Close
today i learned (til)

The Guinea Pig as a Pet

April 9, 2019
The author’s guinea pigs- Peanut (left) and Mocha (right)

 

Guinea pigs are one of the most popular small house pets and for good reason! Cute and communicative, they can form close bonds with their owners. However, owning a guinea pig means making the commitment to provide it a good life. There are many misconceptions about what guinea pigs need to live a healthy life and this article is here to debunk them!

 

 

 

 

Guinea Pigs are Social Animals

Guinea pig are social animals—a pair of guinea pigs is better than just one. In the wild, guinea pigs travel in large herds. Many people do not know this or think their pig will be fine on its own. However, without a friend, most guinea pigs will become depressed, which can develop into physical issues as well. Living in groups decreases levels of aggression and stress in guinea pigs. They also get the physical exercise they need by playing and chasing each other around. Overall, social activity among pigs increases their health and longevity. When adopting multiple pigs, it is best to adopt the same gender. For boars (males), it is recommended to house them in pairs. However, since soes (females) have greater social adaptability and weaker hierarchy structures, they can be kept in larger groups.

Adequate Cage Space

Most cages sold in pet stores are not large enough for guinea pigs to live a happy and healthy life. The minimum cage size for a pair of guinea pigs is 10.5 square feet and this number increases with the number of pigs owned. Even a single pig requires at least 7.5 square feet. This is so they have plenty of room to explore and play around in. Just because they are small animals does not mean they do not need space just like a cat or dog would. In their cage, proper bedding should cover the bottom. In addition to bedding, the cage should contain some boxes and tunnels that they can hide under and feel safe.

Vitamin C

Guinea pigs, just like humans, do not produce Vitamin C on their own! Because of this, their diet must supplement it for them. Dark, leafy greens like kale and fruits like oranges are great sources of Vitamin C. Other foods include red peppers, parsley, and broccoli. Be careful when feeding them fruit, however, since fruit is high in sugar and they should be limited to a few small pieces a day to prevent developing diseases in the long run. It is essential that guinea pigs get a sufficient amount of Vitamin C, as it has been shown to decrease protein oxidative damage, reduce hearing loss, and help maintain a healthy liver.

Are Guinea Pigs Rodents?

Although labeled as a rodent, research has shown that the guinea pig is in fact not and never has been a rodent! Previous studies of rodents were based on more limited comparisons of certain genes or proteins. However, in a recent study, the guinea pig’s genetic pattern was compared not only to rodents, such as mice and rats, but also other mammals, such as humans, chimpanzees, and opossums. Through some complex statistical computations, the scientists constructed phylogenetic “trees”. These trees linked animals that were genetically most closely related. Their calculations revealed that while rats and mice are close cousins, guinea pigs fall on a distant branch and deserve their own order. When it comes to DNA, guinea pigs are clearly not rodents.

 

References
Angier, N. (1996, June 13). Guinea Pigs Not Rodents? DNA Weighing In. Retrieved April 1, 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/13/us/guinea-pigs-not-rodents-dna-weighing-in.html
Dietary vitamin C decreases endogenous protein oxidative damage, malondialdehyde, and lipid peroxidation and maintains fatty acid unsaturation in the guinea pig liver. (2003, January 15). Retrieved April 1, 2019, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0891584994901082
Dietary vitamin C supplementation reduces noise-induced hearing loss in guinea pigs. (2004, December 07). Retrieved April 1, 2019, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378595504003478
Lee, H. (2019, January 15). Can Guinea Pigs Live Alone? – Find Out More About Solitary Pigs. Retrieved April 1, 2019, from https://squeaksandnibbles.com/can-guinea-pigs-live-alone/
0Likes
Katie Lee
About Author

Katie is a 3rd year Computer Science major at Georgia Tech. In addition to coding, she is very passionate about advocating for mental health and educating people about the psychology behind it.

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Evolution of My Design for The Devil Wears Science
today i learned (til)
Common Cat-astrophes
today i learned (til)
Procrastination Reflection
today i learned (til)
Serial Sci-Fi: Awakening by Linda Harley, Chapter 1

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.