Recently someone (my boss, actually) mentioned to me that I wrote more articles about dogs than I did about cats and asked why.
My first thought, naturally, was that it had nothing to do with the fact that I have owned numerous dogs and no cats, but rather reflected the amount of research done by scientists on the animals.
After all, I’ll write about any interesting findings, and I like cats just fine, even if I am a dog person. Two of my adult children have cats, and I would hate for them to think I was paying them insufficient attention. (Hello Bailey! Hello Tawny! — Those are the cats, not the children.)
But I figured I should do some reporting, so I emailed Elinor Karlsson at the Broad Institute and the University of Massachusetts. She is a geneticist who owns three cats, but does much of her research on dogs — the perfect unbiased observer. Her research, by the way, is about dog genomes. She gets dog DNA from owners who send in their pets’ saliva samples.
The research I have been interested in and writing about involves evolution, domestication, current genetics and behavior. And the questions are of the What-is-a-dog-really? variety. Dogs and cats have also been used as laboratory animals in invasive experiments, but I wasn’t asking about which animal is more popular for those.
I had gotten to know Dr. Karlsson a bit while reporting on research she was doing on wolves. I asked her whether there was indeed more research on dogs than cats, and if so, why?
“Ooo, that is an interesting question!” she wrote back. “Way more interesting than the various grant-related emails that are filling up my inbox.
“The research has lagged behind in cats. I think they’re taken less seriously than dogs, probably to do with societal biases. I have a vet in my group who thinks that many of the cancers in cats may actually be better models for human cancer, but there has been almost no research into them.”
Better models than cancers in dogs, that is. Dogs do get many of the same cancers as humans, but in dogs the risk for these cancers often varies by breed, which narrows the target down when looking for the cause of a disease.
Furthermore, said Dr. Karlsson, cat behavior gets no respect.
“Non-cat people tend to laugh at the idea of studying behavioral genetics in cats, and the animal training world complains that people tend to dismiss cats as untrainable.”
Cats, of course, can be trained just as any animal can. Dr. Karlsson unwittingly trained her cat to hop up on the counter when she opened the door of a cabinet containing goodies.
And commerce has recognized cat trainability. There are several models of toilet training kits to teach cats to use human toilets. If such kits exist for dogs, I couldn’t find them. Not even for Bichon frises.
And as to the cancers, Dr. Karlsson said Kate Megquier, a veterinarian working on a Ph.D. at the Broad Institute in cancer genomics thought cat cancers deserved more attention.
Dr. Megquier said “I’ve been studying a lot of the dog cancers,” but that there are reasons studying certain naturally occurring cancers in cats could be valuable.
They get a lot of cancers called lymphomas, she said, and “they certainly have something to teach us about lymphomas.” They also get oral cancers similar to ones humans get and it’s possible, she said, that these might be related to environmental toxins they pick up while grooming themselves.
Investigating that possibility “could give us some insight into these cancers,” she said, helping pets and people. Dr. Megquier likes dogs, but is, by her own account, “definitely a cat person.”
Dr. Karlsson said that there are good reasons dogs are studied so intensively. There are many more dog breeds — about 400 compared to about 40 cat breeds. That means more genetic diversity, and better tools for studying genomes.