Dog behaviour as with any species behaviour is a product of the interaction between genetically innate behaviour (behaviour that they were born with) and learned behaviour. Exactly to what extent each of these variables impacts behaviour and the exact contributions of each is a keenly debated and researched topic in the scientific world. It is easier to study and record the science of a gene’s affect on the formation of an organ for example and the functional consequences that may result as there is a physical and palpable form to be studied and assessed. In terms of behaviour, genes that code for certain aspects of the central nervous system have been shown to result in specific behavioural characteristics, It has also been demonstrated that the presence or absence of a specific gene results in the presence or absence of a specific behaviour ( Manning and Dawkins, 1998).
Genetics indicate that the domestication of the dog occurred approximately 100,000 years ago (Bradshaw, 2011). We can therefore surmise that there is at least 100,000 years worth of genetic manipulation, meaning that compared to recent crosses (in the last 1,000 years) the affect of the dogs ancient ancestry should have a lesser contribution to the dogs that we see today. When you look at dogs that live a semi-wild existence in countries such as India, and the far east we understand from their behaviour that they are predatory, social, intelligent, independant and opportunistic. This can certainly help us when we consider the basic building blocks of the dogs that live in our homes today as opposed to the outdated wolf-dominance model. To what extent these behaviours are perfomed in our pet dogs will depend on whether or not these behaviours were selected for when more recent dog breeders manipulated and crossed breeding.
Since Roman times dogs have been crossed to produce dog breeds fit for purpose (Coren, 1994). Since then dogs have continued to be classified according to the task to which they are best suited. From Dr Caius in 1570 through to Linnaeus in the 1700s some dog breeds were identifiable as these gentleman formulated two of the very first systems of classification according to the tasks that the dogs performed. Dogs size, shape, physical attributes as well as temperament and willingness to perform certain behaviours were all considered in breeding for these tasks. We can therefore surmise that since the Romans bred their fighting mastiffs (but not limited to, this is simply what we currently have evidence for) a dog’s genetic behavioural fingerprint has been manipulated to produce dogs that fall into fit for purpose task based categories.
The Victorians really ran with this concept, as with everything that was of intrigue and offered the possibility of exhibition and classification. Dog shows were introduced in 1859 and were originally classified according to sporting and non-sporting breeds, retaining most of the previous concepts of classification according to purpose. It was then over the course of the next 100 years that the switch to breeding for appearance was adopted. This represents a major shift as in comparison to the many many years preceeding this shift where the whole function of the dog was important from behaviour to physiology, appearance is now the main group of traits that pedigree breeders look to manipulate in the gene pool. Leading us to the inevitable conclusion that behaviour is much less important in the show ring. In fact, it seems of so little consequence that actually temperament and character of each breed features as just two lines in the breed standard published by The Kennel Club. This however, does not negate the fact that pedigree breeding represents just 1% of the whole genetic history of the dog (Bradshaw, 2011). By comparison selection for purpose; meaning physiology and behaviour is thought to represent 99% of the dogs genetic history, so it stands to reason that the temperament, behaviour and physiology of todays breed groups are heavily influenced by the breeding history prior to this shift. Dogs will still show a tendency towards behaviour and temperament preferred within the roles in which they were bred to function in.
It is therefore a vital piece of research that should be done by any prospective owner. Looking into the breed history, the roles that were established for certain types of dog and the older breeds that may have been crossed to produce the breed we know today. For instance the Golden Retriever is a relatively modern breed of dog that was created by the thorough and well documented breeding of Lord Tweedmouth in Scotland. Golden Retrievers were thought to gain in popularity as the development of guns progressed. As more birds could be shot in one day and also shot in flight over greater distances a dog was needed to cope with these developments. Lord Tweedmouth was meticulous in his records and we can conclusively report today that the golden retriever was born out of numerous crosses between the older breeds “wavy coat retriever” and “Tweed water spaniel” as well as the Red Setter, Black Labrador and Bloodhound. The breed characteristics of these breeds are just as important in the assessment of a golden retrievers behavioural repertoire heritage when understanding the role which they were bred to perform.
Over the course of the next few blog articles I will provide a history of each breed group, how they were formed, the main roles that the dogs were bred for within each group and as such the main behavioural traits that would have been preferred within the gene pool.
Comments