Are “dogs” genetically differentiated from wolves in any significant fashion, or are dogs simply wolves bred to desired specifications over the last 0,000 years or so?
PIMF “10,000 years or so”
Check out the January 2002 issue of National Geographic, “From Wolf to Woof.”
And certainly dogs and wolves can interbreed. I’ve seen several dog-wolf hybrids. They’re controversial. The general consensus is that a pure wolf or even a half-wolf is much too wild to make a good pet – too physically strong, for one thing, and not bred to obey humans. One wolf owner told me wolves can be “socialized” but never “domesticated.” I’ve heard that the American Kennel Club does register wolves and wolf hybrids.
Not significantly, no. Domestic dogs and wolves can also interbreed with coyotes, but the genetic difference between dogs/wolves vs. coyotes is considerably greater than the differences between wolves and dogs.
That’s the consensus these days. Generally the wild phenotype asserts itself pretty quickly when cross-breeding occurs.
Not to say there is not 100% agreement on this - Some still classify dogs and wolves as separate species. But the number of authorities that do so seem to be a definite minority at this point.
- Tamerlane
Drop that second “not” in the second to the last sentence if you want it to make a little more sense ;).
- Tamerlane
I don’t know if classifying them as a different species is correct but domesticated dogs left to breed at will do not revert back to wolves.
It’s been awhile but I saw a TV show that watched what happened to stray dog populations in large cities (where sufficient numbers of strays allows for a varied mix of breeding). Over a few generations a distinct type of dog appeared that tended to about 40 pounds, had medium length fur and sandy blond coloring and while wild feared humans but could be quickly tamed given the chance. This is not close to being a proper wolf.
Sounds like Dogmeat from Fallout, although he was darker in color.
Anyway, I wouldn’t expect that sort of dog to be wolflike. Mixing various domestic lines at random won’t get you any closer to the original, especially when those lines are already fairly far removed.
An article in the March 99 issue of the Smithsonian entitled “Tracking America’s First Dogs” had some interesting things to say on this topic. This article is about genetic studies involving Carolina dogs, which are the type of dogs often called “yaller” (as in “Old Yaller”)
IIRC, their theory is that a there is specific hormone that affects size, coloring and personality (making the animal more or less fearless). The original canids had abnormally high or low levels of this hormone, which allowed them to get closer to humans than regular wolves and thus scrounge for either handouts or garbage. Which made them more successful as long as they hung out near people. Thus they were self-selecting rather than being bred. The size and coloring is also of interest because dog, even feral dogs are smaller on the whole than their wolf cousins, and unless bred for specific coloration are generally solid colored or piebald rather than having strong camoflage coloring . (Also of interest - this condition is true of almost all domesticated animals. The only example I’ve ever been able to come up with to the contrary is the cat)
BTW, according to this article, dogs will revert as Whack-a-mole stated - which is remarkably like the Carolina dogs, and similar to dingos and other wild dogs around the world.
Yeah, dogs are not quite wolves. Dogs are trash-eaters, largely. Wolves are hunters.
I wasn’t sure how to describe it but the mutts were predominantly dark blond but they had a peppering of balck hair in their coat so yes…the dog you decribe sounds kind of close. Think along the lines of Dingoes and you’re pretty close.
As to expecting a wolf to pop back out I don’t think it is too far a stretch to think that overtime animals derived from wolves would tend back to their roots if left to themselves. As it was it was interesting that the dogs did tend to a distinct ‘breed’ if left to breed randomly.
Yeah, the Pariah Dog/Dingo phenotype. This does seem to be the case and is certainly an argument for classifying them separately. However the weight of genetic evidence seems to argue otherwise. One paper on Canid genetics:
http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne2.htm
- Tamerlane
I’m about confused about the wolf line in dogs, too.
How many types of pre-domestic dog-type dogs are there? Dingo, pariah, wolves, coyotes, foxes…
If we’re just talking wolves, where did wolves live before domestic dogs? Where were domestic dogs domesticated in the world 14,000 years ago? Heck, where were humans then?
