Talk:Munchkin (cat)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cats Portal This article is supported by the Cats WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents 1 Dominant vs. recessive 2 Origin 3 Bias 4 Proposed Solution?

[edit] Dominant vs. recessive

Because the munchkin gene is a dominant one, approximately half the kittens with a munchkin parent will be 'standard' munchkins. The remainder have normal length legs, but they can be used to pass the gene on to the next generation.

Now, admittedly it's a long time since I did biology, but if the gene is dominant, doesn't that mean it's impossible for a cat to have the gene without expressing the trait? So how can cats with normal legs pass on the gene? Evercat 02:31, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

It could be that the gene is tied to several other genes - i.e, you can't hace the short legs unless you also have, say, short hair and tabby patterns. But I don't actually know anything about cat genetics, so don't quote me on that. It's an intresting question, though. Is there someone we can take this to? DuctapeDaredevil 23:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

They don't pass on the trait. Here is a link for more info on munchkin cat genetics ( http://www.arbbs.net/~pfsstcat/mk_genetics.html ) --Renwick

As far as the recessive/dominance question, it appears to have been corrected. A kitten that does not demonstrate the short legged trait cannot pass the trait on to its kittens. Solveig Pflueger, a geneticist associated with TICA has been working for years to attempt isolation of a homozygous munchkin with no success. —This unsigned comment was added by 64.122.55.32 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 16 March 2006.

I've fixed this problem, and added a couple of nifty little Punnett squares to facilitate understanding for people who, like myself, find diagrams easier to understand than written explanations. --Icarus 06:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origin

I read a newspaper article years ago that attributed the munchkin breed to cat owners in pre-war Germany. It was a small breed, and after the war there were fewer than 350(?) of them left. Due to the low genetic variation the cat breed remained small and they were expensive cats (at least the article cited breeding fees as several thousand dollars). I thought that the munchkin phenotype could be half-expressed (short front legs), but I don't remember specifically if the article made mention of this.—This unsigned comment was added by 128.12.20.126 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 11 November 2005.

I seem to recall reading that a similar breed was developed in the 20s, but that it was lost - the modern Munchkin has no connexion with it. --86.135.179.53 05:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

The munchkin mutation has occured several times in history although the previous generations died out during World War II ( http://www.munchkin.net/faq.html )--Renwick

I am a former breeder of munchkin cats and would like to add to this discussion. While the genetics for the breed were previously expressed in Europe, no breeders managed to maintain the breeding stock and those programs did not succeed. All contemporary munchkins that are recognized by feline registries can trace their roots back to Blackberry.—This unsigned comment was added by 64.122.55.32 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 16 March 2006.

[edit] Bias

This article fails to mention the fact that vets and cat fancies are often opposed to this breed on health grounds. Simply saying that certain organisations don't recognise the breed without explaining why is clever use of weasel words. The British Governing Council of the Cat Fancy, for example, together with the British Small Animals Veterinary Association, have made clear [1] their intention never to recognise the munchkin as a breed in the UK. Their argument is that these extreme mutations have major impacts on the health and well-being of the cat.

The statement in this article (based on opinion rather than scientific research, presumably) that munchkins are "extremely active, agile and fast runners" cannot possibly be true when compared with normal cats. If short legs were better, evolution would have given cats shorter legs; it didn't, and like all other running and jumping predators cats have long legs. Compare with dogs, cheetahs, foxes, lions, bears, etc. The only predators with short legs (weasels and stoats) have evolved to hunt in burrows where being small rather than fast is the key thing.

So, to balance this article, the opposing point of view (held by many) needs to be stated. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 10:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Solution?

I agree that the fact this breed/mutation is controversial should be stated in the article. However I do not believe the article should take a position on that issue, as the above contributor does, and I don't agree at all with the 'weasel words' assessment. His comments themselves show a clear bias. It should be evident that most traits that are bred into domestic pet breeds would be most unhelpful to their feral counterparts - the 'evolutionary' logic above makes no sense in the context of domestic pet breeding. I do not believe it has been shown that the heterozygous munchkin cats currently being bred have a compromised quality of life. (On the other hand I don't know a single pug (canine) that can breathe properly...)

I suggest that the sentence which upsets Neale should be paired with a counter-statement acknowledging the controversy. For instance "The Munchkin cat variety is the subject of controversy among cat fanciers. Some, including the British Cat Fanciers' Association, maintain that it is an unhealthy mutation; while fanciers who keep the variety as pets have reported that they are extremely agile, active, and fast runners." cheers - BillH

Hello BillH,

Let me clarify my position a bit. I've never kept these cats, though I like cats a great deal, particularly oriental cats. As a zoologist, I also happen to understand how animal locomotion works. Speed depends on stride length. The longer the stride, the further between steps and the faster the animal moves. [2] Likewise, agility comes from both the length of the limb and the strength of the muscles, since climbing is about using levels to develop the power to pull the animal against gravity and up a tree (or whatever). Hence every single fast animal has long legs (deer, horse, cheetah) and every single agile animal has long limbs (monkey, squirrel). Evolution "knows" what is doing here, and I'd put my money on evolution above cat breeders...

This isn't to say Munchkin cats cannot be quite fast or agile, but they cannot be as fast and agile as regular cats. Simple laws of physics here. If by some miracles Munchkin breeders have not only halved the length of the bones but also doubled the strength of the muscles, so that the legs can move twice as fast, then perhaps there may be equivalence, but if not, then without scientific evidence to the contrary, I just don't believe Munchkin cats equal regular cats in terms of speed or agility.

As you say, numerous dog breeds are worse, and in the field I write professionally within, fishkeeping, there are varieties of fish that have been bred to very extreme and dibilitating degrees. Trying to rank what's "worse" is difficult. So while yes, I don't like the Munchkin breed particularly and assume that it is an inferior sort of animal in the ways listed above, I feel sure that they are much loved and happy animals.

There's no getting away from the fact this breed is controversial, and my point about weasel words was that by only telling half the story (that is isn't recognised) without saying why (perceived animal abuse) the article was side-stepping the issue.

Cheers, Neale