This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and Dogs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Dog origins about to enter the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland debate?
From Wang (2015): "As there is little evidence of westward human migrations from southern East Asia around 15 000 years ago, the initial spread of the domestic dog out of Asia may in part have been a self-initiated dispersal driven by environmental factors ..." From Fu (2016, "The genetic history of Ice Age Europe", http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature17993.html) " ... [s]econd, we detect an excess of allele sharing with east Asians in a subset of Villabruna Cluster individuals— beginning with an 13,000-year-old individual from Switzerland ... This statistic was originally interpreted as evidence of Basal Eurasian ancestry in Kostenki14. However, because this statistic is consistent with zero when Han is replaced with Ust’-Ishim, these findings cannot be driven by Basal Eurasian ancestry (as we discuss earlier), and must instead be driven by gene flow between populations related to east Asians and the ancestors of some Europeans." So some group with a Han Chinese connection made it's way to Europe to mix with proto-Europeans, or else the original "PIE" homeland was southern China. In either case, it appears that they brought their dogs with them. To the principal editor of this page: I strongly advise rewriting explanatory material to be as non-controversial and neutral as possible, e.g. removing phrases like "lupification of humans" and "psychological convergence", so as to avoid uncomfortable racial inferences in light of new discoveries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 11:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I still await your explanation at the bottom of the section above titled Possible copyright infringement, explaining to me how so. William Harris • talk • 12:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
The conclusion of the paper: "Sixth, within the Villabruna Cluster, some, but not all, individuals have an affinity to east Asians." That hardly equates to "...some group with a Han Chinese connection made it's way to Europe to mix with proto-Europeans, or else the original "PIE" homeland was southern China. In either case, it appears that they brought their dogs with them." That is just personal conjecture. It remains unclear as to why "lupification of humans" and "psychological convergence" leads to "uncomfortable racial inferences in light of new discoveries." You will need to articulate what it is that you mean. William Harris • talk • 10:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello All Origin watchers, tomorrow will see the release of the first of a series of major reports on the origin and domestication of the dog. Three years and three million dollars, over 1,500 ancient wolf and ancient dog specimens DNA sequenced, and nearly 7,000 morphometric analyses undertaken. I expect that it will have a major impact on the structure and content of the Origin article. Because there has been so much that we did not know, this article has been similar to a wide-angle lens on a camera, trying to include in the picture all that we have to work with - whether regarded by some as relevant or not - and as a result it is a large article in size. I expect that shortly we will have a narrow-angle lens to work with, which will lead to a smaller and much-better resolved article. Happy reading. Regards, William Harris • talk • 10:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello All. Fan (2016) very recently found that the dog was a divergent subspecies of the gray wolf. (That paper further argues that the dog IS a gray wolf because there is no genomic difference between the two.) This means that the dog and the wolf have a shared history, and a new article Evolution of the wolf has been created which joins similar articles such as the Evolution of the horse, Evolution of lemurs, Evolution of mammals etc. This also means that sections of the Origin of the domestic dog where it relates to evolution with the wolf can be WP:SPINOFFed into the new article. There are two sections that shortly will join the Evolution of the wolf. Regards, William Harris • talk • 08:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to have a section about mythical dogs or even cartoon dogs which have been a influence to people and their perspective of dogs. Famous dogs that come to mind like Lassie, Rin-Tin-Tin, UnderDog and even Pluto of Disney fame. Currently the article seems rather dry; it could use something that might be of interest to children too — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for your comment. The article is dry because it is science-based, only deals in facts, and is about the origin of the dog. Most of what we know comes from archaeology and genetics. If you want to talk about famous dogs then I recommend that you take your idea to the Talk:Dog page. There already exists from that page a link to List of fictional dogs. Regards, William Harris |talk 08:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, "mythical dogs" are simply not within the scope of an article about the origin of the domestic dog. FunkMonk (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)