- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 5,228
- Points
- 113
Lee Kuan Yew said only those with good genes should breed
Eugenics was the "scientific" basis of his graduate mother scheme
Well the Old Fart has been proven to be talking cock again
Good genes plus good genes equals gila babi of which some are his
If this scientific study proves to be correct lazy smart alecs
Like me should breed with hardworking dim wits from wealthy families
Want a top dog? Good plus better doesn't make best, study suggests
Research on the mainland into a gene linked to obsessive-compulsive behaviour could change the way we think about breeding animals
Dog breeders who want hardworking canines should take a second look at the lazy ones that refuse to get off the couch - they might hold the key for highly motivated puppies, according to mainland researchers.
A recent study found breeding 'the worst to the worst' - the hyperactive with the least active - provided the best chance of producing motivated offspring.
The researchers, from the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Kunming Institute of Zoology, studied the genetics behind behaviour in the Belgian Malinois, a European shepherd dog widely used by police and military tasks to detect explosives and narcotics. The US Secret Service even uses the breed to guard the White House, according to The New York Times.
The Kunming team tested the function of the CDH2 gene, which previous research has linked to obsessive-compulsive behaviour in people, and the disposition to work in Malinois.
With a moderate expression of the gene, a dog displays excellent performance with a strong initiative for work. If the genetic expression is too strong, the animal suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder, circling its cage and incapable of work. If the expression is too low, the dog is inactive with little interest in work.
Dr Wang Guodong, CAS biologist and a lead scientist of the study, said they found the gene would pass down from one generation to the next following a rule called "balancing selection".
"That means breeding two good-performing dogs would produce a 25 per cent chance of an off-spring with a double dose of the gene, and a 25 per cent chance with an inadequate expression, neither of which is good for work," Wang said.
"Though you still have about a 50 per cent chance to get a good dog, the cost of breeding the best to the best can be very high to breeders, because you may not discover the dog's performance until late."
The best strategy was to mate a Belgian Malinois with obsessive-compulsive disorder to one that was extremely inactive.
"It is like a tug of war, with the good result being achieved when the 'evil' power of both is equal," Wang said. "In this case, breeding the worst to the worst you can almost certainly get a good one."
Their paper was published on PLOS ONE, an open-access, peer-reviewed online resource, late last year.
Dr Carol Beuchat, scientific director with the Institute of Canine Biology at the University of California Berkeley, supported the findings and urged breeders to abandon some long-held practices such as "breeding the best to the best".
The finding "means that breeding two dogs that are great working dogs … won't [necessarily] produce better dogs, because some of the offspring will lack the drive and initiative to be good working dogs, while others will have a double dose of the CDH2 gene and be too high-strung to be useful" she wrote in her blog on the institute's website.
Breeders often removed dogs with behavioural issues from the breeding pool on the assumption that mating "best-to-best" would result in "even better", she wrote. But taking dogs out the gene pool would lead to "collateral damage" to later generations, she said.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/arti...d-plus-better-doesnt-make-best-study-suggests
Last edited:
