[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: Dogs
Well put, Martin, and an interesting question to pose. When one steps
back and thinks of the quantity and scope of plants and animals that
humans have domesticated - and many more that humans have influenced,
such as crows, who I understand are not known to live further than 5
km from human habitation anywhere in the world - on every continent
and in every possible environment - not to mention the massive forest,
mountainside, plains, steppe, jungle etc. management humans engaged in
long before industrial economies - it is easier to grasp the idea that
humans have been biologically domesticating themselves just as they
have been mastering this planet's flora and fauna. Selecting for
immaturity (neoteny) is a very interesting aspect to emphasize. It
also puts a nicer spin on some of the dumb things I have done as an
adult! LOL
- Steve
On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
Larry,
I too saw the Dogs Decoded documentary last night, and found it
fascinating. As you described, the evidence suggests that
domestication of wolves has changed their DNA only a fraction (98.6%
the same as wolves, if I recall correctly), but nevertheless has
transformed their inherited behavior. Dogs, but not wolves, can
follow human pointing gestures and even eye direction. They
spontaneously pay attention to human activity, and quickly learn to
respond to spoken commands and even identify objects by name.
The suggestion in the documentary was that this has occurred through
selective breeding of the least aggressive animals in each
generation, and that this amounts to selecting for characteristics
of immature animals. The youngest wolves are the least aggressive,
so that selective breeding of wolves for less aggression will
actually over time slow their developmental process.
We have domesticated wolves as dogs; haven't we also domesticated
ourselves? If 50 generations of selective breeding can transform a
wolf or a fox, what has tens of thousands of years of our own
selective breeding done to and for humans? Darwin noted the
phenomenon of sexual selection - mates are selected, and bred with,
for their desirable characteristics. Aggression, I suppose, in some
societies, but presumably playfulness in others. We have 99% of our
genome in common with chimpanzees, but that small difference has
been the product not only of random variation but also of cultural
selection. The finding that childhood in homo sapiens lasts much
longer than it did for homo habitus, for example, suggests that we
too have selected ourselves for characteristics of immaturity. Are
we slowing down our own ontogenesis, and as a consequence giving
ourselves more time to learn to master the complexities of modern
life?
Martin
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca