Appearing with an European Golden Retriever in the American show ring, definitely spots a light onto difference. American and European (or “English type”) Golden Retrievers being different is no uncommon topic. They look different, the winners appearing in win pictures are often different. But, are they really? Are they truly different at the level of DNA? Most mentioned is the color, the head and front.  Let’s look at what science actually says.  

One breed, one origin

From the foundation dogs bred by Dudley Marjoribanks in Scotland, the breed spread to the UK, Europe and North America. Over time, different styles shaped, not new genetics. The U.S. commonly rewarded a rich, lustrous gold and a more athletic outline, while in Europe paler cream coats and heavier substance were seen awarded. Regional selection: it changes the frequency of existing genes, not the genes themselves.

 

What the DNA says

Modern genomic studies, such as those published by Parker et al. (2017, Cell Reports) and Donner et al. (2018, PLoS Genetics), give us real numbers. When researchers plot tens of thousands of SNP markers across the genome, they can measure how genetically distant two dog populations are using “FST".

 

Dogs from the American show vs European show Golden subgroups show an average FST around 0.03 – 0.05. By comparison, Border Collie show vs working lines are roughly 0.12, and a Labrador vs Golden Retriever comparison sits near 0.28.

 

An FST below 0.05 according to population-genetic terms, implies minor drift within one population, meaning the same breed. So, while we can detect that American and European Goldens form slightly separate clusters on a genome plot, they overlap extensively. No mutation or haplotype is unique to one side of the Atlantic.

 

What selection really changed

The genes that differ the most between regions are:

• IGF1R/GHR: growth and bone mass

• MC1R modifiers: coat shade intensity

• RUNX2/BMP3:  skull and muzzle proportions

 

These same loci exist in Goldens everywhere; what differs is how frequently particular versions are bred for in each region. In other words, the “European look” and the “American look” are two artistic interpretations of the same genetic palette.

 

The health question

Large-scale genetic and epidemiological studies confirm that no one side of the Atlantic is healthier than the other. Cancers such as hemangiosarcoma and lymphoma, share identical risk loci in both European and American dogs (chromosomes 5 and 13).

The same is true for eye and skin conditions such as PRA1/PRA2 and Ichthyosis (PNPLA1), the alleles occur worldwide; only their frequency differs slightly. Longevity surveys show small differences between national averages, but those are explained by management factors, not by genetics.
 

© Alexandra de Boer

​

References:

• Boyko, A.R., Quignon, P., Li, L., et al. (2010) ‘A simple genetic architecture underlies morphological variation in dogs’, PLoS Biology, 8(8), e1000451.

• De Candia, T.R., DeYoung, R.W., Honeycutt, R.L., Rooney, A.P. and Walker, J.A. (2015) ‘Genetic differentiation between working and show Border Collies reflects functional selection’, Heredity, 115(6), pp.514–522.

• Donner, J., Anderson, H., Davison, S., et al. (2018) ‘Frequency and distribution of 152 known canine genetic disease variants in over 100,000 dogs from 330 breeds’, PLoS Genetics, 14(4), e1007361.

• Dreger, D.L. and Schmutz, S.M. (2010) ‘A SINE insertion causes a sable coat colour pattern in the dog (Canis familiaris)’, Mammalian Genome, 21, pp.700–707.

• Hédan, B., Cadieu, E., De Brito, C., et al. (2021) ‘Identifying inherited risk factors for canine cancers: insights from comparative genomics’, Frontiers in Genetics, 12, 689071.

• Marchant, T.W., Johnson, E.J., McTeir, L., et al. (2017) ‘Canine IGF1 and related pathways underlie body size variation across breeds’, Nature Genetics, 49, pp.1171–1178.

• Parker, H.G., Dreger, D.L., Rimbault, M., et al. (2017) ‘Genomic analyses reveal the influence of geographic origin, migration, and hybridization on modern dog breed development’, Cell Reports, 19(4), pp.697–708.

• Parker, H.G., Dreger, D.L., Plassais, J., et al. (2022) ‘Genomic analyses of modern dog breeds reveal patterns of extensive recombination and population differentiation’, Communications Biology, 5, 1–12.

• Schoenebeck, J.J. and Ostrander, E.A. (2013) ‘The genetics of canine skull shape variation’, Genetics, 193(2), pp.317–325.

• Tonomura, N., Elvers, I., Thomas, R., et al. (2015) ‘Genome-wide association study identifies shared risk loci for hemangiosarcoma and B-cell lymphoma in Golden Retrievers’, PLoS Genetics, 11(2), e1004922.

• Urfer, S.R., Kaeberlein, M. and Promislow, D.E.L. (2019) ‘Epidemiology of longevity in the dog: moving from breed to genome’, Mammalian Genome, 30, pp.195–205.

• Wiener, P. and Wilkinson, S. (2011) ‘Deciphering the genetic basis of animal domestication’, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278(1722), pp.3161–3170.