It’s All About the Spots
180 – September, 2010
by Gretchen Bernardi
A battle is being waged regarding the registration of backcrossed Dalmatians. It is an old battle, but new technology and research have made it front page again and the opinions on both sides of the issue are as strongly held as ever and the arguments even more complex. I am reluctant to discuss controversial matters that pertain to breeds other than my own and about which I have only limited information. Because of the complexity of the issue and its strong emotional undertone, I have heavily footnoted this article so readers can, if interested, look more closely at the information.
A statement in the recently published August board minutes caught my attention:
“The Board discussed the issue of the Dalmatian/Pointer cross and the registration of descendents of the original crosses. There was a motion by Mr. Marden, seconded by Mr. Goodman to deny registration of these dogs at this time. This motion failed with the VOTE (affirmative: Mr. Marden, Mr. Goodman, Mrs. Strand, Dr. Garvin, Mr. Ashby; opposed: Dr. Haines, Dr. Newman, Ms. Scully; Mr. Kalter, Dr. Smith; abstaining: Mr. Menaker, Dr. Davies, Mr. Arnold). Staff was directed to compile additional information and the matter will be discussed at the October meeting.” 1
Strong support of our parent clubs is essential and I remain convinced that clubs that are devoted to the health and welfare of our breeds will, in the end, be the salvation of pure-bred dogs. This makes this issue even more puzzling since, in 2008, the Dalmatian Club of America called for a vote of its 950 members: Should the DCA continue to discuss the possibility of registering the backcrossed dogs? The vote was 46.3 per cent (279 votes) for further discussion and 53.7 per cent (324) against further discussion. Yet not too long ago, a petition to include these dogs in the registry was sent to AKC with 1,350 signatures. At a time when the concept of a closed registry is under attack from many sides and when breeders are being accused of ignoring health concerns in pursuit of superficial beauty, surely the actions in this case reflect not only on Dalmatian breeders but on all responsible purebred dog breeders.
Very briefly and perhaps too simplistically I offer a brief history for those not familiar with the history of this controversy. Most research and anecdotal evidence shows that uric acid-related stone disease is a problem in Dalmatians, with a significant percentage of male dogs developing stone disease during their lifetime. This is the result of a single genetic defect that can result in health issues, pain and even death. In 1973, a group of breeders along with Dr. Robert Schaible addressed this issue. 2
Dr. Schaible, a faculty member at Indiana University School of Medicine who earned his doctorate in genetics with additional work in animal breeding and vertebrate embryology, is also a breeder, exhibitor and AKC judge of Dalmatians. He started the “Dalmatian Backcross Project,” which addressed the uric acid problem by breeding an AKC-registered Pointer sire, Ch. Shandown’s Rapid Transit, to an AKC-registered Dalmatian dam, Lady Godiva.
In 1981, two of the dogs down from the original outcross were accepted for AKC registration. William F. Stifel, then president of the AKC and later a delegate, stated, “If there is a logical, scientific way to correct genetic health problems associated with certain breed traits and still preserve the integrity of the breed standard, it is incumbent upon the American Kennel Club to lead the way.”3 The Dalmatian Club of America’s board originally approved the registration in 1981, but a subsequent vote of the membership in 1984 opposed it and the registration of these two dogs were put on hold.
Now, 29 years after the acceptance and then rejection of the dogs into the registry and 37 years after the first AND ONLY CROSS TO THE CHAMPION POINTER, five members of the current board voted not to register the dogs and, surprisingly, three of those five members represent parent clubs and two are Dalmatian breeders. The breeding project is currently on the 14th generation from the original cross and the progeny have mostly AKC-registered Dalmatians in their pedigree and, according to DNA analysis, are 99.998 percent the same genetically as current AKC Dalmatians. The United Kennel Club accepts the backcrossed dogs into its registry without restrictions, and The Kennel Club (UK) and other foreign registries accept them with certain restrictions, such as DNA and health testing for a predetermined number of generations. From The Kennel Club’s press release:
“The decision taken by the General Committee is in line with the Kennel Club’s commitment to consider applications to register dogs from out-crossings and inter-variety matings if it is felt that to do so may present potential health and welfare benefits. The Kennel Club consulted the Dalmatian breed clubs on this matter and their joint feedback was considered at length by the General Committee before arriving at this decision.” 4 and yet in August a motion to NOT register these dogs was made at the AKC board meeting.
