Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

gravitydriven t1_j02zmo3 wrote

Yep, 100% I got it wrong, gene flow is the correct term.

I used the 100k year wolf bc that's what OP said, I agree that wolves were domesticated, eventually resulting in canis familiaris more than 10k years ago. It's tough to pin down a date bc it happened at different rates across different continents. 30k is a date I'm mostly happy with, but I'd like more data (am scientist, always want more data).

I'd like to see more widespread and genetically diverse wolf populations before we start doing hybridization research. I don't think we should be breeding wolf dogs for like 85 reasons. Lets do a great job caring for the ones we have and start legislating against backyard breeders bc 98% of humans are not going to do a competent job raising them.

Side note: I think an expanding population of coyote-wolf hybrids would be very interesting. Lots of good adaptations from both, and a good possibility for inter species cooperation. But there might be a big possibility that they would be very comfortable in urban and suburban environments, which ends with a lot of dead pets and children

1

perta1234 t1_j06abz1 wrote

I agree. Last time I read more about dog domestication, I think domestication more than 16 000 years ago was not having strong evidence, so people had different opinions or interpretations. 16000 years is a long time too. Anyway, maybe that is a minimum estimate. Cannot say if anything new has been found recently. The genomic and archaeological methods develop quickly, but it is still bit challenging to apply those methods to a large number of samples. I have a feeling this type of research is bit less popular or funded at the moment. Could be a personal bias as well.

2