Ask and yee shall receive 
:
http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm
Wolves are holarctic - They were found throughout Europe, Asia, North Africa and North America.
Family Candiae ( dog family ) - 34 species in 14 genera
Genus Canis - 7 or 8 species ( depending on whether you subsume domestic dogs under wolves or not )
- Tamerlane
I don’t know if they revert to the original, but I vaguely remember having read that after some generations, wild dogs living in very different places come to look quite alike (I remember some pictures, and in particular their yellowish-brown color). I’ve no clue if it’s true, though.
Ok, now I’d like to ask and recieve a billion dollars. Just one billion it all.
Actually, that site you cited is way over my head. Can you interpret it and answer my questions? : )
And they definitely weren’t wolf-like, acording to the pictures…
Maybe the Smithsonian article that I wrote several paragraphs about? :dubious:
I’ll give it a shot :).
1.) Although all members of the genus Canis can potentially interbreed, the evidence confirms that the wolf appears to be the primary ancestor of the domestic dog.
2.) Four distinct genetic groupings were found among domestic dogs.
3.) While the archaeological record suggests the earliest dog domestication at ~14,000 years ago, genetic divergence indicates the actual split might have been as early as ~135,000 years ago. That last number is likely inaccurate, but nonetheless the genetic evidence does suggest that dog domestication may have/probably occurred earlier than was previously thought ( and bones of wolves have been found with hominid remains back as far as 400,000 years ago ). The author(s) hypothesize that the discrepancy may arise because perhaps earliest “domestic dogs” looked very similar to wolves and that the actual phenotypic divergence occurred ~10,000 - 15,000 years ago due to selective pressures imposed by the switch from nomadic hunter-gatherers to sedentary agriculturalists. But that’s just a hypothesis.
4.) There is some evidence that obliquely suggests that semi-regular backcrossing to wild canid populations may have occurred, providing genetic material for artificial selection, helping to account for the enormous phenotypic diversity of the modern domestic dog.
This paper appears to confirms that theory:
http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/interbreeding.htm
5.) And further suggests that the domestic dog may have multiple origins from different subspecies of wolf.
6.) And though they label dogs as a separate species throughout the paper, at the end it agrees that there is strong evidence they should be synonomized.
- Tamerlane
I think Tamerlane did answer many of your questions but I’ll try and fill it out a bit.
The first evidence of domesticated dogs comes from east Asia about 15,000 years ago. From there they expanded across the Bering Straight into the Americas and west to Europe.
Some evidence exists that dogs and man were working together as long as 40,000 years ago. However, take ‘working together’ loosely. It would seem that wild dogs stayed wild for a long time but would hang near human settlements picking up scraps of food and such (and follow the nomadic humans around). The humans tolerated this because the dogs acted as sentries alerting the settlement to trouble approaching. It seems properly domesticated dogs, as we pretty much know them today, date back 14,000-15,000 years ago. This is earlier than previously supposed which pegged dog domestication to the entry of farming on the scene in the Middle East around 10,000 years ago. Prior to farming humans were hunter/gatherers and nomadic.
Actually I want to qualify that a bit.
Dogs as pets is a relatively modern invention. Throughout most of history dogs were considered working animals akin to oxen that would pull a plow. Dogs were no more pets than the oxen were.
It takes a modern society where wealth and leisure exist to see the dogs invited into our homes as nothing more than animals kept for the pleasure of it. Keeping a dog is a luxury as they consume resources and in subsistence societies that is a luxury they could not afford. The dog had to earn its keep. Indeed, you can still see this attitude today in many societies and they would be puzzled to see you go play with their dogs much as they’d be puzzled to see you cavort with their oxen.
You do not see the rise of wildly divergent breeds of dogs (such as lap dogs) till the 17th or 18 century as many of these types of breeds are rather useless in a practical, do work sense.