[HN Gopher] How wolves became dogs
___________________________________________________________________
How wolves became dogs
Author : mooreds
Score : 88 points
Date : 2026-01-05 16:29 UTC (5 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
| npstr wrote:
| https://archive.is/yRObl
| amiga386 wrote:
| It's Bob, all right... but look at those vacuous eyes, that
| stupid grin on his face - he's been domesticated, I tell you.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Hehe, shades of The Far Side.
| azornathogron wrote:
| HN title-destroying rules strike again. It's "How Wolves Became
| Dogs"
| Luc wrote:
| This rule is one of the worst ones, often resulting in nonsense
| titles or grammatical problems.
|
| Another one on the homepage right now: "Samba Was Written". Ok,
| great.
| rebolek wrote:
| Technically it's correct.
| andersa wrote:
| Why not get rid of this stupid title changer already? I don't
| get it.
| k8sToGo wrote:
| Why is the how dropped? Is it automatic?
| xnorswap wrote:
| Yes. There are a few other title-mangle rules that HN has.
|
| It's an attempted technical solution to try to remove / limit
| the amount of "clickbait" in titles.
|
| It does not work very well.
| omoikane wrote:
| I tried searching for similar incidents in the past[1], and
| I think the problem is that the title munging actually
| doesn't happen often enough for Hacker News to want to do
| anything about it. It's unusual that two front page
| articles were affected on the same day, but that's a small
| fraction compared to titles that passed through[2].
|
| I don't know if Hacker News will pop up any extra
| confirmation to the submitter to warn that their submitted
| title were automatically edited, but I think that would be
| a better interface than relying on submitters and readers
| to fix the mistake after the article is already visible and
| ranked.
|
| Whether any automated editing of titles actually helps with
| reducing clickbait is a different question.
|
| [1]
|
| How wolves became dogs (2026-01-09) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46553433
|
| How Samba Was Written (2026-01-04) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46551531
|
| Why I have to give Fortnite my passport to use Bluesky
| (2025-12-19) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46327832
|
| How they clean the balls in a ball pit (2025-10-15) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45592984
|
| Why we didn't rewrite our feed handler in Rust (2025-10-08)
| - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45517240
|
| How Spain put up wealth taxes (2025-08-16) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44927460
|
| [2]
|
| Majority of the submitted titles never had "how" or "why"
| to begin with, and sometimes the submitter catches the
| change in time, for example:
|
| How to Code Claude Code in 200 Lines of Code (2026-01-08) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46545620
|
| I didn't see any mentions of the title being edited here.
| mooreds wrote:
| It is automatic on submission, but the submitter can go back
| and edit the title. I just forgot to do so.
| sph wrote:
| It's clear that human companionship has shaped wolves into dogs.
|
| A weird, perhaps silly question I've had for a while is: how have
| wolves shaped humans? Has human society in any way been affected
| by the structure of wolf packs? Did hairless monkeys form
| stronger tribes because of it?
|
| I don't believe for a second that this deep interspecies
| friendship has been one-sided and hasn't brought psychological if
| not physical changes as much as the changes it's brought to
| wolves.
| mikkupikku wrote:
| Seems plausible to me that our long relationship with
| wolves/dogs has modified humanity to be more empathic to other
| species of animals in general. Probably impossible to prove
| though.
| tomkaos wrote:
| I read somewhere that he could have change human sleep. Human
| can have a deeper sleep knowing a guard will alert of danger.
| the_af wrote:
| Thankfully we have those other animals, "human puppies", to
| counteract this :P
| wendgeabos wrote:
| It's hard to imagine how it could not have driven human
| evolution as well.
| HPsquared wrote:
| This is where evolutionary theory can be viewed through the
| lens of coevolution or group selection (a group defined as
| containing both a selection of humans, and also animals and
| plants in varying degrees of domestication, as a whole system).
| This is in contrast to kin selection, which only accounts for
| genetic relatedness.
|
| I remember in one of Jiang Xueqin's videos, he made the
| interesting argument that "grain domesticated humans" at least
| as much, if not more, than "humans domesticated grain".
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Grains aren't very good food until bread is invented
| (probably from sprouted grains, originally). Seeds are
| designed to keep their goodness inside, and are very good at
| that containment. Bread in turn requires cooking. (I wonder
| now if there was a brief period of surviving on raw sprouted
| grains... which are far inferior because they mold so
| quickly.)
|
| Wisdom teeth are far more valuable to a precooking human, who
| has to chew constantly to break down plant cells. The extra
| chewing causes stress that induces the jaw to grow longers,
| allowing space for the wisdome teeth.
|
| We're basically at the "awkward teenage" part of evolving
| past raw-food diets.
| dkarl wrote:
| I think the "wheat domesticated humans" argument is about
| changes to our behavior, our culture and social structures,
| rather than genetic change. It isn't domestication in the
| evolutionary sense. It would be like keeping zebras on a farm
| with horses and doing your best to tame and train them. You
| might be able to change their behavior so that they behaved
| differently from wild zebras, but it wouldn't be
| domestication unless you bred them over generations to
| produce a population that was genetically different from wild
| zebras.
| conductr wrote:
| On a long enough timeline it's possible that cat-people and
| dog-people evolve separately into different species
| thebruce87m wrote:
| I think some dog people already are a different species -
| hanging bags of dog shit on trees would never occur to me for
| example. I'd hate to see what their Christmas trees look
| like.
| pxc wrote:
| Huh? Who does that?
| sjw987 wrote:
| In the UK, it's incredibly common for dog owners to do
| this. When confronted about leaving the bagged dog shit
| somewhere they always say they're going to pick it up on
| the way back, yet the next day it's still there.
|
| Modern British dog owners are incredibly irresponsible
| surrounding how they look after their pets and how they
| handle the pets mess. Covid made it measurably worse.
| FeteCommuniste wrote:
| > In the UK, it's incredibly common for dog owners to do
| this.
|
| That's wild. I've never once seen this in the US.
|
| Obviously there are people who just don't clean up after
| their dogs in the first place, but to clean it up and
| then hang the bagged crap on a tree? Haha.
| jamiecurle wrote:
| They do it a lot. My garden backs onto a public woodland
| and I can confirm it happens. Last summer when I tidied
| up out the back of my house, I found at least five years
| worth of buried dog turds in bags. Cleaning it up was not
| fun. I used a backpack blower to blow it all into line of
| "turd shame" away from the houses.
|
| It looks a lot nicer out there now and I gave the trees a
| little prune (I'm a qualified arborist) so people know
| this is a "tidy area" and so far no more turds in bags.
| tyjen wrote:
| I've never seen it in a tree, but I do see some owners
| leaving their crap bags on hiking trails and often
| forgetting about them on the return trip. I'd rather they
| let the dog poop in the forest instead of encapsulating
| it in a plastic bag until a Good Samaritan picks it up.
| conductr wrote:
| This seems normal to me. I've never done it or even seen it
| - but it seems everyone exercises a slightly personalized
| disregard for the very society they are a part of these
| days
| sph wrote:
| Only if cat-people and dog-people don't intermingle.
|
| But given how hostile many cat-people are (see sibling
| comment), compared to dog-people which tend to also enjoy the
| company of cats, I can imagine a timeline where this
| misanthropist branch of humans splits off, goes to live in
| trees and hisses at anybody that comes nearby.
| FeteCommuniste wrote:
| Hmm, I've known a good number of dog people who dislike
| cats. Never read any stats on the ratio of cat-lover+dog-
| hater to dog-lover+cat-hater groups, though.
| steve1977 wrote:
| > goes to live in trees
|
| Mainly because they lost the ability to climb down.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| A symbiotic relationship with Homo caniphilus firemen,
| then?
| ddawson wrote:
| Culture has been affected by Toxoplasmosis which humans are
| primarily exposed to through cats so this makes sense.
| akkad33 wrote:
| There's no evidence that Toxoplasmosis has that effect on
| humans
| pokstad wrote:
| I watched a documentary on dogs that was cheerful until the
| last 5% when they mentioned modern day dog owners. The film
| speculated that dogs might be a considered like a parasite
| that infiltrates human families and causes them to stop
| breeding humans and instead only have dogs and cats. So if
| that's the case, the evolution ends for us :)
| conductr wrote:
| I've heard this before. I think better term than parasite
| is an addictive drug since we created these types of pet
| dogs and indulge on them. I feel strongly the trend of dog
| ownership overtaking people having children, while real, is
| more so a result of modern economic realities regarding
| cost of housing and raising a child.
| akkad33 wrote:
| I don't know to what extent cost is stopping people from
| having kids. Many poor people have kids. And then they
| struggle to raise them.
| conductr wrote:
| Poverty breeds but globally fertility rates are
| declining. Economics isn't the only thing driving it but
| parasitic puppies isn't even in the debate :)
|
| https://www.imf.org/en/publications/fandd/issues/2025/06/
| the...
| pokstad wrote:
| Cost is definitely a factor, but I think the ease and
| convenience of a dog over the stress of children also
| plays a big role. Dogs are obedient and mature in less
| than 2 years.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| It's so weird that cats are still so feline, basically
| miniature tigers/lions but that dogs went so much off the
| rails compared to majestic wolves. Sure, some dogs are
| wolves-like but many just lot the plot: chihuahuas,
| daschhunds (my mom always had those: friendly but... not
| wolves-like), pugs, sharpeis, etc.
|
| So many are just... Not badass? A wolf is badass. Cats are
| totally badass: they're natural born killers, hunting
| billions of poor preys yearly.
|
| My parents are divorced. Father always had huge dogs (St.
| Bernard, Leonberg, Newfoundland, etc.) while mother always
| had tiny dogs (daschunds). I loved these dogs but I really
| hate having to take care of dog poo. So I'm a cat person.
|
| As a bonus my miniature tiger takes care of itself and goes
| shitting where nobody can see it.
| conductr wrote:
| Dogs get bred for specific personality traits and to
| develop physical traits. My border collie was a maniac that
| just wanted to work all day every day. That herding part of
| his personality was extremely prevalent. Even if I tossed a
| treat on the ground, it never would occur to him to use his
| nose, he'd frantically look all around. Even if it was
| right under his nose if he didn't see it then it's as if it
| didn't exist. Likewise, from 1000 yards away I could make
| subtle hand jesture and he knew to go get his ball that was
| 1000 yards in another direction and bring it to me; over
| half our communication was body language and it even had
| context. Like if we were out somewhere and he was off
| leash, also 1000 yards away, I could nod my head slightly
| and he knew it was time to go and he jumped in the truck.
| Same head nod elsewhere meant something else. It's hard to
| explain but that was the most connected I've ever been to
| another creature (even my wife in many ways if I'm being
| honest, he never misunderstood me :)).
|
| Likewise, I now have a golden doodle. It's like having a
| giant 5 year old puppy. They've been bred to be docile, kid
| friendly, playful, cute, non-shedding, and the perfect
| family/instagram dog. But they're extremely dopey when
| compared to a border collie.
|
| I'm not sure what cats get bred for. Fur length? Ability to
| shit in a box? I'm guessing they've not been bred too much
| on their personality, which is why they are mostly the same
| and still miniature tigers.
| gavinmckenzie wrote:
| Putting aside the greater variety of physical traits that
| you describe, dogs generally are more adaptable than cats.
| They are estimated to have twice the number of neurons and
| are much more malleable whereas cats feel more hardwired
| into a set of cat behaviours.
|
| I've assumed that this greater learning capacity and
| malleability is both the best part of a dog and a
| vulnerability that can lead them to become highly anxious
| and dependent animals.
|
| I've had both cats and dogs, and loved them both, but my
| goodness they are so wildly completely different animals.
| dsign wrote:
| Slightly tangential, but I think that dogs have allowed for
| some bad things to happen to us. Like, they are available
| physically, so if you don't want to go insane in this society
| of ours where you are allowed to have physical contact with at
| most one person (your one and only partner), you can get a dog
| or five, or simply pet your friend's dog or even a neighbor's.
| Many post-agricultural revolution civilizations predicated on
| small family cells and strict property and succession rules
| would have been impossible without a dog to pet.
| sph wrote:
| Are nuclear families a post-agricultural phenomenon? AFAIK,
| it's a much recent societal change driven by the industrial
| revolution (i.e. 300 years ago vs ~15,000 years of
| agriculture)
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > ... if you don't want to go insane in this society of ours
| where you are allowed to have physical contact with at most
| one person ...
|
| There are animals where the male and female only ever live
| together and are loyal (and not for the sake of the idea of
| loyalty, they're animals). It's not something speficic to
| some human societies.
| akkad33 wrote:
| I don't really understand this comment. Are you saying dogs
| made way for nuclear families? Why would it be impossible? In
| India for example pet ownership is very low. Much lower than
| prevalence of nuclear families
| IAmBroom wrote:
| > Many post-agricultural revolution civilizations predicated
| on small family cells and strict property and succession
| rules would have been impossible without a dog to pet.
|
| That's silly. US Midwest farmers meet every detail up until
| "would have been impossible"; dogs are common but not
| ubiquitous, and farming communities are highly social.
|
| (Cats, ironically, _are_ ubiquitous on farms, because of
| their utility at hunting mice and rats.)
|
| Ironically, you're describing the classic "cat lady" trope,
| only with the wrong pet type.
