Without turning this into a witch hunt, I am very curious about this gene. I do not care to discuss the lines that may carry it. Only want to know a few things.

I recently saw a photo of someones puppy who they were saying inherited the long hair gene. The puppy also has a different type of head and a comment was made about that too, that it's common in long haired pups. The littermates all look normal, heads and coats. The long haired pup looks flatter faced. Totally different.

So why would coat gene cause a head to look any different than the rest of the puppies? Almost like it's a different breed?

Besides seeing photographs, I have seen another breeders litter with 3 of 9 that had long coated genetics. It was an all yellow litter but the 3 faces of the obvious affected, long coated gene pups look more like Golden Retrievers then Labradors in their head width and facially. That was only 1 litter & the bitch produced the same with another stud dog. I didn't see the other litter but it was also yellow. Breeder didn't care to ask stud dog owners about it or test her girl. She sold the long coated pups for more b/c she said they were *rare* looking.

There may be more carriers then we originally suspected. I'm not on a witch hunt either. If this was our worst problem to worry about in Labradors, we would be in great condition. Any bitch or dog can be genetically tested if the breeder wants to do it.

My long-coated puppies definitely look different than typical Labradors. I recently saw the long-coated boy - the litter just turned a year old - the boy is in training with a service dog group. He's HUGE! The coat is halfway between a Golden and Newfie in length and texture (the whole litter was black) and he's got way more bone than you'd get typically with a Lab (I've got his normal-coated brother here who has good bone, but not like this puppy). I plan on getting a new picture of Wally (the long-coated boy) next time I'm at Support Dogs. The heads are different too - I guess you could say less stop, so flatter. It's definitely an interesting trait to watch grow up, but I don't want to produce any more!

YES Patty!! They have flatter faces, thats a good way to describe it!!
So at a year old did your boys face still look "flat" with less stop? Maybe more like a flatcoat?
I am fascinated with this now and there HAS to be more to it than just hair!!
Did your long haired pups have any health issues Patty?
I know there's a test but that is not what I'm after. I really want to know what is different about these pups besides their hair because there is obviously more to it!

Yes, I'd say they look a little flat-coatish, plus a bit of Newfie in the back skull. Health-wise, one of the girls has really bad hips -really bad. Of course, mom and 3 of her sisters were excellent (all that were xrayed). I can't help but wonder if long- coat puppies perhaps pull some other breeds' characteristics - like Newfie-including hips that aren't that fabulous.

Thanks for sharing that Patty.
I agree, it could be a throwback to the Newfie, even the flattie I suppose.
Just really strange how it would just "appear" so strongly and in the same litter as normal looking pups.
Mother nature never ceases to amaze!!

How could it be a throw back to the Newfie? The Flat Coat was interbred *way back when* for specific reasons, but aside from the time of the St John's Dog before the Labrador was developed in England...a Newfie?

This is an interesting conversation, but I think it's very important, especially in this day and age, not to say that the "long hair coat gene...causes a flatter face". We do not know the exact relationship. We will do better in genetics if we think about the genes traveling together instead. I think what we are seeing is a collection of recessive genes being expressed. causitive nature unknown.

Absolutely! We (as far as I know) have no definitive knowledge of how the "rest" of the genes that apparently go along with the long-coat trait have come from. I do know that back in the early 1900s, litters could have long and short coats, both yellow and black in the same litter.

I simply find it fascinating that there seems to be more than just a longer coat that goes along with inheriting 2 copies of the long-coated gene.

There are a number of breeds who might express the long-coat, or *fluffy* gene as it is widely known. Rottweilers, Dalmations, Shar Peis, Weimeraners, Corgies, in addition to the Labrador, all have expressed the long coat characteristic from time to time. The Newfoundland has nothing to do with it.

Closely linked genes, inherited in a package, is one possibility. Or there could be pleiotropic effects = one gene affecting a number of different physiological functions. I'm teaching developmental biology right now, and we have been studying the effects of genes that regulate other genes and are expressed at different times in different parts of the embryo. For instance, a gene called Pax6 that affects the lens of the eye and the pancreas, including the expression of a hormone that controls growth of the bone, as well as insulin and glucagon that control glucose metabolism. The CF gene that causes cystic fibrosis, affects the function of sweat glands, the lungs and the pancreas. I can imagine a gene that affects the way in which the bones and face grow during development and also affects the hair follicles of the adult.

I can only speak from personal experience: our long coated Lab was very much like the drawing of the old St. John 's dog (which can be seen in Helen Warwick's book), heavier in bone and "feel" than the average Lab, with less stop, a bigger head and definitely more Newfie than Golden. His health was good and he lived until a ripe old age.

The other one I saw around that time was also similar in type and I just surmised that some ancestral genes had finally gotten together and were having a party.

Some years later, my paths crossed those of a young dog in training with our local guide dog society . I thought it was a young Golden with a bit more growing to do - turned out to be a long coated yellow Lab. Very different: smaller (never made the size) and more Golden in type. And yes, there were some similar bloodlines behind all these cases.

Now I hesitate to generalize...

I have also heard many breeders say that the long haired labs are heavier boned although I think perhaps that may be an illusion attributed to the thicker coat. Its a small region of DNA, and there have not been any real scientific discoveries that identify other skeletal traits that are correlated with long coat although it' may be possible.

There are a few sites with some more useful info as well...
http://www.gatewaylabs.com/html/body_long-coated_labradors.html

http://surrylabradors.blogspot.com/2007/09/long-haired-gene-in-labradors.html

http://webpages.charter.net/lofgren/Fluffy.htm

Besides Labs, this long coat recessive also appears in several other "short-coated breeds" There is a DNA test for this trait as well...
http://www.vetdnacenter.com/canine-long-hair-test.html

Great discussion!! Thank you for all the replies!
Keep it coming, I am hoping to learn as much as possible about this, it's so interesting. I guess because before Patty had hers and didn't hide it from the world (thanks Patty), I had never heard of it.
I am glad there doesn't seem to be any health implications, aside from Patty's one girl which could have been a coincidence!
Would love to hear from others besides the breeders already referenced who have had this

I have just seen yet another litter of labrador long coats. Could see where it came from on the mother but the sire, they had no clue and were shocked to learn he was a carrier....but when I asked to see the ped, I could see were it probably came from.

Anyway... these babies in the head to me resembled FCR though they of course didn't have the onepiece headpiece that FCR are to have. Those saying flat faced, this is correlating to not much stop, IMO and no defined brow line.

I have a friend that breeds GSD's. This breed also deals w/ the long coat gene. In this breed, the long coats are definitely larger, heavier boned.

I've heard that heterozygotes for long hair may have a somewhat longer coat than non-carriers. Is it possible that they are heavier boned as well? Is the current focus on lots of bone and lots of coat causing heterozygotes to be preferentially selected for breeding?

I believe labs in the beginning came from a mixture of anywhere from 5 to 10 different breeds of dogs. To me this is just happen stance genetics occurring. I also believe as a previous poster suggested, we are subconsciously selecting a certain type that may also include the propensity to latently carry these genes, which over time now are appearing. I have even been told chows were part of the mix used by some early breeders in there search to refine thier breeding stock to meet thier indivisual goals.
I have a girl here who was sired by a very popular stud dog about 9 years ago who has a significant amount of "purple" on her tongue. In all her litters, she only produced one girl who had a dime sized purple mark on her tongue. Her children did not have any markings at all on thier tongues. I have always found this to be strange. I beleive there are other peculiraties like these just waiting to pop up at anytime.

The Labrador Retriever as a breed has been "purebred" for less than a century. As late as 1917, dogs registered as Labrador Retrievers and those registered as Flat Coated Retrievers were still being crossed in England (and elsewhere). While the selection for a short, dense coat tends to suppress the LC gene, it has not yet been extinguished in our breed. Unfortunately, selecting for a "ton of coat" and/or plush coats that seem to have been popular with so many people in recent years does just the opposite - the gene is perpetuated. The gene has been there since Labs became Labs - but it is fad and fashion that brings it into the open more frequently.

It has been demonstrated in our breed (as well as many others) that dogs with one gene for LC (carriers) tend to have a slightly longer and fuller coat. Rewarding this variation from the true Labrador coat only spreade the gene around. So, for those who want those "to die for" coats, be careful what you wish for - it may come with strings (of hair) attached

If what you say is true then why test for the gene? The carriers can be picked out at ringside. Mind sourcing your statement?

"I have also heard many breeders say that the long haired labs are heavier boned although I think perhaps that may be an illusion attributed to the thicker coat. Its a small region of DNA, and there have not been any real scientific discoveries that identify other skeletal traits that are correlated with long coat although it' may be possible."

I absolutely agree. The coat is different in texture right down to the undercoat and the areas that are "shorter" like the legs and face just like a Golden or Newfie. I assume the bone and faces of a long coated Labradors in a litter with normal coated littermates is not different structurally but instead it is an illusion of the very very thick and plush coat (even on those short haired areas) and the fact that the hair around the face is much longer making the area around the eyes and the muzzle look so different. Specific characteristics like "more bone" and "less stop" would not be linked to a simple coat color or texture gene. Characteristics like that could be present in a particular line which is also known to carry the long coat gene however they would be expressed in the puppies regardless of coat length ie both long and normal coated puppies in the same litter would tend toward more bone and less stop.

I am surprised at the amount of bone and substance on my friend's Golden pups when they weigh less than typical Labrador pups at the same age - it's all coat.

I also agree that many long coated carriers can be spotted ringside. Of course some are not but many are due to a longer and/or shaggier or curlier coat texture.

You mentioned curlier coats on carriers. Have you seen a lab puppy born with a curly coat and then turn to a LC as it matures or how do they look when born?

I have a girl who carries the long coat gene and she has a very SHORT, very dense coat so there goes that theory - -

Here is an interesting link with photos at different ages
http://webpages.charter.net/lofgren/Fluffy.htm

Agreed. I have a girl that I was certain would be a carrier, based on pedigree and what I call crazy coat. Tested her and she came back negative. So no, one can't tell just by looking.

The key words being VERY DENSE. A coat that is VERY anything is not a typical Labrador coat. Talk to the Pembroke Welsh Corgi people about the problem. They have been dealing with "fluffies" for years because breeders select and judges reward "very dense" or "plush" coats that are not typical of the breed at large. Any exaggeration of the standard - even when it is appealing to the eye - promotes "atypical" genes. In other words, genes that do not represent correct "type".

The fluffy coated pups I had in one litter had NO undercoat. Just a longer, slightly wavy and very soft single coat.

Ok, I misspoke. She has a short, dense coat. What oldtimers refer to as a correct coat. Not the somewhat longer, wavy coat you see alot of today.

This is a really interesting discussion. I have no personal experience with this gene except seeing an occasional dog that has a very long coat at a show. Lab coats certainly differ in length - and texture, which is at least as important. I have litter mates, one of whom has the somewhat longer coat with the harsh texture and slight wave on the back that I have always preferred because of its functionality (one wipe with a towel and she is practically dry). The other has a shorter coat, rather slick in texture. He also dries quickly. I've been told that their father, a MBISS, sometimes produced that short coat, which would have been quite competitive at specialties 30 years ago when I got into the breed, but now would not. I had a male a number of years ago (born in 1987) who had a longer coat with a soft texture, and when he got wet he was wet forever! It wasn't an open coat, but the texture was very soft. Nice for hugging, less so for water work. Bred to a girl with a coat of the correct texture he produced the correct texture. I have great granddaughters now, and they have good coat texture. I am caring for a chocolate lab right now that has a type of coat I've not seen before, very dense, shorter and without wave, with a somewhat softer texture than I see in my own dogs, but it seems to be quite functional, ie. one wipe and he's dry. So there is a lot of variation in the length and texture of Labrador coats. I have never had a long coated Lab and have not had mine tested, as I don't know of a history of it in the lines. Do any of these coats seem to be related to the long haired gene? Do other people see these differences, particularly a coat like the chocolate?

I have a chocolate dog that has a very dense coat, shorter than what we see a lot of in the specialty ring nowadays but a little longer around the neck,with a very slight wave on the topline and good tail wrap. It is harsh to the touch and very water repellent - it is very difficult to get the dense undercoat wet, even when I try. I find this coat to be very consistent in this line.

I have a black dog that has a very short coat with good wave down the back (but because it is short, it is not that noticeable unless you are up close). The coat is very tight and held close to the body. Hard to the touch. His tail is a lovely, tightly wrapped full otter tail (no curl). From pictures, people assume he does not have a lot of coat because much of what we see today are coats that are open or not held close to the body, giving the impression of a ton of coat, but it is fluff - no point in having a lot of undercoat that is not protected. Most long time breeders who have put their hands on him call it a correct coat, one that is not often seen today.

I think people are drawn to certain coat types without having any understanding of functionality. People start breeding to dogs with these coats because they like them, and thus a new fad is born. My dogs are in the water a lot as we do upper level field work and I want the short tight hard coats. I am looking for a stud dog for a girl right now but am turned off by many of the coats out there right now.

As far as coat texture in different colors is concerned, the softest coats I have ever touched are in yellows.

The coat you describe on your chocolate sounds alot like the one on my visitor except I would not describe it as harsh. I have not actually had him in the water (after all , I live in Wisconsin). The coat you describe on your black sounds like the ones I have on my dogs. The tail has no feathering or curl, and the hair wraps around the tail, with the twisted twizzle at the end, but the hair on the butt does have a wave to it. The coat has a harsh texture. I have blacks and yellows with this type of coat, which repels water and protects the undercoat well, mostly descended from a Rainell's Dynasty daughter who had that coat. Lots of Briary on the other side. In my opinion that is the correct coat because of its insulating and water repellent properties. If the tail is thicker halfway down than it is at the body, they do not have that wrapped tail.

I think one of the disconcerting things for me about these coats is that I don't see it when I'm evaluating 7-8 week old pups. In my last litter I was really focused on this problem. My keeper seemed to have what I was looking for in coat, then at about 4 months her coat got longer and more open. I had her and another dog I consider has a correct coat out in the rain for about 15 minutes. The pup comes in soaking wet and the other dog dry. The puppy is now in a nice pet home.

I am really interested in seeing more photos of these dog as they mature.
Does the coat always stay long, are there different type of LC's?
I have personally never seen one in person!
Please show us some pics