeding programs - its part of the criteria for entry into the MDBA Breeder membership and some of these are knock your socks off stuff - sure some are a basic as yet as the breeder is less experienced and less knowledgeable but some could be mistaken for a scientific study.Part of our aim is to teach them how to record their methods and keep stats and write up their results. Purebred breeders who aim to breed consistently well temperamented, healthy animals over generations cant have the same level of success if they don't approach it as if they are scientists recording and dissecting their own and other's data.

[corvus]

So what of someone like Dr Lesley Levins PHD Sc Ed who has been breeding Labs - mainly for guide dog work for around 30 plus years. I believe Sandgrubber has a Phd in something similar as well and breeds labs, there are at least two other Lab breeders Im aware of who have PHDS in NSW - what an untapped resource and why is it less credible because its coming from someone who breeds dogs,why would anyone think that at least some of the people who breed dogs don't approach it in a scientific manner ?

I assume it's not being published in a peer reviewed journal? That would be the most obvious answer. It's not that we think no one is breeding dogs with any semblance of a systematic approach. It's just that they are largely invisible to us. If you approached an academic with interests in the area and offered a lot of data I doubt you would have much trouble getting it statistically analysed and published in a peer reviewed journal. Then what you and others like you have done would no longer be invisible to most of the world. The peer review process may be about 50% bollocks, but at the end of the day it's the best we've got, really. And that means anything that's not peer reviewed is automatically not as credible as something that is peer reviewed. It's nothing personal, just the hierarchy of credible information. There's no way for us to tell if we are hearing stuff from a breeder with exceptional methodological skills and acres of hard data or a breeder with only a basic concept of what they are trying to do with their breeding and a whole lot of biased data, which is worse than no data.

When someone who is making puppies of one breed for a long time and knows the repeatable or avoidable results taking into account the variability of different environments and different owner impact says based on their data, studies and research of what they have produced they believe something is the case its not counted,even if they have documented their methodology, their results and conclusions which are being tested and repeated - because its just a breeder - not a scientific study done through a traditional educational institution. Then its a study so it must be right ,laws change, ideologies change, systems change based on the findings and conclusions even though another study in a couple of years shows it isn't right or there is a variable they forgot to include in the testing, which changes everything.

Scientists are doing their best just like breeders are. We face the irritating dichotomy of either being shrugged off as somehow not experienced enough with the topic or having big holes in our methodology (that are usually dealt with, incidentally) or having people leap on everything we say and clinging to it like a drowning man clinging to a life raft. People regularly misinterpret studies or give them more credence than we do ourselves. Abstracts don't have all the cautionary bits about interpretation. There's not much we can do about it. We put it out there and grit our teeth and wait for the armchair experts to pull it apart or vehemently object to something they imagined we said. Life is not black and white, but it seems most of the population can only think in terms of black and white. The very title of the thread is testament to that. Is temperament 100% genetic? It's like asking if the ocean is 100% water. It's the wrong question. We don't even know what "temperament" is.

[mita]

Good to see you posting on the topic, corvus.

There's an interesting paper that draws together published research from a wide range of discipline interests. A review & evaluation.

Conclusions section right at the end makes good reading:

http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/faculty/gosling/reprints/aabs05dogpersonalityreview.pdf

[BlackJaq]

ummmmm interesting link

not only to early death but agression issues as well

http://www.healthy-k9.com/secure/course/breed.php?db=Dogue%20Brasileiro&gclid=CM-U69eM1rcCFUodpQoddWEAww

Umm have you read that link?

Methinks somebody is a little bit confused (and confusing the heck out of me with your posts, just saying)

[Santo66]

I can see out the window from my desk here, some friends of the people across the road have tail chasing GSD, I have seen the dog several times.......I am watching this dog now continually circling around on the front lawn and wondering if spinners were in the pedigree of this dog from a genetic perspective.......it looks like well structured showline black and tan?

Or maybe it's just under exercised and bored rigid. A dog bred to work needs an outlet. Fail to give it one and problem behavior can be a result. I'd look at the home before writing the problem off as genetic.

I agree that under exercise/stimulation is more than likely the cause of the behaviour........the genetics of the dog is the reason it spins and doesn't just yap, dig up the garden or any other behaviour of bordom.

[mita]

Similarly, we shouldn't ask how much genetic and experiential factors contribute to behavioral development." Pinel, "Biopsychology" Chapter 2, 2011.

Pinel asks us [students of biopsychology] to consider three things, 1. neurons become active long before they are fully developed 2. the course of their development depends greatly on their activity, much of which is triggered by external experience, and 3. experience continuously modifies genetic expression.

Neat summary, Aidan. All spot on. And being demonstrated in human studies.

