Where do dogs really come from?

[lindagarrette]

Hartzburgite's first post was close if not right on. Dogs came from wolves. During the last Ice Age, wolves began to live closely with people. They may have been following hunting parties or scavenging for food near campsites. People adopted these tame wolves, and they became the ancestors of all domestic dogs. (From the San Diago Natural History Museum.)

 

Cats are older than dogs but dogs and cats come from the same ancestor http://www.sdnhm.org/fieldguide/fossils/miacids.html

 

Lions and tigers are sepearate species They can interbreed: ligers, tigons but the offspring cannot reproduce..

[Zohaar818]

Hartzburgite's first post was close if not right on. Dogs came from wolves. During the last Ice Age, wolves began to live closely with people. They may have been following hunting parties or scavenging for food near campsites. People adopted these tame wolves, and they became the ancestors of all domestic dogs. (From the San Diago Natural History Museum.)

 

Cats are older than dogs but dogs and cats come from the same ancestor http://www.sdnhm.org/fieldguide/fossils/miacids.html

 

Lions and tigers are sepearate species They can interbreed: ligers, tigons but the offspring cannot reproduce..

 

There is a theory to suit evryone's tastes..and alll theories have their merits on paper..thing is real life isn't so cut and dry.and if you'd think about it for a minute you'd see the huge gaping holes that your theory must inevitably leave wide open..

It totally discounts wolf behaviour, particularly mating behaviour, and wolf instinct as observed over time. The idea that free-roaming wolves were seduced by the scraps and the campfires and decided on their own to stay in human company..who could be trusted around the kids... is all by itself assuming a lot and ignoring evrything written about wolves and people who tried to domesticate them..

 

"Gray wolves can be distinguished from red wolves (Canis rufus) by their larger size, broader snout, and shorter ears. They are distinguished from coyotes (Canis latrans) by being 50 to 100% larger and having a broader snout and larger feet.

 

"Reproduction

Breeding interval

Gray wolves breed once each year.

Breeding season

Gray wolves breed between January and March, depending on where they are living.

Number of offspring

5 to 14; avg. 7

Gestation period

63 days (high)

Time to weaning

45 days (average)

Age at sexual or reproductive maturity (female)

2 to 3 years

Age at sexual or reproductive maturity (male)

2 to 3 years

 

The dominant pair in a grey wolf pack are the only members that breed. This pair is monogamous although, with the death of an alpha individual, a new alpha male or female will emerge and take over as the mate.

 

Mating systems:

monogamous ; cooperative breeder .

 

Breeding occurs between the months of January and April, with northern populations breeding later in the season than southern populations. Female gray wolves choose their mates and often form a life-long pair bond. Gray wolf pairs spend a great deal of time together. Female gray wolves come into estrus once each year and lasts 5 to 14 days, mating occurs during this time. After mating occurs, the female digs a den in which to raise her young. The den is often dug with an entrance that slopes down and then up again to a higher area to avoid flooding. Pups are born in the den and will remain there for several weeks after birth. Other dens are under cliffs, under fallen trees, and in caves.

 

"Wolf pups develop rapidly, they must be large and accomplished enough to hunt with the pack with the onset of winter. At approximately ten months old, the young begin to hunt with the pack.

" Gray wolves are highly social, pack-living animals. Each pack comprises two to thirty-six individuals, depending upon habitat and abundance of prey. Most packs are made up of 5 to 9 individuals. Packs are typically composed of an alpha pair and their offspring, including young of previous years. Unrelated immigrants may also become members of packs.

 

There is a strong dominance hierarchy within each pack. The pack leader, usually the alpha male, is dominant over all other individuals. The next dominant individual is the alpha female, who is subordinate only to the alpha male. In the event that the alpha male becomes injured or is otherwise unable to maintain his dominance, the beta male will take his place in the hierarchy. Alpha males typically leave the pack if this occurs, but this is not always the case. Rank within the pack hierarchy determines which animals mate and which eat first. Rank is demonstrated by postural cues and facial expressions, such as crouching, chin touching, and rolling over to show the stomach.

 

Each year, gray wolf packs have a stationary and nomadic phase. Stationary phases occur during the spring and summer, while pups are being reared. Nomadic phases occur during the fall and winter. Wolf movements are usually at night and cover long distances. Daily distance traveled can be up to 200 kilometers.

 

"Few animals prey on gray wolves. Wolves and coyotes are highly territorial animals so wolves from other packs and coyotes will attack wolves that are alone or young. They will kill pups if they find them.

 

"Many people think they can train wolves in the same manner that they train dogs. They cannot. Even if well cared for, wolves do not act as dogs do. Wolves howl. They chew through almost anything, including tables, couches, walls and fences. They excavate 10-foot pits in your back yard. They mark everything with urine and cannot be housetrained.

 

"High content hybrids are not good watchdogs, due to the wolf's timid nature. Do not expect a high content hybrid to protect you or your property. High contents and pure wolves don't bark much (usually one warning bark, as opposed to the dog's repetitive bark), so they don't make good "alarms", either.

"Mouthing - mouthing and nipping are natural behaviors which must be modified at an early age. Teaching an adult 120 lb. hybrid not to bite is no fun, not to mention dangerous.

"Obedience - wolves are extremely intelligent. They do, however, have their own reasons for doing things, and do not have the inbred desire to please humans that dogs do. Obedience training (especially with higher contents) is likely to take more time and effort and produce less reliable results than with a dog, although it can be done. Getting a high content hybrid to come when called is a major undertaking; most can not be let off leash in a public area because of this (combined with the fact that children or small animals may trigger the prey instinct at any time). ...Another extremely important thing is that you establish yourself as alpha early on. It is natural for wolves to challenge the alpha for place in the pack order. You must be prepared to deal with these types of behaviors correctly. *Never, ever hit a wolf or hybrid.* Seek help from a professional trainer experienced with hybrids.

 

"Although wolves and dogs share the same basic behaviour set and communication methods, wolves take everything seriously and further than dogs do. No matter how well socialised they become to humans, wolves are still wild animals, they do not have any of the built in, domesticated, mental checks and safety latches that dogs have. Wolves have a strong inquisitive instinct and will dismantle anything to get at something that interests them - and you can't stop them (if you want to live!). Wolves also have more intense prey behaviour which involves chasing and killing small animals much more readily than most dogs do. 'Small animals' for a pet wolf (not a wild one) includes pets and small children and if these release the wolf's prey behaviour then they will be pursued irrespective of whether the wolf 'knows' or 'loves' the animal or child involved. Another difficulty is the wolves' hierarchical instinct. They are much more intense about it than dogs and are quite willing to escalate to a full fight in response to what they may perceive as a threat to their status - and you can threaten their status easily and unknowingly if you don't fully understand canine behaviour. There are also a number of other major nuisance behaviours which are inevitable and which you must either avoid or distract. Producing the wrong response to them even once can mean the end of the relationship."

http://www.anglianwolf.com/d_front_page/d_ar_article/d_wd_wolfdogs/Wolfdogs.htm

 

 

A recent Chicago Tribune article reported on studies on dogs and their evolution. It appears that dogs were first bred in China about 15,000 years ago. Testing has been done on ancient dogs dug out of the permafrost along with behavioral tests on modern dogs. When you look at the fact that humans have bred dogs into the most widely diverse species of mammals on the planet in a very short period of time compared to natural evolution. With DNA from hundreds of dogs worldwide, it looks like there were just a few original groups of wolves in East Asia that gave rise to all of today’s dogs. In another study (at Harvard) dogs are found to do better than chimps in some simple cognitive tests. Chimps are the ones most often thought to be most similar to humans. In a third study DNA was taken from North American fossil dogs including 11 from the permafrost in Alaska. There were also some from Mexico and Peru. They are all dated to before European explorers arrived. This DNA showed that the early arrivals brought their dogs from Asia rather than domesticating wolves found in the new country....

...Now that the human genome is known maybe they will work on the dog genome soon. There may be more we can learn about evolution from these animals than was thought before.

 

To be fair to you I know there are an awful lot of scientists who support your position and write with an absolute certainty, it seems until you realize that a lot of it is assumption, or a best guess.

http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm

What this site does say however is that whatever wolf-to-dog domestication took place took place no more than 12,000 years ago, or about the dawn of recorded history.

it also ignores the fact that domesticated dogs were not domesticated across the planet, which you would think would be the case if it was such a 'human thing'to do..domesticate wild breeds from local stock. There were no shortage of wolves in the northern hemisphere, and we have records of human habitation from Siberia to Canada to what is now Norway and yet dogs did not make an apearance anyplace except central asia..and these dogs were supposedly then brought along to all parts of the earth, including N.America by asian explorers.

of course that theory falls by the wayside if you factor in the evidence cited in the link below:

http://www.cabrillo.edu/~crsmith/anth7_hist1.html

 

I know it may seem unrelated to wolf-dog theory but it isn't..if humans were living in N.America before the land bridge opened up from Siberia to Alaska..for thousands and thousands of years..in a land replete with wolves and coyotes...humans who were hunters but lived in relatively settled circimstances, like the mound peoples and log hut peoples...why were the wolves not domesticated into dogs?

Wolf-dog theory ASSUMES that it was a natural consequence of having common needs and common enemies and being able to share and combine mutual strengths [tracking, guarding, understanding of body language and facial expression...] why don't we find examples of it anyplace other than central asia..or at any time before 12,000 years ago?

 

Did it require a certain kind of wolf breed only found in central asia, or did it require a special kind of human, who then , instead of teaching the trick to others humans, forgot the trick and kept the dogs which they took on their emigrations

Or did it require a certain technology, a technology only found in central asia, 12,000 years ago?

http://www.crystalinks.com/lolladoffplate.jpg

12,000 year old stone dish found in Nepal clearly shows a disk shaped UFO and a figure resembling a Grey alien.

 

I find it coincidental and curious...and i still don't know where dogs came from.

That they share wolf DNA i cannot argue. That it got there by way of the standard textbook theories suggested so confidently, I cannot accept.

 

 

Sorry, but thank you anyway for the reply..it is appreciated.

-Zohaar

[Boerseun]

There is a theory to suit evryone's tastes..and alll theories have their merits on paper..thing is real life isn't so cut and dry.and if you'd think about it for a minute you'd see the huge gaping holes that your theory must inevitably leave wide open..

...exactly. Why would this statement not be applicable in your case? You seem hell-bent on battling the dog-from-wolf crowd, without giving a firm foundation to your own view.

 

It totally discounts wolf behaviour, particularly mating behaviour, and wolf instinct as observed over time. The idea that free-roaming wolves were seduced by the scraps and the campfires and decided on their own to stay in human company..who could be trusted around the kids... is all by itself assuming a lot and ignoring evrything written about wolves and people who tried to domesticate them..

 

"Gray wolves can be distinguished from red wolves (Canis rufus) by their larger size, broader snout, and shorter ears. They are distinguished from coyotes (Canis latrans) by being 50 to 100% larger and having a broader snout and larger feet.

 

"Reproduction

Breeding interval

Gray wolves breed once each year.

Breeding season

Gray wolves breed between January and March, depending on where they are living.

Number of offspring

5 to 14; avg. 7

Gestation period

63 days (high)

Time to weaning

45 days (average)

Age at sexual or reproductive maturity (female)

2 to 3 years

Age at sexual or reproductive maturity (male)

2 to 3 years

 

Sounds very much like a dog to me. I fail to see the point of describing the similarities between dogs and wolves to disprove domestic dog's family ties to wolves.

 

"Many people think they can train wolves in the same manner that they train dogs. They cannot. Even if well cared for, wolves do not act as dogs do. Wolves howl. They chew through almost anything, including tables, couches, walls and fences. They excavate 10-foot pits in your back yard. They mark everything with urine and cannot be housetrained.

 

Sounds like my dog... he even howls at the full moon. I wonder if it's because of a small bit of ancient wolf still left in him that the breeders couldn't get rid of?

 

"High content hybrids are not good watchdogs, due to the wolf's timid nature. Do not expect a high content hybrid to protect you or your property. High contents and pure wolves don't bark much (usually one warning bark, as opposed to the dog's repetitive bark), so they don't make good "alarms", either.

"Mouthing - mouthing and nipping are natural behaviors which must be modified at an early age. Teaching an adult 120 lb. hybrid not to bite is no fun, not to mention dangerous.

"Obedience - wolves are extremely intelligent. They do, however, have their own reasons for doing things, and do not have the inbred desire to please humans that dogs do. Obedience training (especially with higher contents) is likely to take more time and effort and produce less reliable results than with a dog, although it can be done. Getting a high content hybrid to come when called is a major undertaking; most can not be let off leash in a public area because of this (combined with the fact that children or small animals may trigger the prey instinct at any time). ...Another extremely important thing is that you establish yourself as alpha early on. It is natural for wolves to challenge the alpha for place in the pack order. You must be prepared to deal with these types of behaviors correctly. *Never, ever hit a wolf or hybrid.* Seek help from a professional trainer experienced with hybrids.

 

Nobody said it was easy to build a poodle from scratch. Matter of fact, it took Mankind thousands of years to get rid of abovementioned traits in dogs. And, every now and then, a dog regresses to his wolf-state and loses his mind and kills the person who raised, fed and loved him for years. You read about it in the newspaper often enough.

 

Once again, I fail to see how you are going to manage to discount the dog-from-wolf theory by pointing to the similarities between them.

