Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Aug 28;19(8):e0306350.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306350. eCollection 2024.

The doodle dilemma: How the physical health of 'Designer-crossbreed' Cockapoo, Labradoodle and Cavapoo dogs' compares to their purebred progenitor breeds

Affiliations
Comparative Study

The doodle dilemma: How the physical health of 'Designer-crossbreed' Cockapoo, Labradoodle and Cavapoo dogs' compares to their purebred progenitor breeds

Gina T Bryson et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Booming UK ownership of designer-crossbreed dogs resulting from intentional crossing of distinct purebred breeds is often motivated by perceived enhanced health, despite limited evidence supporting a strong 'hybrid vigour' effect in dogs. Improved evidence on the relative health of designer-crossbreed dogs could support prospective owners to make better acquisition decisions when choosing their new dog. This study used a cross-sectional survey of UK owners of three common designer-crossbreeds (Cavapoo, Cockapoo, and Labradoodle) and their progenitor breeds (Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, Cocker Spaniel, Labrador Retriever, and Poodle) to collect owner-reported health disorder information. The authors hypothesised that designer-crossbred breeds have lower odds of common disorders compared to their progenitor breeds. Multivariable analysis accounted for confounding between breeds: dog age, sex, neuter status, and owner age and gender. The odds for the 57 most common disorders were compared across the three designer-crossbreeds with each of their two progenitor breeds (342 comparisons). Valid responses were received for 9,402 dogs. The odds did not differ statistically significantly between the designer-crossbreeds and their relevant progenitor breeds in 86.6% (n = 296) of health comparisons. Designer-crossbreeds had higher odds for 7.0% (n = 24) of disorders studied, and lower odds for 6.4% (n = 22). These findings suggest limited differences in overall health status between the three designer-crossbreeds and their purebred progenitors, challenging widespread beliefs in positive hybrid vigour effects for health in this emerging designer-crossbreed demographic. Equally, the current study did not suggest that designer-crossbreeds have poorer health as has also been purported. Therefore, owners could more appropriately base acquisition decisions between designer-crossbreeds and their purebred progenitors on other factors important to canine welfare such as breeding conditions, temperament, conformation and health of parents.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. A graphical representation illustrating how some current breeds were created from crossbreeding between pre-existing breeds.
Many of today’s purebreds originated from crossbreeding between different pre-existing purebreds. The Silky Terrier, Golden Retriever and Bullmastiff were products of intentional breeding between different pre-existing breeds and therefore, could be considered ‘designer dogs’ that later gained purebred status. The Irish Wolfhound originated similarly but later on, and necessitated crossbreeding with other breeds like Great Danes in order to keep the Irish Wolfhound from disappearing altogether.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Burnett E, Brand CL, O’Neill DG, Pegram CL, Belshaw Z, Stevens KB, et al. How much is that doodle in the window? Exploring motivations and behaviours of UK owners acquiring designer crossbreed dogs (2019–2020). Canine Med Genet. 2022;9(8). doi: 10.1186/s40575-022-00120-x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hladky-Krage B, Hoffman CL. Expectations versus Reality of Designer Dog Ownership in the United States. Animals. 2022;12(23):3247. doi: 10.3390/ani12233247 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. O’Neill DG, McMillan KM, Church DB, Brodbelt DC. Dog breeds and conformations in the UK in 2019: VetCompass canine demography and some consequent welfare implications. PLoS One. 2023;18(7):e0288081. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288081 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Packer RMA, Brand CL, Belshaw Z, Pegram CL, Stevens KB, O’Neill DG. Pandemic Puppies: Characterising Motivations and Behaviours of UK Owners Who Purchased Puppies during the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic. Animals (Basel). 2021;11(9):2500. doi: 10.3390/ani11092500 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Worboys M, Strange JM, Pemberton N. The Invention of the Modern Dog: Breed and Blood in Victorian Britain. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2018.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources