gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) (02/08/90)
In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) writes: >yes, all dogs are the same species. but why then aren't wolves in the >species too, since dogs and wolves can cross-breed? I don't know from what wild species domestic dogs were derived, but even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves and produce viable offspring. However, those offspring would then be infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the horse/donkey/mule system. Some general remarks: In many cases, including dogs and cats, a large number of breeds or varieties have been produced via artificial selection from a single wild species. In some cases, such as the St. Bernard/Chihuahua example a mating barrier has been established via artificial selection. In a sense this mimics the process of speciation in natural populations when geographical barriers separate a population into two sub-populations and then morphological/physiological/behavioral/other variations develop between the two sub-populations which eventually render them unable to successfully interbreed. However, by domesticating a wild species via artificial selection the domesticated breeds are effectively removed from the evolutionary and phylogenetic history of the species from which they were derived, in my view, and so asking if they are a new species or if several new species have been created is an irrelevant question. Gregg ******************************************************************************* "In future you should delete the words crunchy frog and replace them with the legend crunchy raw unboned real dead frog!!" -- Inspector Bradshaw, The Hygiene Division *******************************************************************************
J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (J.M. Spencer) (02/08/90)
In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: > > >In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) >writes: > > >>yes, all dogs are the same species. but why then aren't wolves in the >>species too, since dogs and wolves can breed. I believe that the domestic dog is a *sub-species*. (Correct me if I'm wrong). > > >I don't know from what wild species domestic dogs were derived, but >even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves >and produce viable offspring. It *was* the wolf. >However, those offspring would then be >infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the >horse/donkey/mule system. I'm not convinced that a dog-wolf cross *would* be infertile. Do you have any references? I saw an ITV documentary regarding Italian feral dogs interbreeding with wolves, and as I recall, their concern was that hybrids *were* fertile. What is the inheritance hierarchy of the horse and mule (I don't know?). Is one inherited from the other, as with wolves and dogs. If not, then you are not comparing like with like. > >Some general remarks: > >In many cases, including dogs and cats, a large number of breeds or >varieties have been produced via artificial selection from a single >wild species. In some cases, such as the St. Bernard/Chihuahua >example a mating barrier has been established via artificial >selection. I don't buy this. Both *breeds* belong to the same *species*. Therefore they carry the same genes, right? Therefore, in theory at least, they should be able to breed. Unless you are meaning that they *physically* couldn't manage it? If you do, then that has nothing to do with genetics/species, does it? >In a sense this mimics the process of speciation in >natural populations when geographical barriers separate a population >into two sub-populations and then >morphological/physiological/behavioral/other variations develop >between the two sub-populations which eventually render them unable >to successfully interbreed. However, by domesticating a wild species >via artificial selection the domesticated breeds are effectively >removed from the evolutionary and phylogenetic history of the species >from which they were derived, in my view, and so asking if they are a >new species or if several new species have been created is an >irrelevant question. > > > >Gregg
debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) (02/08/90)
In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: <In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) <writes: < <>yes, all dogs are the same species. but why then aren't wolves in the <>species too, since dogs and wolves can cross-breed? < <I don't know from what wild species domestic dogs were derived, but <even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves <and produce viable offspring. However, those offspring would then be <infertile. dog/wolf breedings do produce fertile offspring.
gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) (02/09/90)
In article <1990Feb8.100425.16932@newcastle.ac.uk> J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (J.M. Spencer) writes: >In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: >> >> >>In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) >>writes: >> >> >>>yes, all dogs are the same species. but why then aren't wolves in the >>>species too, since dogs and wolves can breed. >I believe that the domestic dog is a *sub-species*. (Correct me >if I'm wrong). >> >> >>I don't know from what wild species domestic dogs were derived, but >>even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves ^^ >>and produce viable offspring. >It *was* the wolf. Several people have pointed that out; I simply didn't know. >>However, those offspring would then be >>infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the >>horse/donkey/mule system. >I'm not convinced that a dog-wolf cross *would* be infertile. Do >you have any references? Notice that above I said _if_ dogs were not derived from wolves. Given that assumption (which proved to be wrong) the fact is that the rest of my argument then holds. > >>Some general remarks: >> >>In many cases, including dogs and cats, a large number of breeds or >>varieties have been produced via artificial selection from a single >>wild species. In some cases, such as the St. Bernard/Chihuahua >>example a mating barrier has been established via artificial >>selection. >I don't buy this. Both *breeds* belong to the same *species*. >Therefore they carry the same genes, right? Therefore, in theory >at least, they should be able to breed. Unless you are meaning >that they *physically* couldn't manage it? If you do, then that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ precisely what I meant -- i.e., morphology barrier >has nothing to do with genetics/species, does it? Yes. Species are defined by the presence of some kind of mating barrier between them. The definition of mating barriers is somewhat blurry but usually is agreed to include morphological, behavioral and physiological differences as well as genetic ones such as different chromosome number. It can also mean interbreeding but producing infertile offspring as described above. Remember that the concept of species has been around a lot longer than any of our concepts of genetics. Gregg ******************************************************************************* "In future you should delete the words crunchy frog and replace them with the legend crunchy raw unboned real dead frog!!" -- Inspector Bradshaw, The Hygiene Division *******************************************************************************
sbishop@desire.wright.edu (02/09/90)
In article <1990Feb8.100425.16932@newcastle.ac.uk>, J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (J.M. Spencer) writes: > In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: >> >> >>In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) >>writes: >> >> >>>yes, all dogs are the same species. but why then aren't wolves in the >>>species too, since dogs and wolves can breed. > I believe that the domestic dog is a *sub-species*. (Correct me > if I'm wrong). >> >> >>I don't know from what wild species domestic dogs were derived, but >>even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves >>and produce viable offspring. > It *was* the wolf. >>However, those offspring would then be >>infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the >>horse/donkey/mule system. > I'm not convinced that a dog-wolf cross *would* be infertile. Do > you have any references? I saw an ITV documentary regarding Italian > feral dogs interbreeding with wolves, and as I recall, their > concern was that hybrids *were* fertile. What is the inheritance > hierarchy of the horse and mule (I don't know?). Is one inherited > from the other, as with wolves and dogs. Just to clarify my earlier posting, I had several wolf/dog crosses. I started out with a female that was 3/4 wolf. She was the product of a wolf who was mated to his half-wolf daughter. I subsequently bred her back to her father once and to her brother once. The resulting puppies were healthy and strong; showed the characteristics of the wolf but some of the personality of the dog. Wolf/dog crosses are NOT infertile. Both of the Alaskian sled dog breed such as Siberian Husky and Malamute are heavy with wolf breeding. However, I do not recommend the wolf/dog cross for everyone. They are often very shy/timid animals and can be extremely dependent on their master. My female would not eat unless I fed her. She would tolerate my husband but her world revolved around me. I took her for obedience training to help with the shyness and the instructor was strongly impressed by her personality and charm. Wolf Lady would sit quietly watching all the other dogs in the class misbehaving, with a dignified duchess watching the peons attitude. Was very funny to watch her! Sue Bishop SBISHOP@desire.wright.edu
bjb@ncrorl.Orlando.NCR.COM (Barbara Bowen) (02/09/90)
In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: > >even if it wasn't wolves dogs might still be able to breed with wolves >and produce viable offspring. However, those offspring would then be >infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the ^^^^^^^^^ This is entirely wrong. Wolf hybrids (with most often husky or german shepard) exist with varying concentrations of "wolf", which means that the offspring are FERTILE!!! Friends of mine currently breed hybrids (intentionally) - the bitch is 50% timber wolf, 50% husky; the male is 75% wolf, 25% shepard - the pups/cubs are able to reproduce as well. >morphological/physiological/behavioral/other variations develop >between the two sub-populations which eventually render them unable >to successfully interbreed. However, by domesticating a wild species Further research in your excellent library is necessary. (MURDOCK - WHERE ARE YOU???) More information is available via: The Wolf Hybrid Times Subscription Dept. P.O. Box 1423 Gallup, NM 87305 Subscription is 18.00 Dollars per year. The magazine is published once every 2 months. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EMAIL: barbara.bowen@Orlando.NCR.COM (...ncrlnk!ncrorl!bjb) ------------------------------------------------------------------------
collier@ariel.unm.edu (uncia uncia) (02/09/90)
In article <2495@leah.Albany.Edu> gmr044@leah.Albany.Edu (Gregg Recer) writes: > >>In article <2285@uwm.edu> debbie@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Debbie Forest) >>writes: >> >>However, those offspring would then be >>infertile. This same kind of mating barrier occurs in the >>horse/donkey/mule system. >I'm not convinced that a dog-wolf cross *would* be infertile. Do >you have any references? 1) i heard on the news the other day that even the horse/donkey/mule system isn't as closed as has been assumed for centuries. a jenny became pregnant somehow and successfully foaled. i don't know any more than that. 2) wolves and dogs can interbreed, and their offspring are fertile. this is well documented in a variety of general references on the wolf, and i have observed it directly myself. case in point: my 50% wolf, 50% malamute female escaped during her second heat and brought home a litter of puppies. this is bad, because wolf hybrids are *very* hard to place safely. fortunately the puppies were only 25% wolf, which is about the highest proportion one can keep without requiring a huge extra effort on the part of the owner. anyway, she, at least, proved herself fertile. -- Michael Collier University of New Mexico Computing Center collier@ariel.unm.edu 2701 Campus Blvd. (505) 277 8039 Albuquerque, NM 87131 (Home: 1160 Don Pasqual NW Los Lunas, NM 87031) ...!cmcl2!beta!unm-la!unmvax!charon!collier