Posted on 01/16/2014 9:01:52 PM PST by Fractal Trader
Dogs and wolves evolved from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago, according to new research.
U.S. scientists said that part of the genetic overlap observed between some modern dogs and wolves is the result of interbreeding after dog domestication and not a direct line of descent from one group of wolves. They believe their research reflects a more complicated history than the popular story that early farmers adopted a few docile, friendly wolves that later became our modern canine companions.
Dogs and wolves evolved from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago but modern canines are more closely related to each other than to wolves, according to new research
Dogs and wolves evolved from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago but modern canines are more closely related to each other than to wolves, according to new research Instead, the earliest dogs may have first lived among hunter-gatherer societies and adapted to agricultural life later, according to the study which is published in the journal PLoS Genetics.
Researchers from the University of Chicago said that dogs are more closely related to each other than to wolves, regardless of geographic origin as they do not descend from a single line of wolves.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
ping
Interesting, but not surprising.
This sentence has two problems.
1) The term "canine" can refer to members of the family Canidae (domestic dogs, wolves, foxes, jackals, coyotes, and other dog-like mammals); or, more narrowly, to members of the sub-family Caninae; or, more narrowly, to members of the genus Canis (which includes dogs, wolves, coyotes, and jackals); or only to domestic dogs. So, what are the "modern canines" referred to here? I suspect they mean "domestic dogs."
2) Why "but?" Doesn't it follow that domestic dogs would be more-closely related to each other than to wolves, since (as this article posits) domestic dogs and wolves are two branches which split off from a common ancestor some time in the past?
Regards,
Let’s see, Mother Earth is 6,245 years old, as of last October, Funky Fundie Theologians tell us, which means these dogs must have come from another planet. ALIENS!
I just spent a while researching this actually and was left with the impression that modern dogs most likely owe their genes to an asian wolf which was smaller and more dog like than the modern grey wolf. AS I recall, the domestication process occured in China approx 30-50,000 years ago.
OK then someone explain German Shepards Alaskan Malamutes and Huskies. Because they didn’t evolve very far from that split.
Totally agree! I’ve been “owned” by several alien dogs. They must come from the Dog Star, Sirius, in Canis Major.
A “common ancestor”? What, like a hybrid wolf?
A “common ancestor”? What, like a hybrid wolf?
Somewhere, dogs became to regard wolves as the killers they are, and react when they see one to this day. It probably happened long ago, but in America we’ve imported most of our breeds... I think the Carolina dog is the only ‘native’ dog we can claim.
But today, they're dogs.
I don't see a need to reclassify Canis Lupus Familiaris.
All this new research says is that the modern wolf and the domestic dog at best still cousins on the same family tree.
I think my Mastador came from the Clown Star!
It is not written all that well.
It’s states:
“Researchers from the University of Chicago said that dogs are more closely related to each other than to wolves, regardless of geographic origin as they do not descend from a single line of wolves.”
The key being the comparison with regard to geographic area.
You asked, “Doesn’t it follow that domestic dogs would be more-closely related to each other than to wolves, since (as this article posits) domestic dogs and wolves are two branches which split off from a common ancestor some time in the past?”
Yes, you are right. But what the geographic analysis does is confirm that the dogs did not come from wolves directly because if so, they would have come from a certain line of wolves in a certain geographic region.
So, dogs would be closer to dogs than to wolves, but there would be more similarity to certain wolves of certain geographic areas than to wolves in other areas if dogs had come from wolves.
But these geographic based differences aren’t seen.
I always have an issue with the date. Was it exactly 34,000 years, not a year before or after? And how was the date arrived at? And lastly but not exclusively, has anyone done the math on canine reproductive rates? We would be overun with canines by now, as well as everything else on earth.
Steely Dan from “Reeling In The Years:”
The weekend at the college
Didn’t turn out like you planned
The things that pass for knowledge
I can’t understand
I can, the college is not after truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.