Link to the paper in Science: Ancestry-inclusive dog genomics challenges popular breed stereotypes.

Environment and socialization remain the largest determining factor.

Unsurprisingly, most stereotypes about dog breeds are pseudoscience that come from the eugenics movement. In particular, “popular knowledge” around pitbulls and bulldogs is just thinly veiled racism.

interview on the study from the verge: https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/28/23043508/dog-breed-behavior-genetics-study-stereotypes

The research did find some genes associated with traits like human sociability and howling frequency. But overall, only around 9 percent of dog behavior was explained by breed.

“Dogs are individuals,” said Marjie Alonso, a study author and executive director of the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants. “What a dog looks like is not really going to tell you what the dog acts like.”

Edit: modern “purebred” breeding literally came from eugenicists, that’s why this old political cartoon even exists. Documentary on pedigree dogs and their many issues: https://vimeo.com/166015460

  • BoldTake [e/em/eir, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    :morshupls:

    The bazinga is off the charts in this one.

    you want to insultingly compare this to human eugenic atrocities

    look up the history of where the dog breeds you care so much about came from :)

    you can absolutely identify broad characteristics among breeds

    the study speaks to this. it is present, but extremely limited. clearest example was hounds barking more and border collies being a bit more proficient at learning commands.

    • politicsenjoyer [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      The bazinga is off the charts in this one.

      You posted a science article to c/science. It’s not “bazinga” to criticize shitty (or in this case, poorly messaged) scientific research in a science comm.

      the study speaks to this. it is present, but extremely limited. clearest example was hounds barking more and border collies being a bit more proficient at learning commands.

      You and I both know that the main use of this study in discourse will be over pitbulls, whether they exhibit breed specific aggression and attack behavior (latching, etc.), and whether they overall pose a danger to own as a pet.

        • politicsenjoyer [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I didn’t shift. I just fully understand that there’s exactly one breed over which breed characteristics is a hot button issue, and so I’m just anticipating the discursive application of these results.

          example on how connected “dog breeds” and eugenics are:

          Whether or not eugenicists were involved in early dog breeding (which, if you look at breeds like German shepherds or pugs, is obviously evil) has no relevance whatsoever on the existence of dog breed behavioral characteristics.

          Pitbulls are fine and the fear around them is largely based in racism.

          The only people I’ve known with poorly socialized pitbulls have been white rednecks bragging about how their huntin pit needed a train chain to be kept away from other dogs at home. The only ones with well socialized pits who I still saw maul a kid were white suburban people. The danger from pitbulls is empirical, and trying to paint your opponents as bigoted is a despicable exploitation of racial tension for rhetorical purpose. And one that’s totally unnecessary given that the data is right there.