Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 8;33(1):213–229. doi: 10.1007/s00335-021-09914-z

Table 1.

Clade representation of reference and test datasets

Clades Parker et al. (2017)a Plassais et al. (2019)b Test Samples
Samples Breeds Samples Breeds Samples Breeds
Alpine 26 3 20 4 5 3
American Terrier 16 3 1 1 4 2
American Toy 20 2 5 2 0 0
Asian Spitz 83 9 25 9 1 1
Asian Toy 44 5 2 2 2 2
Continental Herder 44 5 25 4 2 2
Drover 34 4 15 4 0 0
European Mastiff 139 16 24 11 7 5
Hungarian 9 2 0 0 3 1
Mediterranean 98 14 12 6 7 3
New World 45 7 24 7 3 2
Nordic Spitz 64 5 13 10 7 4
Pinscher 12 2 0 0 1 1
Pointer Setter 88 12 18 10 5 3
Poodle 72 8 20 6 3 2
Retriever 66 7 48 7 3 2
Scent Hound 71 8 14 6 1 1
Schnauzer 20 2 5 2 0 0
Small Spitz 14 2 1 1 1 1
Spaniel 44 5 14 5 2 1
Terrier 140 18 100 15 7 6
Toy Spitz 32 4 2 2 2 2
UK Rural 145 16 42 12 0 0
Unplaced*c 20 2 7 4 0 0
Unknown breed*d 0 13 0
Village Dogs*e 0 69 0
Mix Breed*f 0 6 0
Wild Canids*g 9 2 29 2 0 0
No Clade Info*h 0 0 0 0 31 14

*Groups of samples that either do not form a monophyletic clade or have not been included in previous phylogenetic analyses

aAnalysis that initially defined breed clade membership

bDogs in the reference panel that are also included in Plassais et al. (2019)

cDog breeds that formed their own branch in previous phylogenetic analysis and were not a member of a clade

dDogs with no corresponding breed information

eNon-breed dogs sampled from 14 distinct geographic regions

fDogs with mixed breed ancestry

gGroup consists of gray wolves and golden jackals and breed label is used to differentiate these two different species

hBreeds not included in previous phylogenetic analyses and, therefore, not assigned clade membership