Dog Breeds Ideal for Studying Human Diseases, Scientists Say

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Scientists have completed a detailed DNA comparison of purebred pooches and found that a few hundred years of selective siring has resulted in significant genetic differences among breeds.

Elaine Ostrander of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the University of Washington and her colleagues collected tissue samples from 414 pedigreed dogs representing 85 breeds. By analyzing so-called microsatellites--short sequences of DNA that serve as signposts for genes--the team compared similarities and differences among the various kinds of dogs. According to the report, the microsatelite sequences from dogs of the same breed were much more similar to one another than they were to sequences from dogs belonging to different breeds. "These differences are so distinct that we could just feed a dog¿s genetic pattern into the database, and the computer could match it to a breed," notes study co-author Leonid Kruglyak, also at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.

The findings, published today in the journal Science, could prove useful in the fight against a variety of human diseases. "There are more than 400 breeds of dog, and each is an isolated breeding population," Ostrander explains. "What that means is that each dog breed is like a little Iceland--an isolated population that allows us to simplify a complicated genetic problem." Because dogs suffer from many of the same afflictions that can strike people--cancer, heart disease and diabetes, among them--the authors hope that Fido¿s genome will help narrow the search for disease-causing genes in his owner.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American