Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts

Monday, November 14, 2011

Patricia McConnell Seminar: What Science Tells Us About Puppy Development

So now we know: a dog's behavior is a complex thing, based upon both his genetics and his experiences. But can we stack the deck in our favor? How do we ensure that our dogs, and those in the future, are safe, healthy, and sound? What do we know, scientifically, about puppies? Patricia shared some of the research (and some of her own opinions) on the matter.

Good Dogs Start Before They're Born
If genetics influences behavior, that begs the question: What are we breeding for? Patricia showed us a slide that was made up of advertisements for various breeders, including show/conformation breeders. The focus was unequivocally on physical characteristics: size, substance, toplines, coat, color... things which are easily visibly, but in the grand scheme of things, probably not so important, at least not when we're considering the family pet.

The thing is, Patricia told us, today's breeds have severely limited gene pools, and while this is great for establishing a breed, it tends to be detrimental for maintaining it. Lack of genetic diversity can result in less variability in major histocompatibility, which is related to autoimmune diseases, allergies, and hypothyroidism. Patricia urged breeders to calculate co-efficients of in-breeding rather than just looking at pedigrees, and for breed clubs to consider outcrosses with related breeds when done to introduce new genetic material. As for us puppy buyers? We need to look for breeders who consider temperament when planning litters.

Maisy is from a puppy mill- and it shows, even at 12 weeks.
But there are other things that affect a puppy even before he's born. His in-utero experiences can have an effect as well. If a puppy’s mother is experiencing stress, she will have higher levels of cortisol in her body, which will probably reach the fetus. If it does, the fetus will develop fewer brain receptors for cortisol. As an adult, that puppy’s brain won’t be able to sense cortisol unless there are large amounts present in the body. Since the body does need some cortisol, the brain will compensate for the lack of receptors by producing increased amounts, which can result in hyper reactivity, withdrawal, and depression. Not a good thing, and it definitely puts a whole new spin on puppy mills, doesn’t it?

But even if momma dog is happy and content throughout her pregnancy, the number of male vs. female pups in the uterus can have a profound effect on behavior through the process of androgenization. This happens when a female fetus is next to or between two males, which will expose her to increased amounts of testosterone. Studies have found that testosterone has been correlated with an increase in cortisol and aggression. Of course, we really can’t control things like who is next to whom in the womb, but it’s still interesting!

Help Puppy Be All He Can Be
A puppy’s early days can also have a profound impact on his adult behavior. And I do mean early- the US Army created an Early Neural Stimulation program (also known as SuperDog or Biosensor) that is completed between days 3 and 16. This program only takes a few minutes a day, but the end result is impressive. The Army’s research shows that it results in dogs with stronger heart beats, a better adrenal system, increased immunity, and more stress tolerance.

"What is all this white stuff?!"
The results are probably the result of increased dendritic branching. Dendrites are basically connections to other neurons, and when there are more connections, the dog will have increased health and mental stability. Dendritic branching happens as a result of experience, and so things like the early neural stimulation programs probably increase the amount of dentritic branches in the puppy’s brain. Another easy way to do this is by providing a complex environment for the puppy to explore (play tunnels, platforms, different surfaces); such novel experiences help improve the puppy’s long-term behavior.

Nursing is also a vital experience for puppies. Patricia described how pups will push their littermates off a teat, which teaches frustration tolerance and persistence. The pups also learn to tolerate a lot of body touching/handling when this happens. This is probably why, anecdotally, puppies from single litters seem to have more behavior problems.

Patricia also advocated for allowing momma dog to do a natural weaning instead of the breeder forcing weaning at a particular age. In addition to teaching frustration tolerance, she’s seen some very interesting body language happen between momma dog and puppies, and believes that this process is an important learning experience for the pups.

Socialization, Puppy Classes, and You
Anyone who has been in the dog world, even peripherally, has probably heard about the importance of socialization. But what do we know about it scientifically? Well, the results are interesting… and not entirely what I expected.

First, when is the socialization window? Well… we don’t really know. Scott and Fuller said the primary socialization window is between 3 and 7 weeks, but were willing to extend it out as late as 12 weeks. Patricia described some of their research as “squishy,” which means that she takes those ages with a grain of salt. Add in the fact that every individual will develop at his or her own rate, and… well, there's science there, but it's not an exact science.

Okay, but what can socialization do for a dog? Well, two separate studies, conducted on two different breeds, found that socialization may help in some areas, but that it’s unlikely to create a difference in adult dog’s attitudes towards people. One project on German Shepherds studied the differences between puppies adopted at either 6 weeks or 12 weeks, and found no difference in either group in their adult behavior towards humans. However, the pups adopted earlier showed higher distress behaviors, disease and mortality. The other study grouped Jindo dogs into two groups: half were socialized from weeks 7 to 13, and half were isolated. The results showed that the socialized dogs were more playful towards novel objects and dogs… but that there was no difference in their attitudes about people.

So what does this mean? Well, it’s possible that the socialization window is open longer than the guidelines suggest. It’s also possible that a dog’s behavior towards people is more strongly linked to genetics (and less so to early experience) than we think. Considering the fact that dogs have been selectively bred for hundreds of years to interact with humans in certain ways (cooperatively to herd, independently to kill pests, etc.), this seems plausible. Ultimately, we don’t know how much of an effect socialization has, although it seems clear based on the Jindo dog study that even if the benefits are more limited than previously thought, it’s still worth the time.

One highly touted way of socializing puppies is through puppy classes. But does science back this up? Well… probably not. Some researchers placed 58 pups into 5 different groups: socialization and training, socialization only, training only, going into the classroom and being fed a comparable amount of treats, and going into the classroom and having nothing happen. The end result? They found that the group the puppy was placed in had no effect in their social responses to people or other dogs.

Maisy went to puppy classes... but did it matter?
What they did find, however, is that the dogs in the socialization and training group were rated higher on responses to obedience commands, and a later study done by MM Duxbury (who just so happens to be my dog’s own veterinary behaviorist) found that dogs who went to puppy classes were retained at higher rates (90%) than those who did not (75%). Was this because of the effects of socialization? Were these dogs more obedient, and thus easier to live with? Did the owners simply bond with their dogs more if they’d been through a class together? Or was there actually some socialization going on that "innoculated" the dogs against future behavior problems? No matter the reason, it would seem that puppy classes are not a waste of time.


So… can we stack the deck in our favor? Probably, although I suspect we just don’t know enough just yet. Still, it is exciting to see that there’s a lot of research being done into dogs in general, and puppies in specific. I am grateful that I had the opportunity to hear Patricia McConnell discuss some of it.

If You Want to Know More

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Patricia McConnell Seminar: Behaviors with a Genetic Influence

The Labrador’s desire to retrieve. The Great Pyrenees and his devotion to his flock. The Border Collie’s infamous eye. There is no doubt that each breed of dog shares more than physical similarities: they also share behavioral tendencies, a fact which clearly demonstrates that a dog’s genetics contributes to the way he acts.

But beyond breed-related predispositions, what other behaviors can be inherited? Patricia identified five, although she freely admitted that two of them are based on personal speculation alone. The other three have some science that show they tend to be pretty stable over time.

The first, and possibly the most researched, is shyness. Shyness is not the same as docility. It has nothing to do with submission. And it doesn’t really tell you how the dog will act. Shyness, scientifically speaking, has to do with fear of the unfamiliar.

This behavioral trait is actually a continuum, with shyness at one end and boldness at the other. It is influenced by the level of cortisol, the HPA axis, and the activity of the amygdala. A study by Goldsmith and Lemery demonstrated that it is surprisingly stable through an individual’s life. They discovered a correlation between a child’s cortisol baseline and his mother’s, and found that the baseline level taken one and a half years before a child started school could predict a teacher’s evaluation of inhibition at age seven.

In other words, shyness is strongly linked to genes, and is incredibly easy to pass on. This makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint: the child (or monkey or rat or cat- all have been studied) who runs from something new and unfamiliar stands a better chance of surviving than the one who boldly investigates strange and potentially dangerous things. It also makes sense then that shyness is expressed early in an individual’s development. Patricia shared that Margaret Seary Young found it was the only trait reliably predicted on puppy tests.

Reactivity is “mediated by physiology,” Patricia told us, and it is therefore logical that it would be influenced by genetics. Reactivity here does not refer to the bark-growl-lunge type of behavior problem that we dog people usually define it as. In this case, it simply has to do with how quickly and how much a dog responds to its environment.

Reactivity can be desirable in certain contexts- a herding dog that doesn’t have a short reaction time probably won’t be very good at his job. On the other hand, there are times where you need a “bomb-proof” dog who doesn’t really notice, much less respond to, what’s going on around him.

It’s also important to know that reactivity is separate from the shy/bold continuum. A very bold dog might notice and respond quickly to his environment, although he will probably do it in very different ways than the shy dog does.

Another behavioral trait that seems to have a genetic influence is frustration tolerance because it is mediated, in part, by the amygdala. However, there also appears to be a strong environmental component to frustration tolerance as well. Who can’t relate to being more irritable when tired, hungry, or in pain?

A dog who is having difficulty tolerating frustration is more likely to act out aggressively. Interestingly, aggressive dogs typically show lower amounts of serotonin and higher concentrations of cortisol, which also suggests there's a link to genes.

The last two behaviors are the ones that don’t (yet) have any scientific research to back up: predisposition to use mouth and status seeking. Both of these traits are things that Patricia has observed enough to believe they are genetically inherited. For the first, she says it just makes sense. Australian Cattle Dogs, for example, would need to use their mouths in order to herd cows. As for status seeking, Patricia said there seem to be puppies that are interested in controlling resources at a very early age… but more on that soon.

It’s clear that there are a number of behavioral traits that have at least some genetic influence. They go beyond just breed-related tendencies, and help explain why two dogs of the same breed can act quite different from one another. Of course, we already know that the environment is an important factor, too. In my next entry on the seminar, I’ll tell you about some of those factors, including in utero experiences, early stimulation, and socialization.

If You Want to Know More

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Patricia McConnell Seminar: The Interplay of Environment and Genetics on Behavior

There was a time when I believed that Maisy’s reactivity was my fault. I got her when she was around 15 or 16 weeks old, from a less-than-desirable place, which meant that she missed out on that vital socialization period. Her early experiences were limited, and no one was watching out to make sure they were good ones. After she responded so favorably to medication, I began to think that perhaps the problem was genetic. It would certainly fit with her origins.

Today, however, I believe that Maisy’s behavior is likely the result of both, and Patricia’s discussion on the interplay of the environment and genetics only confirmed this. Patricia said that it is very difficult to separate out the effects of each one on behavior. There really isn’t a way to definitively know which is causing something to happen. What’s more, most scientists agree that “flexible behaviors” (that is, behaviors that are not instinctual) don’t have just one cause; they are likely the result of both genetics and the environment.

Research in humans has shown that there are a number of behavioral traits that are stable over time and that make up a person’s general temperament- that is, the specific differences between individuals that are present and relatively unchanged from birth. The “big five” that scientists believe are genetically influenced are: openness to experience (curious vs. cautious), conscientiousness (efficient and organized vs. a more easy-going nature), extraversion (outgoing vs. reserved), agreeableness (friendly and compassionate vs. cold and unkind), and neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident).

As we grow up, our temperaments are overlaid with experience, and this combination results in our personalities. Patricia used a great example to illustrate the difference: a person’s temperament is like a blank canvas where his personality is the actual painting. The finished product can never go beyond the borders of what was originally there, but it may look drastically different based upon the colors and brush strokes that happen.

All of this means that while genes set boundaries, they don’t dictate behavior. Patricia discussed several behavioral characteristics in dogs that she believes are influenced by genetics (more about that in my next post), but noted that even when a dog has a genetic predisposition towards acting a certain way, the behavior still needs to be “triggered” by the environment. Further, while we can definitely influence a dog’s behavior through experience (such as training), we can’t change his genetics. Just as Picasso was confined to the limits of his canvas, so is the best trainer confined to the limits of his dog’s genes.

Interestingly, this means that dogs with different genetics can appear behaviorally similar. The chart below (a recreation of one of Patricia’s slides) is an example of the genetics of two different dogs on the bold/shy continuum. The dogs are limited to what their genes will allow, as evidenced by the range shown.


As you can see, Dog 1 has more genetic capacity for boldness, while Dog 2 is more likely to be shy and fearful. However, their experiences will dictate where each dog will fall within their predetermined range. So, if Dog 1 is kept in relative isolation and Dog 2 receives great socialization, their actual behavior could look the same. The only difference is that Dog 1 will always be capable of being bolder, despite all of the great training Dog 2 might get. And that’s the thing with genes- you can only influence behavior within their boundaries, and you won’t know where the boundaries are until you try.

So was Maisy’s reactivity my fault? Not really. While her experiences (and lack thereof) certainly contributed to her behavior problems, I can no more control her genetics than I can my own. We are what we are. Still, it is my responsibility to take the metaphorical canvas that she is and create something beautiful by using quality tools and an environment full of vibrant colors.

And that's the thing about dogs: they are all individuals. Picasso is not Kandinsky is not Da Vinci, and it would be foolish to try and force Jackson Pollock to be Botticelli. I strongly believe the same is true for our dogs. Encourage them to be their best, of course, but we should enjoy each of our dogs for the works of art they are.

If You Want to Know More
Temperament and Personality: Origins and Outcomes, article by Rothbart et al, 2000
Aggressive behavior in dogs that passed a temperament test, a 2006 study by Christensen et al Patricia said that this study helps demonstrate the effect that the testing environment can have on a dog’s behavior. As a result, temperament tests (which are probably misnamed) are not a guarantee of the future, but rather gauge probabilities.