 

To be fair to you I know there are an awful lot of scientists who support your position and write with an absolute certainty, it seems until you realize that a lot of it is assumption, or a best guess.

 

Pretty sure of yourself, heh? Again - why would this kind of statement not be applicable to your view?

 

I know it may seem unrelated to wolf-dog theory but it isn't..if humans were living in N.America before the land bridge opened up from Siberia to Alaska..for thousands and thousands of years..in a land replete with wolves and coyotes...humans who were hunters but lived in relatively settled circimstances, like the mound peoples and log hut peoples...why were the wolves not domesticated into dogs?

 

I don't know. And I'm sure nobody else knows, either. The fact is, it might take a certain set of circumstances that we can postulate and argue about, it could be that that specific set of circumstances never repeated itself again, or if it did, the ancient people didn't recognise the opportunity.

 

We'll never know.

 

But it still doesn't change the fact that dogs descended from wolves. All the DNA-evidence points in that direction.

 

 

Wolf-dog theory ASSUMES that it was a natural consequence of having common needs and common enemies and being able to share and combine mutual strengths [tracking, guarding, understanding of body language and facial expression...] why don't we find examples of it anyplace other than central asia..or at any time before 12,000 years ago?

 

I don't know. And I'm sure nobody else knows, either. The fact is, it might take a certain set of circumstances that we can postulate and argue about, it could be that that specific set of circumstances never repeated itself again, or if it did, the ancient people didn't recognise the opportunity.

 

We'll never know.

 

But it still doesn't change the fact that dogs descended from wolves. All the DNA-evidence points in that direction.

 

Did it require a certain kind of wolf breed only found in central asia, or did it require a special kind of human, who then , instead of teaching the trick to others humans, forgot the trick and kept the dogs which they took on their emigrations

Or did it require a certain technology, a technology only found in central asia, 12,000 years ago?

http://www.crystalinks.com/lolladoffplate.jpg

12,000 year old stone dish found in Nepal clearly shows a disk shaped UFO and a figure resembling a Grey alien.

 

Dogs descended from wolves. They were helped along by humans who found it to their benefit. They were not helped by aliens. As a matter of fact - have you ever seen an alien, let alone a Grey alien? The only aliens you've ever seen is what's being dished up in the popular media. The fact that the image on the Nepalese stone dish resembles an alien, is purely coincidental and nothing else.

 

I find it coincidental and curious...and i still don't know where dogs came from.

 

They come from wolves. Period.

 

That they share wolf DNA i cannot argue. That it got there by way of the standard textbook theories suggested so confidently, I cannot accept.

 

Seeing as you agree they share DNA, I fail to see your problem. How it got there was through the developing science of animal husbandry over thousands of years. I don't care if you don't accept the results of millions of man-hours worth of studies of years at the most prestigious research facilities in the world, however *confidently* it might be presented. If you don't agree, come with an alternative which don't include aliens. ;)

[C1ay]

Heidi G. Parker, Lisa V. Kim, Nathan B. Sutter,

Scott Carlson, Travis D. Lorentzen, Tiffany B. Malek,

Gary S. Johnson, Hawkins B. DeFrance,

Elaine A. Ostrander, Leonid Kruglyak

 

Mitochondrial DNA analyses have been used to elucidate the relationship between the domestic dog and the wolf (4–6), but the evolution of mitochondrial DNA is too slow to allow inferences about relationships among modern dog breeds, most of which have existed for fewer than 400 years.

 

More.....

Can you disprove such analyses Zohaar? A simple yes or no will be sufficient.

[Zohaar818]

Can you disprove such analyses Zohaar? A simple yes or no will be sufficient.

 

I'm not sure what their analyses prove... so the honest answer to your question must be "no".

 

Having said that..I did read on several sites that all dogs can be traced back to three wolf mothers or clans, all in central or eastern asia and contemporaneous to each other..somewhere between 12, and 15,000 years ago...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2498669.stm

By Christine McGourty

BBC science correspondent

 

"Dogs today come in all shapes and sizes, but scientists believe they evolved from just a handful of wolves tamed by humans living in or near China less than 15,000 years ago.

 

It looks as if 95% of current dogs come from just three original founding females

 

 

Three research teams have attempted to solve some long-standing puzzles in the evolution and social history of dogs.

 

Their findings, reported in the journal Science, point to the existence of probably three founding females - the so-called "Eves" of the dog world.

 

They conclude that intensive breeding by humans over the last 500 years - not different genetic origins - is responsible for the dramatic differences in appearance among modern dogs.

 

One team studied Old World dogs to try to pin down their origins, previously thought to be in the Middle East.

The other team studied dogs of the New World and found they are not New World dogs at all, but also have their origins in East Asia. "

 

And then there's this:http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm

which I think answers all your mitochondrail questions..

 

"In this week's issue of Science, three research teams chase down some of the age-old issues surrounding the evolution of dogs. Using genetic studies, one offers new evidence about where dogs were first domesticated; another employs DNA comparisons to show that New World pooches aren' t from the New World at all; and the third evaluates the ability of dogs to follow human cues.Some researchers think the results of these efforts clear up some key questions about dog evolution. "I'm very excited to read these articles," says John Olsen, an archaeologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson. But others are skeptical. "I am not sure I believe them," says Raymond Coppinger, a behavioral ecologist at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts, about the trio of reports....

 

"Dog researchers, whatever their pet theory, know they're in for a fight. "Everything that anyone publishes about the origin of the dog is controversial," explains Brisbin. "That's because everyone, even the man on the street, feels he is an expert on the dog."Most enthusiasts agree with the standard story that dogs evolved from wolves. But a few insist that dogs stemmed, for example, from one of several jackal species, some hybrid canid, or even a contemporary of ancient wolves that has since gone extinct. Others have suggested that dog domestication took place more than once with more than one species, which might explain the great diversity seen in dog breeds.

The researchers assessed differences in a section of the mitochondrial genomes of 140 dogs of different breeds from around the world: 162 wolves, five coyotes, and 12 jackals. "We showed very clearly that the dog is very close to the wolf and comes from several lineages of wolves," says team member Peter Savolainen, a molecular biologist at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden. Not everyone was convinced, but the work did tip the scales in favor of the wolf.

 

However, based on the number of differences between the sequences of wolves and dogs, the researchers estimated that dogs arose some 135,000 years ago--a conclusion that has quite a few colleagues growling. The date couldn't be right, opponents argue, given that the earliest accepted dog fossils date from just 14,000 years ago. They also suggest that very early humans were probably not sophisticated enough to keep wolves from interbreeding with dogs, a prerequisite for domestication.

 

While canine researchers were still debating Wayne and Vilà' s 1997 results, Savolainen decided to pinpoint where domestication first occurred and perhaps take a second look at the earlier results. For this work, he studied mitochondrial DNA from 426 dogs from across the globe. In addition, he obtained data from studies of Chinese dogs: 100 samples analyzed and provided by Ya-Ping Zhang and Jing Luo of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Kunming. The researchers also gathered DNA from 38 wolves from Europe and Asia.

As the previous study had found, most of the dogs and wolves fell into a single large genetically related group, and other dogs and wolves sorted into two medium-sized groups and several smaller ones. The three larger groups were distributed throughout Eurasia, suggesting that their ancestors had traveled extensively and mingled early in canine history. Furthermore, the data showed that similar breeds didn' t arise from the same groups. Mastiffs and other large breeds didn' t all fit, as one might have thought, into a single group that contained DNA from particularly large wolves.

Despite the different groups, the DNA samples were all similar enough that "we can say now there was probably one geographic origin," Savolainen concludes. That place was East Asia, he and his colleagues report on page 1610. The data aren't precise enough to identify a specific country, but "a good guess would be China," Savolainen says.

 

Several lines of evidence led Savolainen to East Asia. For one, he took a close count of the number of differences between the DNA of each group. As expected, he found that these differences had accumulated over time and had divided each group into subgroups. When he factored in the number of dogs in each group, he calculated that the East Asia pool had the most variety. "The high frequency of diversity in the East versus the West makes the [evidence] overwhelming," comments Brisbin. Furthermore, a large number of genetic sequences were found nowhere else but East Asia, suggesting that this population is ancient enough to have accumulated unique genetic signatures.

 

With these data, Savolainen and his colleagues also took a fresh look at the date-of-domestication question. Their estimate is 110,000 years later than that of Wayne and Vilà. But "we can't say for sure that one or the other is the right date," Savolainen points out, as even he can calculate a much earlier date depending on how he processes his data.

 

Early dogs quickly became world travelers, new evidence suggests. When the first humans walked across the Bering Strait 10,000 to 15, 000 years ago, dogs were by their sides, claims Leonard, who did this work at UCLA with Wayne, collaborating as well with Vilà, who is now at Uppsala University in Sweden. Until now, many people thought that dogs in the Americas were domesticated from New World gray wolves, but mitochondrial DNA studies tell a different story.

 

They decided to examine the origin of New World dogs because early genetic studies of supposed New World breeds showed rich European bloodlines. "It looked like the only way to address this was to look at archaeological specimens," she explains.

 

With the help of local researchers, the team studied 37 dog bones found at pre-Columbian archaeological sites in Mexico, Peru, and Bolivia. They extracted DNA from those samples and also looked at 11 DNA samples from dog remains deposited in Alaska before the arrival of the first European settlers. They compared these samples to DNA from 140 dogs and 259 wolves from around the world.

 

The ancient DNA was just like modern Eurasian dog DNA, the team found. New World dogs fell into the same branch of the canine family tree as three-quarters of the Old World dogs, a branch that includes so- called primitive dogs such as the Australian dingo, the African basenji, and the New Guinea singing dog. The American gray wolf proved to be just a distant cousin. It appears that "dogs accompanied humans into the New World," says David Hillis, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Texas, Austin. Moreover, the data suggest that five lineages of dogs came over the Bering Strait and became the predecessors of the Americas' dogs....

"Finally, the results show that a second wave of fresh blood flooded into the New World canine community with the arrival of colonists millennia later. Even the Mexican hairless, Alaskan huskies, and the Newfoundland and Chesapeake Bay retrievers--all considered to be breeds that were developed in the Americas--have DNA sequences that are indistinguishable from those of modern European dogs, Leonard and colleagues report...."

http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm

 

 

As far as having descend from Tomarctus, a common ancestor as one respondent posted:

go here for a really amazing explanation..

http://www.searchingwolf.com/wevolve.htm

 

There you will read..:" Early Miocene - Middle Miocene Era: Although Canis-like, based on skull and teeth features, the Tomarctus line doesn't appear to lead to the modern dogs, the canines." But then on the same site it says that all dogs most definitely originated in N. America [!!!]

 

"Late Miocene Era: The third canid radiation begins. This is the canine radiation based on the small fox Leptocyon. The decline of the borophagines possibly opens the way for this radiation which begins in North America with the appearance of three genera: Canis, Urocyon, and Vulpes. (2)(10)

It is from the canine radiation that all living dogs are derived. That radiation began in the southwest United States, the birthplace of modern dogs.

 

The success of the canines is the dvelopment of lower carnassials that are capable of both mastication and shearing. (10)

 

8 Late Miocene Era: Canines spread to Eurasia. Dogs, much like the small coyote Canis davisii cross Beringia and enter Eurasia. The migration results in the major portion of the canine radiation which probably occurs in Asia with the appearance of wolves, jackals, hunting dogs, foxes, and raccoon dogs. (2)(10) "

 

Ummm..yeah...so how does that square with the rather scholarly treatise I quoted from found on : http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm

 

So there you have it dogs came from wolves 'domesticated' in China, the Urals or N.America..are or aren't direct descendants of wolves, are either 140,000 years old or less than 15,000..so many scientists all so convinced and all at odds with each other..

The only two choices left....are 'intelligent design/crerationist..or bio-engineered with the help of off-planet technology.

You decide.

 

Now I have a question for you...

 

Why is Sirius called the Dog Star and not Procyon?

 

One of the common answers is that it is because it is found in the constellation Canis major. Since the contellation looks nothing like a dog, and since only one other star in the constellat on has a dog name, one wonders why call Sirius a dog star?

And why is it t hat only star-god cultures, all of whom point to that same constellation [and orion] call it a dog star? [Think Osiris..the dog-faced Egyptian God]...

 

But anyway..here''s the most scintific of all the offered explanations..

 

"According to my copy of Burnham's Celestial Handbook, volume 1, 1978 published by Dover Books, Sirius has been translated as 'The Sparkling One', 'The Scorching One', and is also called Sothis, the 'Star of Isis' by the Ancient Egyptians, among a very large list of names including the Dog Star ( Alpha Canes Majoris).

 

Procyon (Alpha Canes Minoris) also has a long list of names including Antecanis, 'Before the Dog' and the 'Little Dog Star'. Procyon rises before Sirius which is why it gets names like 'Before the Dog'. So, Sirius has a long list of names that highlight many facets to its identity including the fact that it is THE Dog Star. Procyon's claim to fame is that it rises just before Sirius so that's probably why it's name explicitly includes reference to its doggy nature! "

http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q87.html

 

Hmmmmm...

 

But here is the link I like best..

http://www.souledout.org/cosmology/sirius/siriusgodstar.html

[OAE]

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/Ancient_Civilisations_Six_Great_Enigmas.html

 

May sound like a strange name for a thread but I assure you it's a serious question and one that should occupy the minds of Creationsist and Evolutionists alike...[check the link.and see what you think..].

