I'm excitedly awaiting the results of the genome sequencing. Here is more information on sequencing. My 2 cents - it's a fairly complex process where error can be introduced at many points. Contamination is a huge issue - people - note the people w/o protective clothing vs the ones without. Fungi, bacteria, etc. I'm working through a book now on Neanderthal sequencing that discusses these issues and some funny publishings (i.e. possible "dinosaur DNA" in amber turned out to be human contamination). Where I'm going with this is that the field is new, evolving fast with regard to technique, math modeling and machinery and the results won't be "settled science" for some time, which makes it very interesting but also leaves room for caution with regard to results. I think we'll get there. Especially with replication of results by independent labs over time.
My personal thoughts on doggy DNA tests - not yet worth it. From what I can tell the tests look for snippets of sequence matches from one sentinel study (not replicated as far as I can tell) done in 2004 (which is ancient in the world of genetics). The study found that using microsatellite genotypes, breeds could be distinguished between with high accuracy. Note that the study did not extrapolate to mixed breed identification. The original study used a data set with 85 breeds (there are over 300 breeds out there). Fast forward to today's Doggie DNA test....From what I've been reading results from repeating tests with the same lab on the same dog are inconsistent as well as running tests on the same dog with different labs. As an aside I'd like to know how all these rare horny Kelpies from a different continent get around? Here is a typical comparative article: http://news.vin.com/...articleId=23206 my 2 cents - save your $ it's not worth it yet. There's obviously a lot of interpretive "art" in reading the results and probably a lot of extrapolation of data beyond reasonable boundaries. Plus I suspect from reading a third article the general groupings are broadly interpreted such that if you submitted a wolf's cheek swab you'd get a "closest possible match or three" among the ancient asian herding dogs, since these are "the most closely related". Now that would be an interesting test he he he.
found another couple of articles of the scientific "breakthroughs":
Dec. 2015 http://phys.org/news...-tale-dogs.html
& June 2016 http://phys.org/news...ated-world.html
This is my takeaway from the articles:
Lead author Dr Laurent Frantz, from the Palaeo-BARN, commented: 'Reconstructing the past from modern DNA is a bit like looking into the history books: you never know whether crucial parts have been erased. Ancient DNA, on the other hand, is like a time machine, and allows us to observe the past directly.'
".... a bit like looking into the history books: you never know whether crucial parts have been erased. ...." I think this line of thought applies a lot! everywhere!
OH, and I sent my DNA away to help with some ancestry research and BOY is that a novelty also! I am in the Beta version and so every once in a while I look at it and it changes (what they say my ancestors were). First I was mostly Viking and Mediterranean, after a few emails telling my known history, it is slightly more accurate but is that really accurate then? How many thousands of years did the test go back? Also it is based on Mitochondrial DNA not nuclear, so it can only see part of me? I received an answer one time explaining that DNA doesn't always show the same as some one's known heritage: for example someone can be 1/2 Italian but show 0% Italian in the DNA (not even because of mitochondrial testing), it doesn't calculate. Ie. both parents 50% Italian and 50% Irish, child DNA could show 100% Irish on test even though math would say child is 50% Italian and 50% Irish.
From all of this, and BTW - your genome article was informative, I'm waiting & watching for targeted cancer cures so the treatment doesn't kill good cells! and less side effects from the medications too!
I believe most of this research, DNA, genomes, and the like ... can be piggybacked once it gets to a certain degree of sophistication (and I'm OK with learning from history too)