New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Fido’s Human Age Gets New Estimates

By comparing how DNA gets altered over the lifetimes of people and dogs, researchers came up with a new way to compare canine years with human years.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[CLIP: Dog barking]

How old is your four-legged best friend? Common wisdom says that a dog ages seven years for every human year. But Tina Wang, a graduate student at the University of California, San Diego, wanted a more accurate assessment. Her quest started five years ago, when she rescued a dog from a shelter.

“I kind of just wanted to ask how old she was because I felt like they were giving me an age that was very sensible, but I wasn’t sure she was actually that old. So that kind of started this whole project.”


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.


Wang worked in Trey Ideker’s lab, where they study changing patterns of DNA methylation in humans. Small chemical entities called methyl groups attach to stretches of DNA, which affects what sequences are active. As we age, some stretches of DNA get more methylated, and others less. The pattern is so consistent over the course of most people’s lives that it can be used as an aging “clock.” The same process happens in dogs—and published reports existed from other labs about methylation patterns in dogs changing over time.

So Wang compared the age-related patterns in 320 humans and 104 Labrador retrievers.

“We knew that DNA methylation can predict age in many mammals, but we didn’t know exactly how much of this was shared throughout the progression of life, and it wasn't clear if there was anything that was shared. And because of these similarities, we were able to identify a conserved aging signature that allows you to estimate dog years from human years based on this molecular profile.”

The researchers say that dog years per human year change over the lifetime of a dog. For example, their method has a one-year-old dog being the equivalent of a 30-year-old human. A four-year-old dog is about 52. And dog aging per year slows considerably after that. To see a chart of the aging estimates, check out the paper at the bioRxiv Web site. [Tina Wang et al., Quantitative translation of dog-to-human aging by conserved remodeling of epigenetic networks]

—Eliene Augenbraun

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Eliene Augenbraun is a multimedia science producer, formerly Nature Research's Multimedia Managing Editor and Scientific American's senior video producer. Before that, she founded and ran ScienCentral, an award-winning news service providing ABC and NBC with science news stories. She has a PhD in Biology.

More by Eliene Augenbraun

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe