ABSTRACT
This study involved morphological measurements of the body and head of 77 male and female Kyrgyz Taigans aged 12–16, 24–30 and 36+ months (denoted as groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively). Length measurements (head, face and ear) were obtained using an electronic calliper; width measurements (head, face and pinna) and circumference measurements (head, neck, chest, waist and front and rear shins) were taken using a measuring tape; and height measurements (withers and rump) were obtained using a measuring stick. IBM SPSS 22 was used for statistical analysis, and descriptive statistics of the groups were obtained. Student's t‐test was used for between‐group comparisons (gender), ANOVA for multiple‐group comparisons (age), and the Tukey test for post hoc analysis. The average measurements for face, ear, tail, head, neck, front and rear shins, body length, and height were compared, and significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed between the male and female dogs in the three groups. Significant differences in neck, waist and chest circumferences and chest width and depth were also observed (p < 0.05). The Kyrgyz Taigan is a medium‐sized dog breed in terms of body weight, is long‐headed (dolichocephalic), exhibits a rectangular body shape similar to other greyhound breeds, and has a rump and withers that are of similar heights. Compared with other greyhound breeds, the Kyrgyz Taigan has greater values for head length, withers and rump heights, chest circumference and chest depth.
Keywords: body measurements, head measurements, Kyrgyz Taigan, morphometric characteristics
1. Introduction
Dog breeds are classified differently by the United Kennel Club, The Kennel Club, the American Kennel Club and the World Canine Federation according to body weight, head structure, and the job of the dogs. The dog breeds are classified into seven main groups, such as sporting, non‐sporting, hound, working, terrier, toy and herding groups (PAD Society 2020, 2012).
Taigan, also known as Kyrgyz Borzaya Taigan in Ru2007ssia, are found in the Tian Shan Mountains near the China border. Like the hunting and fast‐running characteristics of the Turkish hound and Borzoi, Taigan dogs are used not only for surveillance during hunting but also for hunting fast‐running prey, such as golden eagles, marmots, foxes and rabbits (Anonymous 2025). Aboriginal greyhound breed, Karadağ et al. (2010) defined it as a separate greyhound breed of Kyrgyzstan. Taigan dogs are widely used as hunting dogs by the public (Kurmakov 2007). This breed has been described by Shishkina (2020) based on a limited number of body measurements and morphological features. Additionally, this breed is among those recognized by the Primitive and Aboriginal Dog Society (PADS) (Anonymous 2025).
Dog breeds are mainly distinguished based on head size (i.e., long, short, or medium‐sized head) (Evans, 1993). In fact, head measurements were taken from cadavers (Onar et al. 2001) and live animals during the characterisation of some dog breeds, particularly Kangals (Daskiran and Cedden 2006; Atasoy et al. 2011). In other dog breeds, such as Hound, Kangal, Akbaş and Bozova, morphological characterisation involved some body measurements, including withers height, body length, chest depth, chest width, rump height and shank circumference of the front and hind limbs (Tepeli and Çetin 2000; Tepeli et al. 2017; Atasoy et al. 2011; Onar et al. 2001; Yertürk and Bozkaya 2012; Çilek and Kavak 2012; Yılmaz and Ertuğrul 2011; Urosevic et al. 2020). Similarly, the Greyhound Club of America (GCA) included body measurements in the criteria for the morphological characterization of greyhounds (GCA, 2007).
While the literature describes the importance of Kyrgyz Taigan, its origin, and where it is being raised (Karadağ et al. 2010; Kurmankov, 2007; Kovalenko), it provides limited information about the general morphological characteristics of Kyrgyz Taigans (Anonymous 2025). In addition, Kyrgyz people have been using Taigan dogs for a long time (Karadağ et al., 2010; Kurmankov, 2007). A study (Shiskina, 2020) presents only a few body measurements and the general characteristics of this breed. Thus, to fill the knowledge gap on the morphological characteristics of this dog breed, this study aimed to determine the morphometric measurements of the Taigan breed dogs, which are commonly bred in Kyrgyzstan and known for their hunting abilities.