The enigma of the dog is on the list of the world's 6 great enigmas, [among many] which still beg proper answers...

 

"The Origin Of Dogs – [biogenetic engineering ?]

 

Now we turn to a mystery that nearly equals the pyramid, though it is a little known conundrum hidden in the mists of remote antiquity. Let us start with a simple question that appears to have an obvious answer: what is a dog? It turns out geneticists in the past decade have shown the answer is not so obvious. In fact, generations of anthropologists, archaeologists and wildlife biologists turned out to be dead wrong when it came to the origins of “man’s best friend”.

 

Prior to DNA studies conducted in the 1990s, the generally accepted theory posited that dogs branched off from a variety of wild canids, i.e., coyotes, hyenas, jackals, wolves and so on, about 15,000 years ago. The results of the first comprehensive DNA study shocked the scholarly community. The study found that all dog breeds can be traced back to wolves and not other canids. The second part of the finding was even more unexpected – the branching off occurred from 40-150,000 years ago.

 

Why do these findings pose a problem? We have to answer that question with another question: how were dogs bred from wolves? This is not just difficult to explain, it is impossible. Do not be fooled by the pseudo-explanations put forth by science writers that state our Stone Age ancestors befriended wolves and somehow (the procedure is never articulated) managed to breed the first mutant wolf, the mother of all dogs. Sorry, we like dogs too, but that is what a dog is.

 

The problems come at the crucial stage of taking a male and female wolf and getting them to produce a subspecies (assuming you could tame and interact with them at all). Let us take this one step further by returning to our original question, what is a dog? A dog is a mutated wolf that only has those characteristics of the wild parent, which humans find companionable and useful. That is an amazing fact.

 

Think about those statements for a moment. If you are thinking that dogs evolved naturally from wolves, that is not an option. No scientist believes that because the stringent wolf pecking order and breeding rituals would never allow a mutant to survive, at least that is one strong argument against natural evolution.

 

Now, if our Paleolithic ancestors could have pulled off this feat, and the actual challenges posed by the process are far more taxing, then wolf/dog breeders today certainly should have no problem duplicating it. But like the Great Pyramid, that does not seem to be the case. No breeders have stepped up to the plate claiming they can take two pure wolves and produce a dog sans biogenetic engineering techniques.

 

The evolution of the domesticated dog from a wild pack animal appears to be a miracle! It should not have happened. This is another unexplained enigma. "

 

-Zohaar

I am new to this forum 

 

So I will jump in and start with a reply to some thoughts that are intriguing to me.

 

“Why do these findings pose a problem? We have to answer that question with another question:

( how were dogs bred from wolves? This is not just difficult to explain, it is impossible.)"

 

Impossible No; A thing or process must start someplace or in some manner!

The dog being a mutant wolf! In this context, ( the breeding of the precursor to the domesticated dog) not mutant, in the normal use of the thought process for today’s dog, of to mutate the animal as the contemporary human has done and are now doing, with the product of the domesticated canine. The dog; its size, shape, and specific breeding, for single tasking. (I.e. retriever, pointer, and so on)

 

"Do not be fooled by the pseudo-explanations put forth by science writers that state our Stone Age ancestors befriended wolves and somehow (the procedure is never articulated) managed to breed the first mutant wolf, the mother of all dogs. Sorry, we like dogs too, but that is what a dog is."

 

You may have used a misguided or unintended terminology in the thought of *befriended*.

One will not befriend a wolf from the wild or a dog of the highest temperament level.

The human interacting with an adult wolf from the wild, is interacting at the pack level, they fit into and have the knowledge and temperament for.

The domesticated dog, at its highest temperament level is an aberration, which is all too often equated with the wolf; this aberration is not the case in the normal active wolf pack.

 

Canine Temperament scale

10 – Un-trainable: Alpha (Offensively Aggressive)

This is the alpha dog. This dog will die before submitting to anyone.

The best you could hope for with this dog is a stand-off with a human handler who also has an alpha attitude. This dog will bite its own handler, is not social and, therefore, makes a good area protection dog only. Handle with extreme care! Not recommended.

 

With the wolf, as with the dog, the human must have the knowledge to judge temperament of the animal and react to it, as their tool for interaction.

 

 

"The problems come at the crucial stage of taking a male and female wolf and getting them to produce a subspecies (assuming you could tame and interact with them at all). Let us take this one step further by returning to our original question, what is a dog? A dog is a mutated wolf that only has those characteristics of the wild parent, which humans find companionable and useful. That is an amazing fact.

”

To cohabit with the wolf, is not as difficult as some would have you believe, knowledge of the animal is the key. The difficulty is with the human, not the animal. You interact with the animal on its terms. Terms that the wolf understands and is comfortable with,

this has been and is being done by persons willing to work in this manner.

 

 

To produce a subspecies, change or mutate, whatever terminology is used, is and has been done, time and time again with the canine.

Please keep foremost in mind the wolf is hardwired for pack life. By correct and knowledgeable use of the packing behaviors and a breeding process, culling of temperaments that are too high to socialize with the human as Alpha. Socialization of the offspring using knowledge of the cub’s temperament and what is necessary for the surviving cub’s to interact with the human. The next step, the domesticated animal, contemporized mutation is not far off.

Let us look at our Stone Age ancestors, humans that at this time in our history were in the extreme, much more attuned to the animals with which they shared their environment.

To live at the extremely primitive level, is a thing that must be experienced. The thought process of the present day human, must take a 180 from the norm. I am not discounting formal study of the wolf contained in an enclosure. Nor am I discounting the study of or interacting with, what are termed the primitive breeds.

There is a pronounced difference in studying an animal and the use of and depending on them for your life.

 

When the Seal (dog food) runs low and you are killing dogs to feed the teem. Your relationship with the dogs takes on an entirely different dimension .You look at things for survival, at the animals, as food and tools. As the teem or pack gets hungry, they start to look at you in a different manner also!!

To observe an animal (the Wolf) that operates with such efficiency, yet with the same manner of living as we, (the family unit or pack) will not have escaped the thinking Stone Age observer! (This observer so far as can be time lined 13,000 years ago on the North American continent.)

It is not a stretch of the thought process, that this observation was made and acted upon.

The process of change, if you will, between the wolf to the dog, the wolf with wild / natural, untrained / non-socialized reaction to human stimulus, the animal growing mentality into an adult, this is the change that needs accomplishment. To breed this accomplishment into an animal that is a useful tool, takes knowledge and thought. The knowledge of the animals was there, the need was there, just as a better spear point or feathers were added to the throwing spear. Need calls for doing.

 

We know that our Stone Age ancestors used the analytical thought process in day to day life.

Is it such a hard question to ask, did they observe the wolf, its pack bond and methodology of survival, so vary similar to ours, at the time and react to this opportunity. .

At this time there are third generations hand reared and socialized wolves acting and reacting with the mannerisms of the domesticated dog. This is not to say they are dogs,

but on the track to becoming a useable tool and companion to a knowledgeable human.

This is the first step in the retracing of the mutation steps; from wolf to dog. Action and reaction of the animal from the wild, to domestication!

 

OAE

[lindagarrette]

There is a theory to suit evryone's tastes..and alll theories have their merits on paper..-Zohaar

Well that's not true. Only theories that have not been disproven have merit. What's so complicated about this question, anyway? Dogs are domesticated breeds of wolves and are considered a separate species. Wolves were ancesters of dogs. Genetic mutations are inherited so there are lots of breeds of both wolves and dogs, just as there are of breeds (races) of humans. Where did humans come from? Now that's an interesting question.

[TeleMad]

Where did humans come from? Now that's an interesting question.

 

Africa.

 

Descended from a common ancestor we shared with chimps.

[Zohaar818]

Dear OAE,

 

Well thought out and well argued..but it doesn't explain the DNA...the disagreement between three camps of scientists each claiming dogs came from three different parts of the earth and spread with human migration..or that the whole process could not and did not occur prior to 15,000 years ago.

Nor does it explain why in all that 15,000 years no one has repeated the process of producing a domesticated sub-species from two wolves.

One needs a wolf and something other than a wolf to get the process started.

 

Since there are at least three distinct and competitive theories whose only common tenet is dogs came from wolves but conflict as to the time, location and 'origin' species whch set it off and the process involved I find it of little consequence that an admittedly sensationalist webiste poses the question or lists it as an enigma.

All the science so far proves nothing conclusively and it remains theory..theory theory.

 

-Zohaar

[bumab]

...dogs came from three different parts of the earth and spread with human migration..or that the whole process could not and did not occur prior to 15,000 years ago.

 

It could have happened a couple times, or just once. It's not so difficult that domestication isn't a repeatable accomplishment.

 

 

...Nor does it explain why in all that 15,000 years no one has repeated the process of producing a domesticated sub-species from two wolves.

One needs a wolf and something other than a wolf to get the process started.

 

For one- why domesticate a wolf when you've already got a nice, lovable dog? No reason to risk losing an arm...

 

For second- cabbage, broccoli, califlower, lettuce, and I believe kale all came from the same plant. Selective breeding does some amazing things.

[OAE]

I hope this may be more helpful in the understanding of my thought process of,

Where did dogs really come from!

First, let me make this as crystal clear as I can,

I in NO way indorse the breeding of the wolf by persons for none scientific reasons!!

The keeping of the wolf as a pet,

Has and is leading to the death or a horrendous life of misery for the animals.

 

1.”The problems come at the crucial stage of taking a male and female wolf and getting them to produce a subspecies (assuming you could tame and interact with them at all). Let us take this one step further by returning to our original question, what is a dog? A dog is a mutated wolf “

 

Demonstration of Interaction.

 

Welcome to our latest Newsletter from our accommodation at Combe Martin Dinosaur and Wildlife Park.

http://wolf.cinimod.co.uk/WolfPackManagement/

For those of you that don’t know us, Wolf Pack Management is a self funding voluntary organization dedicated to the conservation and preservation of captive and wild wolves. We have worked with wolves and canids all over the world, learning and researching their intricate language. Our extensive research involves the study of various sub species of wolves, coyotes, foxes and dogs. Under the guidance of the native American Indian biologists, we have had the opportunity to live and learn from the wolves themselves.

 

(There is *no* assuming as to taming and or interacting with the wolf, it has been and is being done every day! This is documented and for my part eyes and hands on, the interaction enjoyed.

The animals, hand reared and socialized. A knowledgeable human can not only interact, but also guide the breeding process. This insuring the human making the decision as to what animals breed to each other, i.e. Selective breeding leading to a domesticated animal.

 

Wolf to Dog

“For example, in becoming domesticated, animals have undergone a host of changes in morphology, physiology and behavior. What do those changes have in common?

Do they stem from a single cause, and if so, what is it? In the case of the dog, Morey identifies one common factor as pedomorphosis,the retention of juvenile traits by adults. Those traits include both morphological ones, such as skulls that are unusually broad for their length, and behavioral ones, such as whining, barking and submissiveness — all characteristics that wolves outgrow but that dogs do not. Morey considers pedomorphosis in dogs a byproduct of natural selection for earlier sexual maturity and smaller body size, features that, according to evolutionary theory, ought to increase the fitness of animals engaged in colonizing a new ecological niche.” Article by Lyudmila N. Trut, Ph.D.

 

 

“Living with humans for hundreds of generations has altered the cognitive abilities of domesticated dogs, according to new research by Harvard University anthropologist Brian Hare. He reported these findings in Seattle last week at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.” Living with humans for hundreds of generations has altered the cognitive abilities of domesticated dogs, according to new research by Harvard University anthropologist Brian Hare.

 

Humans served as a selective factor in canine evolution.

 

"Our new work provides direct evidence that dogs' lengthy contact with humans has served as a selection factor, leading to distinct evolutionary changes," says Hare, who recently completed his Ph.D. in anthropology in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. "This is the first demonstration that humans play an ongoing role in the evolution of canine cognition."

 

2. “Now, if our Paleolithic ancestors could have pulled off this feat, and the actual challenges posed by the process are far more taxing, then wolf/dog breeders today certainly should have no problem duplicating it. But like the Great Pyramid, that does not seem to be the case.”

 

 

“To test his hypothesis, Belyaev decided to turn back the clock to the point at which animals received the first challenge of domestication. By replaying the process, he would be able to see how changes in behavior, physiology and morphology first came about. Of course, reproducing the ways and means of those ancient transformations, even in the roughest outlines, would be a formidable task. To keep things as clear and simple as possible, Belyaev designed a selective-breeding program to reproduce a single major factor, a strong selection pressure for tamability. He chose as his experimental model a species taxonomically close to the dog but never before domesticated: Vulpes vulpes, the silver fox. Belyaev's fox-breeding experiment occupied the last 26 years of his life.

Today, 14 years after his death, it is still in progress. Through genetic selection alone, our research group has created a population of tame foxes fundamentally different in temperament and behavior from their wild forebears. In the process we have observed some striking changes in physiology, morphology and behavior, which mirror the changes known in other domestic animals and bear out many of Belyaev's ideas.”

 

 

3. “The evolution of the domesticated dog from a wild pack animal appears to be a miracle! It should not have happened. This is another unexplained enigma”

 

 

A miracle, no, change brought on to accommodate domestication, advanced evolution. The human using selective breeding to shorten the time factor needed to accommodate the animal to its new environment.

