I just ordered a My Dog DNA test kit for Fionna. She'll be the second Kishu in the My Dog DNA database. Akiyama no Roushya will also be listed on the MDDNA breeder page. It is a complimentary service for breeders who have dogs tested with their services.
Lindsay of the HANA project had Genko, the black & tan Hokkaido Ken tested through the same service, so I thought I'd go into Nami's profile again and check on how it changed the genetic relatedness map the MDDNA service provides.
To my surprise... the Hokkaido is (or, at least, Genko is) the most related breed to the Kishu Ken (or, at least, Nami), according to the service. While it doesn't seem that unusual based on the temperaments the two dogs show, the Hokkaido comes from an isolated, northern island and the Kishu comes from a peninsula in the south of Honshu, near Shikoku. How is it, then, that the two dogs tested in the public database appear so closely related? Why is the Kishu not closely related to the Shikoku? Wouldn't that make sense, geographically? Surprising and interesting! I wonder, if Kishu will bridge the genetic gap between the Shikoku and the other breeds in the same way the American Akita bridges the gap between the Japanese Akita and the other breeds.
I look forward to more of dogs being entered in this system.