2. Materials and Methods
All animal procedures were approved by the Local Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the University (Approval No.2021/02). Male and female Kyrgyz Taigans of different ages (Figure 1) raised by breeders from Bishkek, Sokoluk and Toktugul were used as study animals in accordance with the guidelines of the Taigan Promotion and Protection Association. The animals were divided into three groups: 12–16, 24–30 and 36+ months old (denoted as groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). The age of the dogs used in this study was determined by the records of local Taigan associations, the dog owners' birth certificates, and dental examinations (Barton 1939). Measurements were taken from a total of 77 animals: 14 males and 10 females in group 1, 15 males and 11 females in group 2, and 15 males and 12 females in group 3. The following measurements were taken while the animals were standing on four feet with their heads in an upright position and facing forward (Figure 2).
FIGURE 1.
Photos of Kyrgyz Taigan Dogs were taken from Arı HH (Original).
FIGURE 2.
Measurements of Kyrgyz Taigan dog.
A measuring stick or a measuring tape was used to take the following parameters measurements were taken according to the method by Tepeli and Çetin (2000) and Tepeli et al. (2003).
Withers height (WH): the vertical length between the highest point of the withers (thoracic vertebrae's process (proc) spinosus) and the ground.
Rump height (RH): the vertical length between the highest point of the rump (spina iliaca dorsal of the os ilium) and the ground.
Body length (BL): the distance between the caput humeri and the tuber ischii.
Neck length (NL): the distance between the atlantooccipitalis joint and the spinous process of the first thoracic vertebra.
Chest width (CW): the horizontal measurement taken just behind the caput humeri.
Chest depth (CD): the vertical distance between the highest point of the withers and the sternum.
The following measurements were obtained using an electronic calliper.
Head length (HL): the distance from the crista occipitalis to the tip of the incivum.
Face length (FL): the distance from the point where the two medial eye angles meet to the tip of the incivum.
Pinna length (PL): the distance between the tip of the pinna and its base.
Distance between two pinnas (PD): the distance between the bases of two pinnas.
Head width (HW): the widest distance between the two arcus zygomaticus.
A measuring tape was used to take the following parameter measurements.
Head circumference (HC): the circumference measurement taken from the widest part of the head.
Oral circumference (OC): the distance between the two lateral mouth angles.
Neck circumference (NC): the circumference of the region of the neck located between the third and fourth cervical vertebrae.
Chest circumference (CC): the circumference measurement taken from the level of the proc spinosus of the 13th ribs just behind the scapula.
Waist circumference (WC): the circumference measurement taken around the region of the spine located between the last rib and the hind leg.
Tail length (TL): the distance between the coccyx and the tip of the tail.
Front shin circumference (FSC): the measurement taken from the thinnest part of the metacarpus.
Rear shin circumference (RSC): the measurement taken from the thinnest part of the metatarsuses.
In this section, a measuring tape was used to take measurements.
Body weight (BW): Body weight was taken with an electronic scale placed on a flat and hard surface.
2.1. Statistical Analysis
The body and head measurements were entered into the IBM SPSS22 software for Windows, and descriptive statistics of the analysed groups were obtained. The obtained data were parametric as determined through analyses and based on graphs. Student's t‐test was used to compare binary groups (gender), ANOVA was used to compare multiple groups (age), and the Tukey test was used for post hoc analysis.
3. Results
Table 1 presents the means and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans of different ages.
TABLE 1.
Means and standard errors of the body measurements for Kyrgyz Taigans.