 

 

4. “So what you're syaing is that given enough time in human company, wolf DNA will change into dog DNA..si that it...that introducing wolves to dogs and keeping th em captive for a few generations allows them to 'evolve' into dogs.at which point we cross breed or inbreed to get diverse pedigrees?”

 

 

“Early in the process of domestication, Belyaev noted, most domestic animals had undergone the same basic morphological and physiological changes. Their bodies changed in size and proportions, leading to the appearance of dwarf and giant breeds. The normal pattern of coat color that had evolved as camouflage in the wild altered as well. Many domesticated animals are piebald, completely lacking pigmentation in specific body areas. Hair turned wavy or curly, as it has done in Astrakhan sheep, poodles, domestic donkeys, horses, pigs, goats and even laboratory mice and guinea pigs. Some animals' hair also became longer (Angora type) or shorter (rex type).

Tails changed, too. Many breeds of dogs and pigs carry their tails curled up in a circle or semicircle. Some dogs, cats and sheep have short tails resulting from a decrease in the number of tail vertebrae. Ears became floppy. As Darwin noted in chapter 1 of On the Origin of Species, "not a single domestic animal can be named which has not in some country drooping ears" — a feature not found in any wild animal except the elephant.

Another major evolutionary consequence of domestication is loss of the seasonal rhythm of reproduction. Most wild animals in middle latitudes are genetically programmed to mate once a year, during mating seasons cued by changes in daylight. Domestic animals at the same latitudes, however, now can mate and bear young more than once a year and in any season.

Belyaev believed that similarity in the patterns of these traits was the result of selection for amenability to domestication. Behavioral responses, he reasoned, are regulated by a fine balance between neurotransmitters and hormones at the level of the whole organism. The genes that control that balance occupy a high level in the hierarchical system of the genome. Even slight alterations in those regulatory genes can give rise to a wide network of changes in the developmental processes they govern. Thus, selecting animals for behavior may lead to other, far-reaching changes in the animals' development. Because mammals from widely different taxonomic groups share similar regulatory mechanisms for hormones and neurochemistry, it is reasonable to believe that selecting them for similar behavior — tameness — should alter those mechanisms, and the developmental pathways they govern, in similar ways.

For Belyaev's hypothesis to make evolutionary sense, two more things must be true. Variations in tamability must be determined at least partly by an animal's genes, and domestication must place that animal under strong selective pressure. We have looked into both questions. In the early 1960s our team studied the patterns and nature of tamability in populations of farm foxes. We cross-bred foxes of different behavior, cross-fostered newborns and even transplanted embryos between donor and host mothers known to react differently to human beings. Our studies showed that about 35 percent of the variations in the foxes' defense response to the experimenter are genetically determined. To get some idea of how powerful the selective pressures on those genes might have been, our group has domesticated other animals, including river otters (Lutra lutra) and gray rats (Rattus norvegicus) caught in the wild. Out of 50 otters caught during recent years, only eight of them (16 percent) showing weak defensive behavior made a genetic contribution to the next generation. Among the gray rats, only 14 percent of the wild-caught yielded offspring living to adulthood. If our numbers are typical, it is clear that domestication must place wild animals under extreme stress and severe selective pressure.”

 

Here I concur, the 16% and 14% are difficult numbers yes, but sufficient for breeding.

 

Here you must concur, "the Even slight alterations in those regulatory genes can give rise to a wide network of changes in the developmental processes they govern. Thus, selecting animals for behavior may lead to other, far-reaching changes in the animals' development. Because mammals from widely different taxonomic groups share similar regulatory mechanisms for hormones and neurochemistry, it is reasonable to believe that selecting them for similar behavior — tameness — should alter those mechanisms, and the developmental"

I.E. change in DNA, to pass on the changes to the next generation.

 

 

 

5. “Humans domesticated dogs is not eh same as saying humans domesticated wolves from which dogs descended..nor is it saying dogs came from wolves. If indeed dogs and wolves share a common ancestor then by that statemnent alone it should be obvious that dogs did not descend from wolves, that dogs descended from an older relative, now extinct, one less wolf-like but just as loyal and occasionally fierce, one of different physical characteristsics..one not found in the fossil record...and one from which all the current varieties of dog could eventually be traced back to....and these qualites would have been there long before humans ever got their hands on them....in other words they were 'domestic' before being domesticated.”

 

This may or may not work if the dog and the wolf were not so direct in line with each other.

Again, one of the prominent ideas or denials of domestication is the temperament of the wolf. The thought that the human can not interact or cohabit with the animal, I think it has been proven in a scientific manner with evidence of interaction, cohabitation, and selective breeding, change of body size and temperament (i.e. the experiments in cohabitation and breeding)). Also for good measure!

 

It is official! Dogs are now a variety of wolf. Until recently

zoologists classified dogs and wolves as separate species; now these

scientists have managed a taxonomic merger and proclaimed the two

animals to be the same species. The scientific name of the wolf is

Canis lupus, and the dog used to be Canis familiaris; they are now

both Canis lupus. The dog's specific race of wolf is Canis lupus

familiaris just as the arctic wolf's specific race is Canis lupus

arctos.

This change was formalized by the 1993 publication of Mammal Species

of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, edited by D.E.

Wilson and D.A.M. Reeder. Published by the Smithsonian Institution

in association with the American Society of Mammalogists, this

reference book is the final authority of the scientific community on

mammal classification.

It has long been known that dogs were domesticated from wolves, and

many scientists considered the dog a variety of wolf. Dogs and

wolves can interbreed and produce fertile offspring (the classical

definition of a species is a group of organisms capable of

reproducing within itself), and dog and wolf behavior is strikingly

similar. For a while, some zoologists thought dogs might have arisen

from jackals, but that idea has been discredited, especially by new

molecular genetic analysis. No doubt these considerations led to

this new classification and to the sudden realization by millions of

people around the world that they are pack-mates to the wolves

fetching their slippers.

 

OAE

 

 

 

 

 

:)

[IMAMONKEY!]

Longest post ive ever seen...

 

Heres my view on it.. Short and simple... It may be wrong but anyway... Dog's are not anymore evolved then wolves. They are merely trained and domesticated by gaining their trust. They see humans as a sense of security and happiness. A few of you are looking at this subject in a "hard" and cold manner. When they are puppies they are easily influenced and hence as puppies we interact with them, pet them, and other things. :eek:

 

Hence the dogs see us as their caregivers. Wolves are no different. They can be domesticated as easily as dogs and dogs are merely the way they are through cross-breeding. A Grey Wolf may have mated with another species of wolf, and there you have a seperate "breed" which happened to mate with a different wolf creating a whole other breed. And as for the DNA differences... I have heard of humans with less or more chromosomes so i dont see why that couldnt happen to dogs or wolves.

