Skip to comments.Dogs are NOT descended from modern wolves but split from common ancestor 34,000 years ago
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 ...
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?
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?
But what does the fox say?
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.
“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.
thank you so much for sharing that picture with me.
Add Norwegian Elkhound.
What does THAT mean?
Just a variation on that “+1” thing done in some forums when one person agrees with another’s post. Reads “plus infinity squared” in longhand; just a bit of hyperbole on my part.
Is that really necessary?
Coincidentally milkbones were invented between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago.
And to this very day the iconic Chinese dog is called a Chow.
(Why are there no Mein Streets in Chinatown???)
Have you forgotten that it's a dog eat dog world?
Might be closer to the truth than you’d think, though I could quibble on the details. (The good bishop got a little TOO speculative there, methinks.)
Why we should even expect to see the original 7 day creation world is beyond me. It had continuity with the Garden of Eden, which is now out of view.
We could call it a two-universe theory.
Anyone who doubts mammal aren’t descended from dinosaurs, hasn’t seen my Akita yawn.
Makes perfect sense. Figured they were too close for happenstance. But then I’m a Basset Hound sorta guy. But I surely appreciate the sheer grace and power of a Sheppard.
If presidents can be aliens then so can dogs. ( maybe that’s why he eats them , too?)
Glad to see this thread. Based on the extreme differences in physical qualities between all the various breeds - it’s not impossible to believe that human ancestors domesticated dozens of wild ‘canines’ that are now extinct.
Hard to believe that primitive humans, on all the different continents; with the range of climate, terrain, flora and fauna, discovered and domesticated just the one grey wolf.
Amazing LOOK at the Hips and legs on the early 1900 GSD and the ones in later years. Totally different!
Words have meanings and grammar enables words to convey the author’s intended meaning. This seems lost on our thumb typing text-o-matic generation. Thank you for the discussion.
That made me LOL.
hee hee... a little cheer for this icy cold morning, to warm you up! :-)
This thread has gone to the dogs.
If you lay down with dogs, you wake up with flees.
And, if you lay down with wolves, you wake up...
Without your vital organs...
With the cousins of flees...
With a strong desire to eat your dog, cat and hamster.
Vanity and fashion are the ruin of many a great breed.
Don’t tell this to my wolf dog. He’ll talk your ear off telling you different, especially if he thinks it means he has to be a pet and not the master.