| Measurement | All dogs (n = 77) | Male (n = 45) | Female (n = 32) | p | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | SX | X | SX | X | SX | ||
| HL (cm) | 25.27 | 0.21 | 25.80 | 0.28 | 24.57 | 0.29 | 0.003 |
| FL (cm) | 11.00 | 0.11 | 11.26 | 0.15 | 10.67 | 0.16 | 0.009 |
| PL (cm) | 13.87 | 0.17 | 14.26 | 0.23 | 13.34 | 0.23 | 0.008 |
| PD (cm) | 12.37 | 0.37 | 12.45 | 0.26 | 12.25 | 0.32 | 0.628 |
| HC (cm) | 38.12 | 0.32 | 39.38 | 0.38 | 36.45 | 0.40 | 0.000 |
| OC (cm) | 12.56 | 0.22 | 12.78 | 0.32 | 12.27 | 0.28 | 0.263 |
| NL (cm) | 18.80 | 0.29 | 19.26 | 0.42 | 18.17 | 0.34 | 0.061 |
| NC (cm) | 34.18 | 0.40 | 35.54 | 0.54 | 32.36 | 0.44 | 0.000 |
| BW (kg) | 20.94 | 0.45 | 21.97 | 0.63 | 19.57 | 0.55 | 0.008 |
| HW (cm) | 15.18 | 0.35 | 15.23 | 0.48 | 15.12 | 0.51 | 0.878 |
| BL (cm) | 64.36 | 0.55 | 65.72 | 0.79 | 62.55 | 0.61 | 0.004 |
| CW (cm) | 12.49 | 0.30 | 12.70 | 0.35 | 12.21 | 0.51 | 0.409 |
| CD (cm) | 30.66 | 0.35 | 31.34 | 0.48 | 29.76 | 0.49 | 0.025 |
| CC (cm) | 69.30 | 0.62 | 70.45 | 0.83 | 67.76 | 0.88 | 0.030 |
| WC (cm) | 49.88 | 0.67 | 51.28 | 0.49 | 48.00 | 1.37 | 0.029 |
| TL (cm) | 39.58 | 0.41 | 40.26 | 0.53 | 38.68 | 0.62 | 0.056 |
| FSC (cm) | 10.90 | 0.10 | 11.30 | 0.12 | 10.36 | 0.13 | 0.000 |
| RH (cm) | 65.27 | 0.47 | 66.61 | 0.59 | 63.47 | 0.64 | 0.001 |
| RSC (cm) | 9.77 | 0.10 | 10.13 | 0.14 | 9.29 | 0.12 | 0.000 |
| WH (cm) | 64.82 | 0.50 | 66.23 | 0.65 | 62.94 | 0.66 | 0.001 |
Table 1 shows that the values were generally significantly higher in the male dogs than in the female dogs. The following values were obtained from the male and female Taigans, respectively: 21.97 ± 0.63 and 19.57 ± 0.55 kg (p < 0.01) for body weight, 66.23 ± 0.65 and 62.94 ± 0.66 cm (p < 0.01) for withers height, 65.72 ± 0.79 and 62.55 ± 0.61 cm (p < 0.01) for body length, and 70.45 ± 0.83 and 67.76 ± 0.88 cm (p < 0.05) for chest circumference.
Table 2 presents the mean and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 1.
TABLE 2.
Means and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 1.
| Measurement | Male (n = 14) | Female (n = 10) | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | SX | X | SX | ||
| HL (cm) | 24.75 | 0.40 | 24.92 | 0.63 | 0.814 |
| FL (cm) | 10.75 | 0.24 | 10.80 | 0.40 | 0.910 |
| PL (cm) | 14.07 | 0.43 | 14.20 | 0.38 | 0.835 |
| PD (cm) | 11.46 | 0.42 | 12.36 | 0.65 | 0.239 |
| HC (cm) | 37.43 | 0.49 | 36.70 | 0.50 | 0.317 |
| OC (cm) | 12.65 | 0.53 | 11.90 | 0.63 | 0.373 |
| NL (cm) | 18.79 | 0.56 | 18.10 | 0.40 | 0.330 |
| NC (cm) | 32.57 | 1.09 | 32.10 | 0.48 | 0.732 |
| BW (kg) | 19.05 | 1.04 | 19.53 | 0.68 | 0.728 |
| HW (cm) | 15.04 | 0.76 | 14.78 | 1.28 | 0.853 |
| BL (cm) | 61.89 | 1.14 | 64.30 | 0.97 | 0.143 |
| CW (cm) | 11.56 | 0.50 | 12.59 | 1.32 | 0.422 |
| CD (cm) | 29.11 | 0.69 | 28.95 | 0.95 | 0.892 |
| CC (cm) | 66.29 | 1.04 | 65.05 | 1.17 | 0.441 |
| WC (cm) | 49.00 | 0.91 | 42.60 | 0.84 | 0.000 |
| TL (cm) | 39.39 | 0.99 | 40.53 | 1.07 | 0.452 |
| FSC (cm) | 11.18 | 0.18 | 10.65 | 0.17 | 0.050 |
| RH (cm) | 64.04 | 1.12 | 64.25 | 0.87 | 0.889 |
| RSC (cm) | 9.67 | 0.22 | 9.35 | 0.15 | 0.284 |
| WH (cm) | 63.30 | 0.99 | 64.05 | 0.63 | 0.570 |
The values obtained from the 12–16‐month‐old male and female Kyrgyz Taigans did not significantly differ, except for waist circumference (p < 0.001) and front shin circumference (p = 0.05).
Table 3 presents the mean and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 2.
TABLE 3.
Means and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 2.
| Measurement | Male (n = 15) | Female (n = 11) | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | SX | X | SX | ||
| HL (cm) | 26.57 | 0.48 | 24.55 | 0.49 | 0.008 |
| FL (cm) | 11.32 | 0.27 | 10.45 | 0.26 | 0.036 |
| PL (cm) | 14.73 | 0.40 | 12.70 | 0.31 | 0.001 |
| PD (cm) | 12.90 | 0.39 | 12.75 | 0.65 | 0.830 |
| HC (cm) | 40.84 | 0.41 | 35.91 | 0.84 | 0.000 |
| OC (cm) | 13.03 | 0.52 | 12.73 | 0.53 | 0.699 |
| NL (cm) | 19.07 | 0.78 | 19.38 | 0.63 | 0.769 |
| NC (cm) | 36.55 | 0.53 | 31.75 | 0.83 | 0.000 |
| BW (kg) | 23.70 | 1.05 | 18.85 | 0.60 | 0.001 |
| HW (cm) | 15.38 | 0.78 | 15.78 | 0.83 | 0.731 |
| BL (cm) | 67.51 | 1.34 | 62.55 | 1.06 | 0.011 |
| CW (cm) | 12.54 | 0.40 | 12.82 | 0.88 | 0.754 |
| CD (cm) | 33.10 | 0.61 | 30.32 | 0.58 | 0.004 |
| CC (cm) | 73.13 | 0.92 | 68.86 | 1.21 | 0.009 |
| WC (cm) | 52.80 | 0.78 | 50.86 | 2.44 | 0.401 |
| TL (cm) | 41.40 | 0.98 | 38.82 | 1.06 | 0.090 |
| FSC(cm) | 11.30 | 0.26 | 10.23 | 0.25 | 0.008 |
| RH (cm) | 67.87 | 0.80 | 63.50 | 1.38 | 0.008 |
| GSC (cm) | 10.19 | 0.23 | 9.23 | 0.21 | 0.007 |
| WH (cm) | 68.17 | 1.10 | 63.23 | 1.32 | 0.008 |
Table 3 shows that the values for the male Taigans were generally significantly higher than those for the female Taigans. Among the evaluated morphologic features, head length, pinna length, head and neck circumferences, body weight, chest depth, chest circumference, front and rear shin circumferences, and rump and withers heights were significantly greater (p < 0.01) in male dogs than in female dogs. The differences in face and body lengths were also significant (p < 0.05).
Table 4 presents the means and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 3.
TABLE 4.
Means and standard errors of the body measurements for male and female Kyrgyz Taigans in group 3.
| Measurement | Male (n = 15) | Female (n = 12) | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | SX | X | SX | ||
| HL (cm) | 26.03 | 0.48 | 24.29 | 0.41 | 0.013 |
| FL (cm) | 11.67 | 0.19 | 10.77 | 0.20 | 0.004 |
| PL (cm) | 13.97 | 0.38 | 13.21 | 0.40 | 0.185 |
| PD (cm) | 12.9 | 0.47 | 11.71 | 0.34 | 0.056 |
| HC (cm) | 39.77 | 0.72 | 36.73 | 0.68 | 0.006 |
| OC (cm) | 12.64 | 0.63 | 12.17 | 0.33 | 0.544 |
| NL(cm) | 19.90 | 0.83 | 17.13 | 0.52 | 0.013 |
| NC (cm) | 37.30 | 0.66 | 33.13 | 0.87 | 0.001 |
| BW (kg) | 22.97 | 0.83 | 20.28 | 1.32 | 0.085 |
| HW (cm) | 15.25 | 0.97 | 14.79 | 0.57 | 0.708 |
| BL (cm) | 67.49 | 1.15 | 61.08 | 0.97 | 0.000 |
| CW (cm) | 13.93 | 0.73 | 11.33 | 0.35 | 0.007 |
| CD (cm) | 31.67 | 0.83 | 29.92 | 0.96 | 0.179 |
| CC (cm) | 71.67 | 1.61 | 69.00 | 1.79 | 0.279 |
| WC (cm) | 51.90 | 0.55 | 49.88 | 2.52 | 0.448 |
| TL (cm) | 39.93 | 0.75 | 37.00 | 0.92 | 0.020 |
| FSC (cm) | 11.42 | 0.17 | 10.25 | 0.23 | 0.000 |
| RH (cm) | 67.77 | 0.86 | 62.79 | 1.04 | 0.001 |
| RSC (cm) | 10.49 | 0.23 | 9.29 | 0.25 | 0.002 |
| WH (cm) | 67.03 | 0.92 | 61.75 | 1.24 | 0.002 |
Table 4 shows that the values were significantly higher in male Kyrgyz Taigans aged 36 months and over than in their female counterparts. In the statistical analysis, the differences in face length, head and neck circumferences, body length, chest width, front and rear shin circumferences, and withers and rump heights between the male and female dogs were more strongly significant than the differences in neck length and tail length (p < 0.05).
Table 5 shows the means and standard errors of the body measurements for Kyrgyz Taigans according to age group.
TABLE 5.
Means and standard errors of the body measurements according to age group.
| Measurement | Group 1 (n = 24) | Group 2 (n = 26) | Group3 (n = 27) | p | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | SX | X | SX | X | SX | ||
| HL (cm) | 24.82 | 0.34 | 25.71 | 0.40 | 25.26 | 0.36 | 0.247 |
| FL (cm) | 10.77 | 0.21 | 10.95 | 0.21 | 11.27 | 0.16 | 0.193 |
| PL (cm) | 14.13 | 0.29 | 13.87 | 0.33 | 13.63 | 0.28 | 0.517 |
| PD (cm) | 11.84 | 0.37 | 12.83 | 0.35 | 12.38 | 0.32 | 0.135 |
| HC (cm) | 37.13 | 0.35 | 38.75 | 0.64 | 38.40 | 0.57 | 0.100 |
| OC (cm) | 12.34 | 0.40 | 12.90 | 0.37 | 12.43 | 0.38 | 0.544 |
| NL (cm) | 18.50 | 0.37 | 19.20 | 0.52 | 18.67 | 0.57 | 0.593 |
| NC (cm) | 32.38b | 0.66 | 34.52ab | 0.66 | 35.44a | 0.66 | 0.006 |
| BW (kg) | 19.25 | 0.66 | 21.65 | 0.81 | 21.77 | 0.78 | 0.380 |
| HW (cm) | 14.93 | 0.68 | 15.55 | 0.56 | 15.04 | 0.59 | 0.748 |
| BL (cm) | 62.90 | 0.80 | 65.41 | 1.01 | 64.64 | 0.98 | 0.172 |
| CW (cm) | 11.99 | 0.62 | 12.66 | 0.43 | 12.77 | 0.50 | 0.521 |
| CD (cm) | 29.04 b | 0.55 | 31.92 a | 0.50 | 30.89 ab | 0.64 | 0.003 |
| CC (cm) | 65.77 b | 0.77 | 71.32 a | 0.84 | 70.48 ab | 1.204 | 0.000 |
| WC (cm) | 46.33 b | 0.91 | 51.98 a | 1.11 | 51.00 a | 1.15 | 0.001 |
| TL (cm) | 39.87 | 0.73 | 40.31 | 0.753 | 38.63 | 0.643 | 0.216 |
| FSC(cm) | 10.96 | 0.13 | 10.85 | 0.21 | 10.90 | 0.18 | 0.908 |
| RH (cm) | 64.13 | 0.73 | 66.02 | 0.85 | 65.56 | 0.81 | 0.240 |
| RSC (cm) | 9.54 | 0.14 | 9.78 | 0.18 | 9.96 | 0.20 | 0.271 |
| WH (cm) | 63.61 | 0.63 | 66.08 | 0.96 | 64.69 | 0.90 | 0.137 |
Note: The superscripts indicate that the differences between group averages are important (i.e., p < 0.05).
As seen in Table 5, the differences in body weight between groups were not statistically significant. By contrast, the values for neck circumference, chest depth and circumference, and waist circumference significantly differed between age groups (p < 0.01). The values for these characteristics were generally low in group 1 but were similar between groups 2 and 3. The differences in other characteristics were not statistically significant.
Table 6 presents the distribution of coat colour in the investigated dog population.
TABLE 6.
Distribution of coat colour in the studied Kyrgyz Taigan population.
| Coat colour | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 32 | 41.559 |
| Pied Black | 12 | 15.584 |
| Grey | 8 | 10.389 |
| Light brown | 8 | 10.389 |
| Yellow | 14 | 18.182 |
| White | 3 | 3.897 |
| Total | 77 | 100.0 |
Table 6 shows that almost half of the studied dogs (41.559%) had a black coat colour. Moreover, the proportions of dogs with pied black and yellow coat colours were relatively close at 18.2% and 15.584%, respectively.
4. Discussion
In the research, the data of Taygan dogs were compared with Turkish hounds, Kazakhstan hounds, Greyhounds and Borzois, as they have similar phenotypes. Yilmaz and Ertugrul (2011) stated that the body growth rate slows down after 12 months and that a very slight growth rate is observed after 24 months, indicating that Turkish Sight Hounds reach their mature body weight and size around 2 years of age. This research shows that the Taigan dog breed's growth performance is also late like the Turkish sight hound. This study is the first to obtain morphologic measurements of the head, neck, trunk and front and rear shins of male and female Kyrgyz Taigans of different ages. The average bodyweight (20.94 kg) for this breed was higher than that reported for Turkish hounds (Yılmaz 2018) and lower than the values reported for Kazakhstan hound and Borzoi (Shishkina 2020). In this study, the male dogs had a higher average body weight than the female dogs. In terms of age groups, group1 had a low body weight, whereas groups 2 and 3 had nearly equal body weight values (Table 5). Thus, the Kyrgyz Taigan was considered to be a medium‐sized dog breed.
Shishkina (2020) described Taigan as a long‐ and wide‐headed dog breed. The current average head length was similar to that reported for Taigan (25.27 cm) (Shishkina 2020) but higher than the values reported for Spanish hunting dogs (Gonzalez et al. 2011) and Kazakhstan hounds (Shishkina 2020). Moreover, the obtained head length‐to‐head width ratio was > 1(Table 1), indicating that the Kyrgyz Taigan is indeed a long‐headed (dolichocephalic) dog.
The reported pinna length for Taigans is 12–14 cm (Shishkina 2020), whereas that for Turkish greyhounds is 12 cm (Urosevic et al. 2020). In this study, the average pinna length was 13.87 cm, and the average values for the male and female dogs were 14.26 and 13.34 cm, respectively (Table 2). Thus, the pinna length for Kyrgyz Taigan was taller than that for Turkish greyhounds. Similarly, the pinna length for Kyrgyz Taigan was larger than that reported for Taigan by Shishkina (2020).
Body length is one of the parameters that contributes to the rectangular body shape characterising all greyhounds. The average body length for Turkish greyhounds is 60.40 cm (Urosevic et al. 2020), whereas it is 63–41 cm for male and 63–36 cm for female Kazakhstan greyhound (Shishkina 2020) and Spanish greyhounds (Gonzalez et al. 2011). The reported values for body length range from 36.8 cm to 65.2 cm, which is quite wide (Gonzalez et al. 2011). In this study, the average body length was 64.36 cm (Table 1), and the average values for male and female dogs were 65.72 and 62.55 cm, respectively (Table 2), indicating that on average, the Kyrgyz Taigan is longer than the Kazakhstan greyhound and Turkish greyhound. In addition, the withers height‐to‐body length ratio was high, Table 3 it < 1, resulting in a rectangular body shape when the dogs are seen from the side.
The average chest depth (30.66 cm) was higher than the values obtained from greyhounds raised in different regions of Spain (13.7–22.5 cm) (Gonzalez et al. 2011) and from Turkish greyhounds (18.50–36.00 cm). As for chest circumference, the average value for Kyrgyz Taigan (69.30 cm) (Table 1) was equal to that for Turkish greyhound (Urosevic et al. 2020), which in turn was greater than the average value (63.34 cm).
The current average withers height (64.82 cm) was close to that reported for Taigan (65 cm) by Shishkina (2020), and the difference between the current values for male and female dogs was 5 cm, consistent with the findings of Shishkina (2020). Moreover, the average withers height for Kyrgyz Taigan was higher than the values reported for Spanish greyhound (60.4–45.4 cm) and Turkish greyhound (60.44 cm) (Urosevic et al. 2020).
The reported average rump height for Turkish greyhounds is 60.41 cm (Urosevic et al. 2020), whereas the range reported for Spanish greyhounds is 39.5–66.88 cm (Gonzalez et al. 2011). The average value obtained in this research (65.7 cm) was greater than that for Turkish greyhounds and other breeds (Urosevic et al. 2020) and was equal to that for Spanish greyhounds (Gonzalez et al. 2011).
Significant differences in the average values for face and pinna heights, tail and body lengths, and head, neck and front and rear shin circumferences were observed between the male and female dogs (p < 0.05). Significant differences in neck, waist and chest circumferences and chest width and depth were also found between age groups (p < 0.05).
In terms of coat colour, 41.559% of the examined dogs were black, 18.182% were yellow, 15.584% were pied black and 25.7% had coat colours other than those aforementioned (Table 6).
It was concluded that the finding that waist circumference (p < 0.001) and front shin circumference (p = 0.05) were different according to p1 and p2 in 12–16‐ month‐old male and female Kyrgyz Taigan dogs may differ depending on the breed and nutrition of the animals.
It was concluded that the finding that the waist and tail lengths of the Kyrgyz Taigans were different from those of the third group may be an indication that growth is still continuing in these regions. There may be no difference between these two groups (G2 and G3) because the development of the dogs in group 1 is continuing, but the growth of the dogs in groups 2 and 3 has been complete.
The present results showed that the Kyrgyz Taigan is a medium‐sized dog in terms of the body weight, has a long head (dolichocephalic) because the head length is longer than the width (Anonymous 2025), exhibits a rectangular body shape similar to other greyhound breeds, and has a rump and withers that are of nearly similar heights. Compared with other greyhound breeds, the Kyrgyz Taigan has larger values for head length, withers and rump heights, chest circumference, and chest depth.
Author Contributions
Conceptualisation, Garip, M.; Methodology, Taş; Data curation, Bayraktar, M.; Investigation, Arı, H.; Formal analysis, Şen, I.; Resources, Begaliev, A., Salıkov, R.
Ethics Statement
Ethical approval was obtained from the Local Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Kyrgyzstan–Turkey Manas University (Approval No. 2021/01 dated 18 February 2021).
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Peer Review
The peer review history for this article is available at https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer‐review/10.1002/vms3.70409.
Funding: This study was supported by the Kyrgyzstan–Turkey Manas University with Project No. KTMU‐BAP‐2021.FB.06.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
- Anonymous 2025. Taigan Accessed March 27, 2025. https://www.wisdompanel.com/en‐us/dog‐breeds/taigan.
- Atasoy, F. , Uğurlu M., Özarslan B., and Yakan A.. 2011. “Body Weight and Measurements of Akbas Dogs in Its Nature Work Condition.” Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 58, no. 3: 213–215. 10.1501/Vetfak_0000002477. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Barton, A. 1939. “Age Determination in Dogs.” Iowa State Univ Vet Student 2: 18–19. [Google Scholar]
- Çilek, S. , and Kavak G.. 2012. “Some Morphological Characteristics of Kangal Shepherd Dogs (Karabas) Raised at Villages by Farmers in Kırıkkale Province.” Asian Journal of Animal Veterinary Advances 7: 403–411. 10.3923/ajava.2012.403.411. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Daskiran, I. , and Cedden F.. 2006. “Some Descriptive Characteristics Concerning Craniometric Measurement in Kangal Dogs.” Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 5: 194–196. [Google Scholar]
- Erdoğan, M. , Tepeli C., Özbeyaz C., Akbulut M. D., and Uğuz C.. 2012. “Comparison of Some Morphological Characteristics of Native Turkish Dog Breeds.” Eurasian Journal of Veterinary Science 28: 106–110. [Google Scholar]
- Evans, H. E. , and Christensen G. C., 1993. "The skeletal system (skull)." In: Miller's Anatomy of the Dog (H. E. Evans, ed.), 3rd edn, chapter 1. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co, pp. 6–49.
- Gonzalez, A. , Aguilera R. A., and Bravo S.. 2011. “Use of Morphometric Variables for Differentiating Spanish Hound Breeds.” International Journal of Morphology 29: 1248–1255. [Google Scholar]
- American Kennel Club . 2007. The Complete Dog Book. Ballantine Books. [Google Scholar]
- Karadag, H. , Sefergil Ş., Alpak H., and Istanbullugil R. F. 2010. "The Genetic Source in Kyrgyz Republic: Taigan." Proceedings of the VI. International Veterinary Anatomy Congress. Afyonkarahisar, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
- Kurmakov, A. 2007. “The Taigan Kyrgys Sighthound Breed: Its Contemporary State, Origins, and Ways to Its Restoration: The Need for Creating a Gene Bank for Aboriginal Breeds, Methods of Selecting Donors.” Proceedings of the First International Conference Aboriginal Dog Breeds as a Part of Diversity and of the Cultural Heritage of Human Kind, Almaty, Kazakhstan. [Google Scholar]
- Onar, V. , Özcan S., and Pazvant G.. 2001. “Skull Typology of Adult Male Kangal Dogs.” Anatomia, Histologia and Embryologia 30: 41–48. 10.1046/j.1439-0264.2001.00292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- PAD Society. Accessed December 10, 2020. https://padsociety.org/.
- Shishkina, E. 2020. Origin of Asian Sighthounds: Tazy and Taigan: In the Footsteps of Forgotten Expeditions. Vol 1, Sishkina Publishing House, Moscow, Russia. [Google Scholar]
- Tepeli, C. , and Çetin O.. 2000. “Determination of Growth, Some Body Measurements and Reproductive Traits of Kangal Turkish Shepherd Dogs.” Veteriner Bilimleri Dergisi 16: 5–16. [Google Scholar]
- Tepeli, C. , and Çetin O.. 2003. “A Study on Head Measurements of Kangal and Akbash Turkish Dogs.” Proceedings of the first International Symposium of Kangal Dog. Sivas, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
- Tepeli, C. , Erdoğan M., Yılmaz A., Bulut Z., and Savolainan P.. 2017. “Some Morphological Characteristics of Turkish Shepherd Dogs Raised in Breeder Conditions Various Countries.” Eurasian Journal of Veterinary Science 33: 268–275. 10.15312/EurasianJVetSci.2017.171. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Urosevic, M. , Matejevic M., Drobnjak D., and Özkanal U.. 2020. “Use of Morphometric Variables for Differentiating Breed Variations in Turkish Tazi (Sighthound) Population.” Pakistan Journal of Zoology 52: 1765–1770. [Google Scholar]
- Yertürk, M. , and Bozkaya F.. 2012. “Some Morphological Characteristics of Bozova Dogs (Gureh).” Harran Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 1, no. 1: 35–38. 10.17582/journal.pjz/20191206171254. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yılmaz, O. 2018. “Hunting Dog Breeds of Turkey.” International Journal of Livestock Research 8: 1–5. 10.5455/ijlr.20170923124626. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yılmaz, O. , and Ertuğrul M.. 2011. “Native Dog Breeds and Types of Turkey.” Iğdır University Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 2: 99–106. [Google Scholar]
- Yılmaz, O. , and Ertuğrul M.. 2011. “Some Morphologıcal Characteristics of Turkish Tazı (Sighthound).” The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 21, no. 4: 794–799. [Google Scholar]
- Yılmaz, O. , and Ertuğrul M.. 2013. “Some Morphological Characteristics of Kangal Dogs Raised in Various Parts of Turkey. I. Body Measurements.” International Journal of Livestock Research 3: 81. 10.5455/ijlr.20130109095630. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.