Juustin
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- Messages
- 501
My wife and I own a chocolate lab. The breeder we got her from has 4 labs (2 are fixed and just there as pets, only 2 are breeding). One of their labs is silver (not one used for . They explained to us that 'silver' is considered a type of 'chocolate' lab by the AKC; a mutation that causes the fur to be tinted differently.
Today I was looking up something about chocolate labs, and found that there's some sort of "controversy" brewing over it. For instance, here is a site claiming they are most likely mixed with Weimeraners, called "The Trust Behind Silver Labs":
http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/silverlabs.html
According to another site I've read that felt silver is genetically a variation of pure chocolate labs, the AKC had UC Berkeley do some genetic profiling on silver labs in the late 1990s (though it doesn't link to the study), which said they can trace them back as being 100% lab.
However, the site I linked to above says the woman writing it has an MS in genetics, and says this about the DNA tests mentioned:
That, to me, seems fishy. We can trace lineages way back using current technology, and it strikes me as a wide net "science doesn't know everything" sort of dismissal.
It also echos the same thing in other sections:
The site taking up the opposite side (in full disclosure, they are a breeder), addresses it at this page:
http://www.silverlabs.com/controversy.htm
Maybe I'm crazy, it just seems the woman suggesting that DNA can't prove whether or not there's another breed mixed in might not be 100% credible.
Today I was looking up something about chocolate labs, and found that there's some sort of "controversy" brewing over it. For instance, here is a site claiming they are most likely mixed with Weimeraners, called "The Trust Behind Silver Labs":
http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/silverlabs.html
According to another site I've read that felt silver is genetically a variation of pure chocolate labs, the AKC had UC Berkeley do some genetic profiling on silver labs in the late 1990s (though it doesn't link to the study), which said they can trace them back as being 100% lab.
However, the site I linked to above says the woman writing it has an MS in genetics, and says this about the DNA tests mentioned:
That, to me, seems fishy. We can trace lineages way back using current technology, and it strikes me as a wide net "science doesn't know everything" sort of dismissal.
It also echos the same thing in other sections:
The site taking up the opposite side (in full disclosure, they are a breeder), addresses it at this page:
http://www.silverlabs.com/controversy.htm
Maybe I'm crazy, it just seems the woman suggesting that DNA can't prove whether or not there's another breed mixed in might not be 100% credible.
