Author Archives: Christine Ruessheim

CFA’s recording system for imported cats not meeting registration rules

abysnowHere are the rules to record cats from a foreign registry system with CFA, if the cats do not meet CFA registration rules for its corresponding breed:

 

CFA is offering this new service, called Cat’s Ancestral Tracking Service (CATS), as a supplement to our regular breed registry. Participation in CATS is intended to provide an accurate recording of a cat’s ancestry and that cat’s future generations. The intention is to build a pedigree history for the cat and its offspring. The desired end result would be to have recorded a sufficient number of generations (that conform to the usual requirements for the breed) to allow for the possible acceptance of the line into CFA’s standard registration files.A cat recorded under this system will not be issued the standard CFA certificate of registration, is not guaranteed acceptance or breed recognition into CFA’s usual registry, and is not eligible for showing in CFA. For this line to cross over from CATS to our standard registration database, all future generations would be required to meet the usual CFA registration requirements.Cats may be listed in the CATS database, which will be completely separate from our regular system, under the following possible circumstances. Other situations will be considered on an individual basis.
Recognized breeds with insufficient number of generations of ancestry to be included in the CFA registry, such as Siamese or Abyssinians with fewer than 8 generations of known and registered background.
Recognized breeds with NO ancestral history, such as cats in or from a country with a developing cat fancy, which has no registration association in which to record a cat’s history and therefore cannot supply the required certified pedigrees necessary for standard registration.
Recognized breeds from organizations currently not recognized by CFA for cross-registration purposes (ICE, ACE, UFO, etc.).
Breeds recognized for registration by other associations, but not by CFA, such as Australian Mist, Burmillas, etc.
Cats whose breed is not currently accepted for registration in CFA or any other association.
Cats that would not be eligible for registration with CFA due to breeds and/or colors found in the background and which are not accepted by CFA as allowable outcrosses.

PLEASE NOTE: The CATS system was not established for the recording of pets or for those cats which have been altered. CATS was created to be used by breeders who wish to perpetuate a particular line of breeding by recording each generation for eventual acceptance of future offspring for both breeding and showing purposes. It is meant for those who are willing to take the necessary steps over what could be a number of generations in order to record the existence of a particular line of cats. Recording of a cat using this plan would have no practical advantage for the non-breeding pet owner.

The fees for this service are as follows:

$10.00 per individual cat
Only individual cats will be accepted for recording in the CATS system. It will not be possible to apply for the recording of entire litters using the standard litter application process.

The application to enter your cat into the CATS system is available in a PDF format or a copy can be obtained through the CFA office. Photocopies of all available documentation (pedigrees, etc., letters, or import documents, if any) should be submitted along with the application, which must be signed and dated by the applicant. At least one color photo must also be enclosed, which will become part of the cat’s permanent file and cannot be returned.

$20.00 to transfer a cat from CATS to the CFA’s main registry.
The conversion to standard registration will not be initiated automatically by CFA once standard registration requirements have been met. It will be the responsibility of the cat’s owner to make the request for transfer. The request should be in writing and should include the return of the CATS certificate for the cat along with the required transfer fee.

The rule can be found on CFA homepage here

Genetic screening using SNP Array technology – what is this?

Texas A & M University Animal Genetics Laboratory uses SNP array technology  (as they explain on their introduction site) to screen your cat’s DNA for possible mutations responsible for expressing certain traits or making it susceptible to certain diseases.

So, what does SNP stand for? SNP is the short form for Single Nucleotide Polymorphism and is the variation of a single base pair in the DNA sequence between either the members of a species or between the paired chromosomes of an individual. These polymorphisms may affect how organisms develop diseases and respond to chemicals and drugs. SNPs are, therefore, of great value in biomedical research and drug development. SNP detection and genotyping can be used to explain and diagnose many diseases, to study the variation in drug responses, to establish the origin of biological material and to study the relatedness between individuals.

Once it has been established that a SNP pattern is associated with a particular disease, or traits, such as coat color or coat length, etc. they can use SNP microarray technology to test an individual for that disease/trait expression pattern to determine whether the individual is susceptible to (at risk of developing) that disease or express/carries the trait. When genomic DNA from an individual is hybridized to an array loaded with various SNPs, the sample DNA will hybridize with greater frequency only to specific SNPs associated with that individual. Those spots on the microarray will then fluoresce with greater intensity.

