by cantleave 227 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
DD, if you want to see diverse, check out an island population (Darwin's Finches). Starting from sometimes only a few species, the niches will be filled.
I'm suggesting that the canine is not special in this regard. It has more to do with where the animal is living, threats and opportunities.
Evolution is the change in the genomes of a population over time. The mutations are random, the differential survival of those mutations is not random.
IT is important to understand that random means soemthing different in science as opposed to how we use it.
I don't think that's what has happened in this case - DD
Of course not, the domestic dog only goes back about 10 000 years - that's yesterday.
Come back in another 500 000 years and maybe the wolf and the dog will have diverged enough to impress you.
The OP was about the discovery of the precise location and nucleotide sequence of the genes that enabled some wolves to benefit from scavenging around humans.
Its amazing science that adds another small piece of evidence.
I'll keep my mouth shut then... - tornapart
Why don't you start studying the evidence? Then you will understand why there is no room for personal opinions about the fact of evolution.
The Common Ancestry thread would be a good place to start, we put it together for this very reason and there is more to come.
random means something different in science as opposed to how we use it - PSac
How do you mean?
Marmot
Nice marmot.
Of course not, the domestic dog only goes back about 10 000 years - that's yesterday.
I've read somewhere that domestication goes back farther than that. mtDNA evidence implies as much as 15,000 years, but that does not mean canids weren't already associating with human populations for far longer. It just means that that was when divergence occurred. Divergence seems to have taken place at about the same time as when humans became agriculturalists and sedentary.
Regarding so called village dogs, there is research going on into that--and these free ranging feral type dogs look remarkably similar--regardless of geography.
those marmots are obviously gearing up for paradise.
those marmots are obviously gearing up for paradise.
Maybe that's what lions looked like in the Garden of Eden. :-)
Anyway, evidence about how far back the man/dog relationship might go:
31,700 BP according to this source:
Using multivariate techniques, several skulls of fossil large canids from sites in Belgium, Ukraine and Russia were examined to look for possible evidence of the presence of Palaeolithic dogs. Reference groups constituted of prehistoric dogs, and recent wolves and dogs. The fossil large canid from Goyet (Belgium), dated at c. 31,700 BP is clearly different from the recent wolves, resembling most closely the prehistoric dogs. Thus it is identified as a Palaeolithic dog, suggesting that dog domestication had already started during the Aurignacian. The Epigravettian Mezin 5490 (Ukraine) and Mezhirich (Ukraine) skulls are also identified as being Palaeolithic dogs. Selected Belgian specimens were analyzed for mtDNA and stable isotopes. All fossil samples yielded unique DNA sequences, indicating that the ancient Belgian large canids carried a substantial amount of genetic diversity. Furthermore, there is little evidence for phylogeographic structure in the Pleistocene large canids, as they do not form a homogenous genetic group. Although considerable variation occurs in the fossil canid isotope signatures between sites, the Belgian fossil large canids preyed in general on horse and large bovids.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440308002380
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27240370/#.UQbfor_LSSo
33,000 BP here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14390679
mtDNA evidence points to up to 15k years before present---but mtDNA can only point to divergence evident in the genetic material of current populations. It is very possible that domestication happened more than once and in more than one geographic location.
village dogs - yeah - skinny.
Here's a Pariah Dog (India)
Compared to a Canaan dog (Levant)
The Carolina Dog:
Famous Greek "riot dog" (an adopted street dog) Loukanikos conforms to the type:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-ranging_dog
Pariah dogs are canids that have kept close to the original form and have evolved with little or no purposeful human intervention. Pariahs in all countries have a very similar, typical morphology known as the "long-term pariah morphotype". [5] This primal body design resembles the ancient breeds from from which most other dog forms are derived. Typically, these canids have a wolf or fox-like appearance with wedge-shaped head and a pointed muzzle, almond eyes, erect ears, and a long, curved tail. Unlike modern breeds, pariah dogs have one annual estrus cycle.
jgnat
I don't think there is much to argue about in that article. Finches became finches the same way dogs become dogs, bears become bears.
cofty
The OP was about the discovery of the precise location and nucleotide sequence of the genes that enabled some wolves to benefit from scavenging around humans.
The problem is you need to show the time when N0 wolves had that gene sequence.
Come back in another 500 000 years and maybe the wolf and the dog will have diverged enough to impress you.
I don't think I can hold my breath that long.
After seeing firsthand how differently Bloodhounds perform (at their jobs) compared to other breeds I'm very impressed, but I'd hardly use them as examples of evolution. Personally I think there is probably in more difference between a bloodhound and a wolf genetically speaking ( I'd love to see someone do the science) than what is being discussed in the article in question.