Those who oppose the registration of these dogs, and this includes, officially, the Dalmatian Club of America, give various reasons for their opposition: urate stones are not a significant health issue; the dogs are not really purebred; uric acid problems can be managed by diet and careful hydration; the proponents are animal rights sympathizers playing into the notion that our purebred dogs are unhealthy; the conclusions drawn in other studies are suspect; the dogs are not good specimens of the breed; the dogs display inferior spotting and flawed pigmentation. As far as the prevalence of the problem is concerned, several studies show otherwise:
Dr. Susanne Hughes (DCA-funded ultrasound study): 71.3% of the males and 25.4% of the females tested had significant urinary bladder debris. 5
Dr. Carl A. Osborne of the Minnesota Urolith Center reports that from 1981 to 2000, 7,560 stones were removed from 7,350 Dalmatians, both male and female.
Dr. Joseph Bartges (DCA-funded study): 33% of the males and 5% of the females studied had urate stones and required medical intervention during their lifetime. 6
The DCA surely agrees that urate stone disease is a problem in its breed, because it is currently funding a study that involves DNA analysis of sibling pairs of male Dalmatians to determine why some Dalmatians form stones and others do not, since all Dalmatians have high uric acid.
No research is infallible and this includes scientific research, but surely that conducted by qualified and respected scientists must be considered and all sensible, fact-based opinions on this issue must be respected. But what I find unfathomable is the inconsistency in positions, especially at the AKC. This is virtually the same board that approved Conditional Registration, which gives full registration to dogs of unknown parentage after three generations of DNA parentage identification. Granted, AKC will only grant Conditional Registration when the “dog appears and is believed to be purebred.” The backcross Dalmatians are certainly purebred after all of these generations as confirmed by DNA and certainly “look” like Dalmatians.
And this is the same staff and board, the majority of which approved the Administrative Research Registry, through which pet shop puppies are being registered despite the fact that the sire or the dam, or both, are not AKC-registered. What is going on here? If it is a matter of going against the will of a parent club, there is certainly precedence. Remember that we went against the will of the Greyhound Club of America when we refused to close the Greyhound stud book to racing, NGA dogs. Remember also that we allowed a huge influx of Coonhounds into the registry, despite an overwhelming parent club vote against the action. Why is the Dalmatian being treated differently? Perhaps in the other cases it was a matter of numbers with an increase in registration being the card that trumps all others. Registering the current backcrossed Dalmatians would increase the registry by approximately 50 to 60 dogs, but 50 to 60 healthy dogs that cannot form urate stones.
What has changed since 1981, that the attitude on this subject has altered, both at the level of the AKC board and the DCA board? Why was there such enthusiasm for registration after only five generations from the original Pointer/Dalmatian breeding and now, 10 to 14 generations later with reliable DNA technology, there is opposition, even from some of the same people who supported it initially?
Also unfathomable is the way in which we use the wisdom and expertise of Dr. Elaine Ostrander, a consultant to the AKC on DNA science and technology issues, when it suits us. The AKC staff and board justified the implementation of the Conditional Registration, which has been criticized by many parent clubs, based on the opinion that Dr. Ostrander expressed in her September, 2005 address to the delegates, when, according to the AKC website, she recommended that “AKC adopt this solution to allow for informed breeder decisions while maintaining a large population for genetic diversity.”
Likewise, do we rely on DNA when it is supportive of a desired course of action and we value genetic diversity in some cases but not all? In her article, “Genetics and the Shape of Dogs” published in American Scientist, Dr. Ostrander reflects on the work she and other scientists have done:
“Certainly the next few years will bring an explosion of disease-gene mapping. The genetics of canine cancer, heart disease, hip dysplasia, vision and hearing anomalies have all been areas of intense study, and investigators working on these problems are poised to take advantage of the recent advances described here. Whole genome association studies are likely to replace family-based linkage studies as a way of finding genes associated with not only disease susceptibility and progression, but morphology and behavior as well.
“What will the companion-animal and scientific communities do with this new information? It is certainly hoped that the disease-gene mapping will lead to the production of genetic tests and more thoughtful breeding programs associated with healthier, more long-lived dogs. It will be easier to select for particular physical traits such as body size or coat color, not only because we understand the underlying genetic pathways, but because genetic tests are likely to be made available as quickly as results are published.” 7
And, disease-gene mapping did in fact lead to the discovery of the mutations in the SLC2A9 gene causing elevated uric acid in Dalmatians. Danika L. Bannasch, D.V.M., Ph.D. at the University of California, Davis, conducted the research that led to this discovery. And who funded her research? The AKC Canine Health Foundation and the Dalmatian Club of America (with additional support from the Morris Animal Foundation and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases within the National Institutes of Health). 8
Even more puzzling is that an officer of the DCA and one of the board members who voted NOT to register the backcrossed Dalmatians is also a board member of the Canine Health Foundation, one of the funding entities for the study. Medical research is not merely an academic pursuit, with the research itself as the end game. Hopefully, it results in tools that enable all who care to use them to produce healthier animals. And it has.
It is my understanding that the Canine Health and Welfare Advisory Panel, formed by the AKC “to provide factual and impartial information by creating a forum for proactive discourse based on scientific and ethical concerns” was asked to advise the board on this issue and that an opinion was delivered. Neither the content of that report nor the opinion has been made public, but I hope that sooner or later all of us will have an opportunity to read about their deliberations and decision on this issue.
There are several protocols for eliminating disease in a breeding program. The first is the way we always did it, prior to the discovery of specific genes. We tried to eliminate affected dogs from the gene pool; we tested when we could; we studied pedigrees carefully, bred the dogs and held our breath. With discovery of markers for specific disorders we were able to breed around that specific disorder by either eliminating the carriers or using them judiciously with non-carriers when possible.
These are possible strategies in breeds in which the problem or problems do not affect the entire population of that breed. But with Dr. Bannasch’s discovery of the gene that causes elevated uric acid levels in Dalmatians and with her further discovery that virtually every registered Dalmatian carries that mutation, all previous strategies are off the table if eliminating the problem is the goal. Breeders of Dalmatians cannot breed themselves out of this problem and they have two choices: they can continue to breed affected to affected and hope for the best, that the puppies will not develop urate stone disease as a result of their high uric acid production, or they can use the backcrossed dogs to begin to purify the breed of the problem as much as possible…but not be able to register the dogs, show them at AKC shows or participate in any AKC event.
There is a time to protect the purity of a breed against reckless introduction of foreign genes. There is also a time to admit, for the benefit of the dogs, that one outcross in 37 years is a very small price to pay for healthier dogs when there is no other solution. Current NUA Dalmatian (Normal Uric Acid) pedigrees from the outcross include over 10,000 AKC-registered Dalmatians, one AKC-registered Pointer, plus one NUA Dalmatian per generation. If these dogs are accepted into the registry and they do not measure up in quality in the show ring, they won’t win and most likely won’t be bred. That’s how it hopefully works in all of our breeds, since we continue to think of the show ring as a test of potential breeding stock. No one will be forced to use these dogs in a breeding program, but it is time to give all breeders that choice, for the dogs and for all of us who profess that we are interested in breeding healthy dogs as well as beautiful ones.
Gretchen Bernardi ~ berwyck@ezl.com
1 http://www.akc.org/pdfs/about/board_minutes/0810.pdf
2 http://www.dalmatianheritage.com/about/schaible_research.htm
3 AKC The Gazette, July, 1981, pp. 86-87.
4 http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgibin/item.cgi?id=2878&d=23&h=pnhp
5 http://www.akcchf.org/pdfs/whitepapers/Dalmatian07.pdf
6 http://www.showdays.info/Bartges.html
7 http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/genetics-and-the-shape-
8 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081107071818.htm
Short URL: https://caninechronicle.com/?p=1463
Posted by Comments are closed
