Animals – Genetic selection

Genetic modification has many negative associations around DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid, or genetic code) adjustments, but selecting parent stock for breeding purposes is as old as domestic agriculture and, being philosophical, potentially as old as humans ourselves.

Most breeding genetic selections are based on physical appearances, the so-called phenotype selection. Only more recent scientific advances have allowed selection based on genetic information or genotype selection.

No dog breeder would mate a large male dog, such as a rottweiler, with a small female dog, such as a fox terrier. The size difference would suggest potential issues with the birthing process (let alone the breeding process itself). The offspring would be too big to pass through the pelvic canal of their mother. This last statement is actually a pragmatic, logical or practical opinion. There is little evidence of true fact or true cause and effect, i.e. event A will result in event B.In scientific thought this is the holy grail or true basis for advancement: understanding when event A will cause event B to happen, or event B has resulted due to event A. In popular discussion and thought, causality is often not proven and erroneously assumed as being fact. This is something even scientists can be guilty of. A good example of this would be the idea that the world is flat. Few would argue, with modern knowledge, that the world is not round and the earth does not rotate around the sun.

We often forget this scientific thinking (causality) and take on emotional thinking (based on hunches or feeling). Many great examples are found in marketing, steeped in emotion, lacking fact; receivers (the general public) often fail to detect the difference. The statement that organic farming is natural and therefore healthier is widely believed. But is there causality? Arsenic is a naturally occurring mineral, but there is no way that I would add arsenic to my cup of tea and be healthier.

Getting back to the genetic selection idea, many people are adamant that genetic modification is bad. Genetic modification definitely requires some strong ethical ideas to be included in the decision making, just as selecting the sire and dame are in breeding programs.

Eli Goldratt, author of The Goal, suggests “Don’t question the conclusion when examining a problem or idea, question the assumptions”. Some great gains have been achieved with genetic selection – facial eczema resistance in sheep is a good example. There are good careers and lifetime enjoyment associated with genetics in New Zealand farming systems, both from a farmer’s practical application and from scientific applications.