Home
Science & History
Print|Email|Text Size: ||
Deconstructing the Gene Pool

Mark Neff: The study of how individuals respond differently to medicines due to their genetic makeup is called pharmacogenetics, and it’s an intense area of investigation in human genetics. Probably all of us are aware of instances where one person responds positively to a medicine and is cured, while another person responds negatively or not at all. These differences are often tied to variation in genes. If we knew the genes that were responsible for side effects, we could identify the individuals at risk and prescribe the medicine that avoids a reaction and still provides relief. The same opportunity exists for dogs. Not all Collies have the mutation; those that don’t can be treated with ivermectin, which is an effective drug for its purpose. The Collies who do have the mutation can be treated with a different medicine.

JB: In dogs with the mutation, what happens?

MN: The normal product of this gene is a protein pump that can eliminate toxic chemicals from the central nervous system, thereby protecting the brain. The mutation causes the pump to be defective. If both copies of the gene are mutated, no functional pump is produced at all, which is the worst scenario. When the dogs are given a drug like ivermectin, which is toxic to neurons in high doses, the drug accumulates in the central nervous system, killing nerve cells. However, dose-sensitivity is an important issue. The smaller dose of ivermectin used to prevent canine heartworm infection, for instance, does not appear to be a problem for these dogs regardless of the mutation, but the higher dose used to treat mange can be fatal in a dog with two defective genes. The dose sensitivity varies by drug as well, so there’s still a lot to be sorted out.

JB: You’ve said that you think there is currently a disconnect between canine genetic research and the application of genetic knowledge. What do you mean?

MN: Breeders and owners are beginning to be inundated with DNA test results, which will only increase in the next few years. There’s an unmet need of genetic counseling that ideally would accompany DNA test results. In addition, we as researchers typically don’t have all the information we need to advise breeders on integrating test results with their breeding strategies. For example, based on our data, we think that both copies of the gene need to be mutated to acquire supersensitivity to ivermectin, but this may pertain to only some of the breeds with the mutation. Sighthounds have very different physiologies from Collies, for instance, and this could alter the effects of the mutation. Science always involves uncertainty, and it’s difficult to convey the ambiguity that remains. Katrina Mealey, our collaborator at Washington State, is continuing the research and adding a lot more detail to this particular story.

JB: In the research article, you advise re-examining how a breed is defined genetically. Would you elaborate?

MN: This is a statement more for academic geneticists than for breeders and owners. There’s a lot of scientific work going on now that neglects the fundamental fact that dog breeds are not natural species, but rather, have evolved through selective breeding and intentional outcrossing to produce new combinations of traits and hence new breeds. Most studies describing breed relationships use statistical and computational tools that were developed to describe relationships between species with distinct lineages. These tools are inappropriate for analyzing breeds of dog. Our paper showed that an identical mutation existed in two very different types of dog, two sighthounds and seven herding breeds. Conventional tools would have almost certainly missed the relatedness of these breeds.

JB: Your research identified seven affected herding breeds, which were mostly developed after the mid-19th century, and provided evidence that these breeds are in fact closely related. How did you draw those conclusions?

Print|Email
CommentsPost a Comment
Please note comments are moderated. After being approved your comment will appear below.
Submitted by Tom and Terri Reed | August 22 2013 |

The interview made perfect sense and speaks to the end product when evaluating selective breeding vs. natural selection. We generally can identify breed traits in our own mixedbreed rescue dogs, and appreciate their diversity and sturdiness. We adopted our newest addition last summer when she was brought into a rescue facility in Playa del Carmen Mexico to be euthanized. Collected in Tulum, Coba was a two-pound street puppy, malnourished and infested with lice and internal parasites. Our daughter, who was interning at the clinic, elected not to euthanize but rather, to treat and spay her. With health certificate and plane ticket in hand, we brought Coba home. While Coba may or may not qualify as a true village dog in the scientific sense, clearly, her behavioral traits are influenced by DNA developed over time by natural selection. She is bright, resourceful, intuitive, assertive without being aggressive (a culled behavior, according to Dr. Boyko) and slow to trust. Coba is a joy and has given us so much more than we have given her. She is now full grown and a healthy 26 pounds. People tell us, “That is one lucky dog.” The reality is, we are the lucky ones to have her and to experience what she contributes to our lives.

More From The Bark

By
Mark Derr
Sporting Terriers, from Alys Serrell’s "With Hound and Terrier," 1904.
By
Alston Chase
By
Claudia Kawczynska
More in Science & History:
Freud Sang to His Dog
Myths: Loyalty Rewarded
Body Language
Is Your Dog Waiting For You?
Scientists Searching for Clues to The First Dog
The Wolf in Your Dog
Alexandra Horowitz, The Canine Mindseeker
DNA Testing
Buffon
Can DNA Decipher the Mix?