Edited June 10, 2013 by mita

[Jumabaar]

I can see out the window from my desk here, some friends of the people across the road have tail chasing GSD, I have seen the dog several times.......I am watching this dog now continually circling around on the front lawn and wondering if spinners were in the pedigree of this dog from a genetic perspective.......it looks like well structured showline black and tan?

Or maybe it's just under exercised and bored rigid. A dog bred to work needs an outlet. Fail to give it one and problem behavior can be a result. I'd look at the home before writing the problem off as genetic.

I agree that under exercise/stimulation is more than likely the cause of the behaviour........the genetics of the dog is the reason it spins and doesn't just yap, dig up the garden or any other behaviour of bordom.

Is it though?

Perhaps the owners rewarded it as a pup for playing with its tail because it was cute and so it decided that was more rewarding than barking to gain attention and it grew from there...... Also how DO you know that its under exercise and stimulation that causes it? Its highly likely thats the cause but I have seen tail chasing after traumatic brain injury too.

Actually I have seen plenty of dogs become quite aggressive due to pain such as arthritis. I dont think that its genetics that is causing them to react, its pain.

Thus if I have seen animals temperament/disposition change due to pain and brain damage which I believe are non genetic 'external' factors how can I look at a pup and decide that there is absolutely nothing external that could have happened during utero or early development to modify how it behaves? I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

[Santo66]

Well lots of us have actually documented ,methods and results and kept stats etc of the results of our choices in our breeding programs and differences in how we manage our breeding girls,puppies etc. Many of which are being repeated with the same results - some of us old birds have been doing this for a couple of decades.

Well I know one thing: If I wanted a particular type of dog I would trust a breeder who consistantly produces the type over a scientists recommendation who's never bred a dog in their lives :D

"

We would not ask how much musicians and how much instruments contribute to music; we would not ask how much the water and how much the temperature contribute to evaporation; and we would not ask how much males and how much females contribute to copulation. Similarly, we shouldn't ask how much genetic and experiential factors contribute to behavioral development." Pinel, "Biopsychology" Chapter 2, 2011.

Pinel asks us [students of biopsychology] to consider three things, 1. neurons become active long before they are fully developed 2. the course of their development depends greatly on their activity, much of which is triggered by external experience, and 3. experience continuously modifies genetic expression.

I wonder if this would be helpful in selecting the parentage I would like my next pup from

Edited June 10, 2013 by Santo66

[Santo66]

Perhaps the owners rewarded it as a pup for playing with its tail because it was cute and so it decided that was more rewarding than barking to gain attention and it grew from there...... Also how DO you know that its under exercise and stimulation that causes it? Its highly likely thats the cause but I have seen tail chasing after traumatic brain injury too.

Actually I have seen plenty of dogs become quite aggressive due to pain such as arthritis. I dont think that its genetics that is causing them to react, its pain.

Thus if I have seen animals temperament/disposition change due to pain and brain damage which I believe are non genetic 'external' factors how can I look at a pup and decide that there is absolutely nothing external that could have happened during utero or early development to modify how it behaves? I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

We know that external factors can trigger a behaviour, I totally agree, but what the dog does, how the dog processess the trigger is genetic. Some dogs do become aggressive with pain, some slink off and hide in the corner......the genetics of the dog determines the default behaviour associated with pain IMHO

[Steve]

thanks Corvus - perhaps part of the answer lies in us talking together more and working together - numerous ways I can imagine that could happen .There are also many things that as a breeder I would like to see studied by scientists to enable breeders to make better choices.I guess that politics, fame and fortune will always impact too.

In this case I see loads of stuff on people designing temperament tests and trying to determine via these assessments how reliable and accurate they are to predict behaviour in various situations or when the pup is older. Few get anywhere near looking at genetic possibilities re temperament , how selection impacts on predictability and reliability of assessments of what a pup's temperament will be etc ,not just between breeds but also between what breeders in a particular breed have focused on. Not that I need studies for me to believe that this a greater impact than anything else but some more studies would tidy it all up.

Seriously I appreciate your input - its been great.

[mita]

I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dog found some factors associated with it, were non-genetic (like age at which they were taken away from their mothers).

They couldn't find a specific genetic link. But they seem to think one will be found.

Boredom didn't get a gong.

The associated cluster of factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dogs-best-friend/201208/why-do-some-dogs-chase-their-tails

Edited June 10, 2013 by mita

[Jumabaar]

Perhaps the owners rewarded it as a pup for playing with its tail because it was cute and so it decided that was more rewarding than barking to gain attention and it grew from there...... Also how DO you know that its under exercise and stimulation that causes it? Its highly likely thats the cause but I have seen tail chasing after traumatic brain injury too.