 

So much for short and simple... :eek:

[OAE]

I love short and simple, even if I do tend to get Extremely long winded when it comes to dogs, the wolf or the K-9 in general. :)

 

“They are merely trained and domesticated by gaining their trust. They see humans as a sense of security and happiness. A few of you are looking at this subject in a "hard" and cold manner. When they are puppies they are easily influenced and hence as puppies we interact with them, pet them, and other things. “

 

Please forgive what may seem hard or cold, but the fact of life is, the vast numbers of people that keep dogs have no more understanding of the animals then they do of quantum mechanics.

The wolf, then the dog, changing adapting to new environment (evolving) size, temperament, survival methodology, then add the vary extreme human manipulation of the animals as breeding is done for a specific task. Or as is in most cases breeding done with no knowledge of what the person is doing, must make the wolf one of the most evolved animals on earth.

From your thoughts or perhaps just the choosing of words, (merely trained and domesticated) I would be willing to make a small wager; you have not interacted with dogs of the highest temperament or the adult wolf.

The thought process of the person just being a caregiver, instilling a sense of security, grooming, feeding and so on, that this will domesticate a wolf, or enable the person to live with a dog of the higher temperament in safety. This thought process is what gets the animals killed and a large number of people bitten vary badly.

Your heart is in the correct place, but as I hammer into people that come to me for help with their dog or looking for a pup. Expand the knowledge base, use the knowledge, your heart will come along for the ride. :(

[IMAMONKEY!]

Wonderful Post. I would like to say i agree with you whole-heartedly. And You might lose that wager. I have interacted with dogs of an extremely high temperament as well as cats. Both i was able to gain their trust in the course of a few hours to a few days.

 

I do not know what you do for a living, but have you ever been near a dog so wanting human companionship, that it was willing to shove aside it's offspring for that attention? Or a dog chained up after being allowed to roam free for a long long time? I had to take care of a dog like that. While i took care of it it wasn't allowed to roam free. It was chained. And it was so ready to get away that it was chewing on the metal chain when i came to feed and pet it.

 

I felt sorry for that dog, but hes now roaming the streets and even though he will eventually get hit by a car like all animals in my dumb neighborhood do, it is his lifestyle. Dogs may be animals but they are still quite intelligent. I haven't seen creativity in a dog, a quality we humans possess exclusively i think. But when that does appear, i would call it a great moment in evolution that we may have the privelige of viewing.

[OAE]

“I do not know what you do for a living, but have you ever been near a dog so wanting human companionship, that it was willing to shove aside it's offspring for that attention? Or a dog chained up after being allowed to roam free for a long long time? I had to take care of a dog like that. While i took care of it it wasn't allowed to roam free. It was chained. And it was so ready to get away that it was chewing on the metal chain when i came to feed and pet it.

 

I felt sorry for that dog, but hes now roaming the streets and even though he will eventually get hit by a car like all animals in my dumb neighborhood do, it is his lifestyle. Dogs may be animals but they are still quite intelligent. I haven't seen creativity in a dog, a quality we humans possess exclusively i think. But when that does appear, i would call it a great moment in evolution that we may have the privelige of viewing.”

 

 

My bread and butter is transportation, an offshoot of what I did in the military for thirteen years.

For the past forty years, starting in Antarctica, transporting the dogs on C130 A/C, as a loadmaster/ dog handler, Dogs, the K-9 have been my life passion.

Yes, I have seen dogs starved for human interaction, or for that matter starved for and driven almost to the point of insanity and past the point into full blown insanity, for interaction with anything. One of the best dogs I ever interacted with was brought to me drugged, with the muzzle and legs duck taped. The nitwit that had him fed the dog by tossing food into the pen, he was that frightened of the dog. After 8 months of work, this dog, I trusted totally and he worked security one on one with me, he also did nursing home visits

This type (temperament or dog put into a situation) of dog was not what I referred to.

The highest temperament of the domesticated dog is an animal that is a total Alpha, there is no middle ground with this temperament. Their temperament is such as to fight to the death rather then submit to any canine or human. It is a moment to moment contest as to which of the two, the dog or the human, which will call the shots or even cohabit with, as to what will take place in the interaction. The adult or yearling wolf from the wild, brought into contact with the human, un-socialized will react in what seems to the human, in the same manner, but for different reasons. The key words here are *seems to the human*.

 

OAE :shrug: :wave:

[bonnieallmine]

Yes-s-s-s..but, as posted earlier in this thread...the proto-dog is not and was not all that close to wolf...and is about as removed from wolf as from coyote, jackal, and possibly dingo...and there is no way of getting dogs from breeding wolves...period...no matter how much time you take.... Your theory postulates the pre-existence of proto-dog. Fine. It may be related to proto-wolf and proto-jackal..also fine.

That they can breed, by force and not by choice is also noted...but that means you have to start with a wolf and a dog, not two wolves.

To assume that a mere 50,000 years is all it took [or more likely 14,000, which is even faster] for proto-wolf-dog to split and go seperate ways..is also fine...but it is a theory lacking all but the scantest evidence. We have proto-horses but no proto-dogs as far as one can tell..certainly no animal definable as a unique ancestor species..and the DNA record, such as it is, tells us wolves and dogs although possibly having closely related great-great-great-great....grandmothers, have no such link with their fathers..whoever, or whatever they be.

The question was..were dogs bio-engineered...and perhaps if we take the widest application to the term bio-engineered, which is to say someone, may be man himself, tampered with the normal breeding ritual of canis-types and introduced non-canis dna.

That needn't have been done in a lab..but there is no reason to rule it out completely..

 

-Zohaar

 

Zohaar, dogs and wolves can and do interbreed, they are interfertile. Depending on the geneticist whose article one reviews, dogs split off from wolves from 15,000 to 135,000 years ago. I personally think 15,000 years is too recent. More like 40,000 years ago, in connection with changes in weather, environment and in reaction to the sudden increased numbers of humans, leaving food at living sites.

 

It would be inaccurate to assume that humans were domesticating dogs that long ago. It is likely that a wolf or wolves, who were low in pack hierarchy began to discover and scavenge from human hunting refuse, and hanging out around them. A lone wolf not with a pack (and it happens often), would find a human trash pile where bones and food is thrown and hang around. Perhaps humans found them useful as they might let humans know when danger was approaching. Serendipity then acted to make these two animals (human and dog) useful to one another. Actual changes in dog skeletons (meaning they were no longer wolves) have so far been found no more than about 12, to 15,000 years ago. Dog crania are not as large inside as wolf crania and the jaw has begun to change by then.

 

You might like reading some books one by Lorna and Raymond Coppinger A new Understanding of Canine Origins; Wolves, edited by David Mech. James Serpell edited an excellent book on dogs, but I cant remember the name at the moment!

[bonnieallmine]

The June 2005 reply is correct, and has a great deal of useful biology and science in it. The july 2005 response has no information, no science and no knowledge in it.

 

I thought this was a science forum?