Please, also look at the following animation illustrating and explaining the technology

Controversial DNA test results?

IMG_9321There was recently a huge discussion about the test results for an “Aby” whose DNA sample has been sent to two labs (UC Davis and Texas A & M) for screening if the cat carries for longhair since only 10 years ago some Somalis were introduced in that pedigree. The results came back different or should I say inconclusive. Read my thoughts about it below.

I will be trying to explain with different words and  how the explanatory text from the Texas A&M site can be interpreted and whose correct link, btw, is:
http://www.catdnatest.org/DNA-results.html .

First thing to notice is, that apparently Texas A&M (other than UC Davis) only tests for 3 of the 4 Mutations involved in modifying hair length in cats. They are M1, M2 and M4, hence they do not test for M3. Also the Texas A & M uses two different markers for M4 (M4 and M4_2), due to difficulties in typing they say. Their observance in results is, that in most cases the result is the same for both markers (for example M4 +/- and M4_2 +/-). In order for a cat to show the longhair however it seems that cats need to have two mutations at either M4 or M4_2 (or both together?). One mutation at each marker of M4 would not make it a longhair cat, unless there would be an additional mutation at one of the other loci (M1- M3). So the compound heterozygote doesn’t apply for mutation M4 when both markers have one mutation.

Below you can see a couple of combinations of different mutations and how they “translate”:

Mutation M1 Mutation M2 Mutation M3 Mutation M4 Mutation M4_2 Phenotype Genotype
+/- +/- -/- -/- -/- longhair compound heterozygote
-/- -/- +/- +/- -/- longhair compound heterozygote
-/- -/- -/- +/+ -/- longhair homozygote
-/- -/- +/- -/- -/- shorthair carrying M3
-/- -/- -/- +/- +/- shorthair carrying M4/M4_2
-/- -/- -/- -/- -/- shorthair homozygote
-/- -/- +/- +/- -/- longhair compound heterozygote

The test result for the cat in questions shows one mutation for M4_2, and no mutation for M4. Cat also doesn’t have any mutation for M1 and M2, M3 is not tested by that Laboratory. Another Laboratory reported the cat to be free of any mutation (M1-M4), but I do not know wether they test for both markers in M4.  So far, it is not clear, whether mutation M4_2 is functional or not. None of the description I read so far did state that anywhere clearly, neither pro nor con. If there do exist cats which tested M4_2 +/+ and are phenotypically longhaired, then the answer should be yes. Question is, did they also test M4 +/+, if so, it still would not be clear if the mutation M4 at the 2nd marker is functional or not. My first approach would be to contact Texas A&M and ask them exactly that question. Maybe, they are inconclusive themselves, then we are back to square.

Another thought we never have to dismiss when receiving test results for genetic screening is: Possibilities for errors due to contamination (during or after sampling) or other causes DO exist. Read more about at the following site: DNA Testing: An Introduction for Non-Scientists If nothing else then I would at least resample the cat in question by trying to be as careful as possible to avoid contamination during sampling. Then sending the NEW sample to both Laboratories, maybe even a third, and see how the results translate. This can become quite costly and the question arises if it would not be simpler to just mate the cat in question to a longhair cat and see whether it produces longhair offspring. Unfortunately, even if one phenotypically HAS the trait and the other one carries it, there is not 100% certainty that the recessive will show in offspring in just one mating. On the other hand, why even going through all these obstacles from multiple testing to possible test matings if the pedigree shows recent introduction of the longhair? Our breed still has a large genepool if breeders take the time and work to search for outcrosses not having another breed recently introduced.

Other than all of the above said and if the mutation M4 at the 2nd marker IS functional then of course the cat CAN produce longhaired offspring.

In addition we still do not know if more mutations exist that could affect growth of hair. Quoting from the study: “Although this study included 62 unrelated individuals from 14 long-haired breed registries and 23 long-haired nonbreed cats from the Johns Hopkins University and Nestle-Purina pedigrees, it is possible that additional mutations in the feline FGF5 gene may be present in unsampled long-haired breed and nonbreed cats. In addition, the reported quantitative and qualitative differences between the coats of long-haired cat breeds indicate that other independent loci may modify the major influence of FGF5 on hair length in the domestic cat (Vella and Robinson 1999).”

The fulltext study can be found here, or read the abstract of the other study.