Ars Technica: Why is my dog like this? Current DNA tests won’t explain it to you.

Another disappointing article about dog research.

The dog shown in the photo above is a stock photo chosen for this article.  To me, the photo says,

“Hi, my name is Patches!  They found me at a pet sematary.  This paw is bigger than my other paws, and my ears don’t seem to be related.  I look to be patched together from a bunch of dogs, so they call me Patches!  Can I take your kids for a walk over to the edge of the forest?  You don’t have to come along.”

That was they only licensed photo they could afford.  The other two photos are the author’s dog. 

The dog’s name is ‘Max’, so that’s screwed up.  It just promises too much.  Based on the dog’s personality, go with ‘Laddie’, “MacGregor’, or ‘Bruce’.

If those are the best photos she’s got, then her dog has no charisma.  The tongue is doing too much work trying to inject some whimsy, but it doesn’t look real.  Since it remains in that spot, it’s like a prosthetic tongue or the dog has a speech impediment. 

When I notice a dog science article, I usually read it.  Photos of the research dogs are fine, because the dogs are doing dog stuff.  When they put stock dog photos or they take a few dog photos, I’m usually disappointed.

It always makes me think that Sparky should be a dog model.

The research isn’t great either.  Dog DNA predicts a dog’s physical appearance, but is inconclusive with regard to the dog’s behavior.