Voith Victoria L, Ingram Elizabeth, Mitsouras Katherine, Irizarry Kristopher
Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA 91766-1854, USA.
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2009;12(3):253-62. doi: 10.1080/10888700902956151.
Governmental and other agencies may require dog caregivers (owners) to provide breed identification of their dogs. This study compares breed identification by adoption agencies with identification by DNA analysis in 20 dogs of unknown parentage. Of the 20 dogs who had been adopted from 17 different locations, the study identified 16 dogs as having (or probably having) 1 or 2 specific breed(s) in their ancestry. DNA analysis of these dogs indicated that 25% (4/16) did in fact contain genetic evidence of an adoption agency's identified breed as one of the predominant breeds in a dog's ancestry. DNA analysis did not detect all specified breeds in 14 of these dogs. That is, 87.5% of the dogs identified by an adoption agency as having specific breeds in their ancestry did not have all of those breeds detected by DNA analysis. The discrepancies between opinions of adoption agencies and identification by DNA analysis suggest that it would be worthwhile to reevaluate the reliability of breed identification as well as the justification of current public and private policies pertaining to specific dog breeds.
政府及其他机构可能要求犬只照顾者（主人）提供其犬只的品种鉴定。本研究比较了领养机构对20只身世不明犬只的品种鉴定结果与DNA分析的鉴定结果。在从17个不同地点领养的20只犬只中，该研究确定其中16只犬只的血统中含有（或可能含有）1种或2种特定品种。对这些犬只的DNA分析表明，实际上25%（4/16）的犬只含有领养机构鉴定出的品种作为其血统中主要品种之一的基因证据。DNA分析在其中14只犬只中未检测到所有指定品种。也就是说，领养机构鉴定出其血统中含有特定品种犬只的犬只中，87.5%并未通过DNA分析检测出所有这些品种。领养机构的判断与DNA分析鉴定结果之间的差异表明，重新评估品种鉴定的可靠性以及当前有关特定犬种的公共和私人政策的合理性是值得的。
