

The second study 5, which was published in 2015, also explored validity of visual breed identification when compared to DNA, as well as consistency among experts. 4įor additional information, please see: How long before we discard visual breed identification? Every profession’s responses, in total, were correct less than 1/3 of the time. And no profession did significantly better than any other. However, the respondents were only correct in naming at least one of the breeds detected by DNA analysis on average less than 1/3 of the time. 4 Since, in almost every dog multiple breeds had been detected, there were lots of opportunities to be correct.

For the purposes of the survey, a response was considered “accurate” if it named any of the breeds DNA analysis had detected in the dog, no matter how many other breeds had been detected, and whether or not the breed guessed was a predominant breed in the dog. Their assessments were then compared to DNA breed profiles of the dogs.
DOMINANT TRAITS IN DOGS SERIES
The first 3 was an expanded 2012 survey of over 5,000 dog experts – veterinarians, breeders, trainers, shelter staff, groomers, rescuers, and others – who visually assessed breeds in dogs in a series of photographs. Separate, additional visual breed identification research was conducted at the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Florida 3,4,5, which further confirmed the unreliability of visual breed identification used by dog adoption agencies, animal control, and in regulation. Over 90% of the dogs identified as having one or two specific breeds in their ancestry did not have their visually identified breeds as the predominant breed in their DNA analysis. In all only 31% of the dogs showed any DNA evidence of the adoption agencies’ named breeds somewhere in the dogs’ ancestry. Finally, those 3 dogs also had other breeds of equal contribution that were not identified by their adopting agencies. Furthermore, for 3 of the 4 that did have genetic markers matching their visually identified breed, that breed contributed at most 12.5% of their makeup. Of the 16 dogs that had been assigned a specific breed as predominant by their adopting agency, DNA analysis showed that only 4 were actually predominantly comprised of said breed. The results showed little agreement between reported breed (from visual identification) and actual breed as determined by DNA analysis. Voith describes her initial 2009 research 1 which compared the adoption agency visual breed identifications of 20 mixed-breed dogs against DNA identification.