Actually I have seen plenty of dogs become quite aggressive due to pain such as arthritis. I dont think that its genetics that is causing them to react, its pain.

Thus if I have seen animals temperament/disposition change due to pain and brain damage which I believe are non genetic 'external' factors how can I look at a pup and decide that there is absolutely nothing external that could have happened during utero or early development to modify how it behaves? I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

We know that external factors can trigger a behaviour, I totally agree, but what the dog does, how the dog processess the trigger is genetic. Some dogs do become aggressive with pain, some slink off and hide in the corner......the genetics of the dog determines the default behaviour associated with pain IMHO

But how do you know its the genetics that triggers if they become aggressive or slink off. Perhaps its the perception of the pain? Or their experience with previous painful episodes where people didnt handle them gently? I think that there is much more going on than simple genetics with every action a dog does.

I guess what am saying that even if the default is to bite at X level of pain, if the dog has experienced lesser pain previously and miss handled it may bite at a much lower threshold then it is genetically predisposition too. Alternately good handling and trust in its owner may see it exceed its pain threshold without biting although once again genetically it is programmed to react at level X.

My dog wont bite me if I clip his nails, he would bite you.

Which is the true representation of the dogs temperament? Which is his default behaviour and where do you draw the line in the sand saying this is temperament and this is behaviour?

His mother squirmed around when I tried to cut her nails as a pup so are we saying that the action they are taking is the 'temperament' or the fact that they express any resentment toward getting their nails cut at all 'temperament'. And if I said I now get out the nail clippers and I have both of them jumping on me to have their nails clipped because their 'temperament' is such that a few treats and a desire for praise outweighed their initial genetic displeasure at the action and their genetic reaction towards the aversive. If you met my dogs today, jumping around to get their nails clipped would you say they have a good solid temperament, even though they both had quite big tantrums initially? Would you say my other dog (related to them) who still has tantrums screaming and throwing herself around has a poor temperament and genetics because I have been too lazy to train her as well as the other two?

I think Corvus is onto something when she says we havent defined 'temperament' so how can we say its genetic or not? Is it the decision about what behaviour to perform in reaction to a stimuli which we have proven can be modified? or is it the decision that there even needs to be a reaction to a stimuli? Or is it something else entirely?

[Santo66]

In this case I see loads of stuff on people designing temperament tests and trying to determine via these assessments how reliable and accurate they are to predict behaviour in various situations or when the pup is older. Few get anywhere near looking at genetic possibilities re temperament , how selection impacts on predictability and reliability of assessments of what a pup's temperament will be etc ,not just between breeds but also between what breeders in a particular breed have focused on. Not that I need studies for me to believe that this a greater impact than anything else but some more studies would tidy it all up.

Usually these puppy tests are derived from the behaviour of puppies who turned out to be adult dogs of the type bred for, so the breeders look for puppy behaviour resembling that of their good dogs in puppyhood......sometimes it works, sometimes not. Perhaps when this process doesn't work it may have been obvious there was a difference between the pups with results of test they may not routinely implement. I think puppy tests are better at avoiding unwanted traits than actually determining traits of improvement?

[Steve]

I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dogs .... to everyone's surprise, I'd think.... found the factors associated with it, were non-genetic. Nor was it boredom.

The associated cluster of environmental factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today:

http://www.psycholog...ase-their-tails

Thats not quite right . They found SOME factors associated with it were non genetic and they still expect to find a genetic link.

[Steve]

I think Corvus is onto something when she says we havent defined 'temperament' so how can we say its genetic or not?

I agree what I think temperament is I cant imagine why anyone would think that could be impacted by environment or owners.

For me its not behaviour or able to be trained in or out.

[mita]

I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dogs .... to everyone's surprise, I'd think.... found the factors associated with it, were non-genetic. Nor was it boredom.

The associated cluster of environmental factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today:

http://www.psycholog...ase-their-tails

Thats not quite right . They found SOME factors associated with it were non genetic and they still expect to find a genetic link.

Which .... if you read my then edited post..... is exactly what I said.

[Steve]

I do believe genetics plays a role because we can select for it. I certainly wouldnt bet on it being the ONLY contributor for temperament.

Very, very interesting study on tail chasing in dogs .... to everyone's surprise, I'd think.... found the factors associated with it, were non-genetic. Nor was it boredom.

The associated cluster of environmental factors that tail chasing dogs have in common are fascinating to read about. Summary report in Psychology Today:

http://www.psycholog...ase-their-tails

Thats not quite right . They found SOME factors associated with it were non genetic and they still expect to find a genetic link.

Which .... if you read my then edited post..... is exactly what I said.

Oh Good = we agree then