| deadbabe wrote:
| Misconceptions about wolf pack hierarchical structures have led
| humans to come up with misguided perceptions of being an Alpha,
| Beta, Sigma, etc...
| psunavy03 wrote:
| On the plus side, it makes it easier to write off someone as
| a loser when they use any of those terms unironically.
| venusenvy47 wrote:
| I've watched a couple documentaries that discuss your question.
| I think they mention the aspect about how humans could become
| more agricultural.
|
| https://m.imdb.com/title/tt10462930
|
| https://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/dogs-that-changed-the-world-...
| belviewreview wrote:
| I am speculating that agriculture lead to human beings evolving
| to do the sort of labor that it requires, especially grains.
| z3t4 wrote:
| It's common in fur farms that they breed the animals that are
| most friendly to humans, and in only a few generations those
| animals behave like very friendly pets, and killing them becomes
| more difficult.
| wendgeabos wrote:
| huh so that's a way that it's adaptive for the animals
| ekr____ wrote:
| See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
| suzzer99 wrote:
| A NOVA episode on dogs showed a Russian study where they bred
| the most friendly foxes with each other and did the same with
| the most aggressive (so extremes in both directions). The
| aggressive-bred animals were like that scene in I Am Legend
| where he checks on his infected rats. They were being fed, and
| they still wanted to kill their feeders. Kind of terrifying.
| akkad33 wrote:
| Why do they kill animals for fur? Could they not shave them? (I
| realise my question sounds dumb)
| szanni wrote:
| I am rather surprised the article does not mention the shared
| hunting technique of pursuing prey until exhaustion as a possible
| link.
|
| Many hunter gather tribes apparently employed this technique and
| it can still be found today in Africa with the San people.
|
| Sharing food or stealing wolf puppies were probably part of the
| domestication but was this because humans possibly hunted
| alongside wolves? Humans possibly being capable of pursuing for
| longer distances due to better body temperature control through
| sweating while wolves being better at tracking.
|
| At least that would be my take.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Interesting. Counterpoint: since the canines can't keep up with
| the humans, are they only used to start the hunt? How do they
| know where the humans are near the end?
|
| Until the dog is fully domesticated (OK, I'll go home and await
| his return. He'll bring me meat!), I don't know how they could
| cooperate on a many-hour hunt like this.
|
| I used to wonder the same about falconry until I met a
| hawkmaster. The animals don't take prey far away where they'd
| be hard to find; they hover or perch near the humans in open
| fields, where they are trivial to find.
|
| I also wondered why they don't just eat the prey. It's because
| that involves lots of effort; they know a human will shortly
| arrive with tasty food that isn't wrapped in tough fur.
| Basically, they trade a package of hamburger for a Big Mac.
| runjake wrote:
| _> Counterpoint: since the canines can 't keep up with the
| humans, are they only used to start the hunt?_
|
| Can you elaborate here? This is a weird fascination of mine
| (man+canine).
|
| I walk long distances with dogs, here's what I've found and
| ruminated:
|
| 1. If I chase or follow a dog, I can chase them to
| exhaustion.
|
| 2. If I'm walking several miles with a dog, they tend to trot
| ahead of me and stop and pant and wait for me. Rinse, wash,
| repeat. Bursted energy/rest cycles.
| kokanator wrote:
| I think your experience is one of conditioning or even
| breed type. I have German Wirehair Pointers which I keep in
| top athletic shape.
|
| When we are in the field they will triple my distance
| travelled ( verified by GPS ). My outings are typically
| 8-12 miles and thus 24-36 miles for the dogs. Of course I
| need to keep them hydrated during this activity.
|
| The behavior of running forward and looking back is most
| likely what we refer to as checking in. The dog is trying
| verify where you are heading/doing. In my dog's case they
| will range out to around 400 yards and then return to with
| 20 yards and run passed making eye contact as they run by.
| MichaelRo wrote:
| >> "The only, absolute and best friend a man has, in this selfish
| world, the only one that will not betray or deny him, is his
| dog."
|
| Well, this is far from absolute, isn't it? :) There's a fair
| number of vicious attacks of a dog on his owner. Oftentimes
| pitbulls (are they even dogs or rather "creatures"?!), but other
| breeds do it too. So ... nothing is absolute :P
| gradschool wrote:
| For another example of betrayal, one of the cronies in
| Katherine the Great's court always gave a dog to his
| girlfriends whenever he started a new relationship. Then if the
| dog ever greeted some other guy familiarly, he inferred he was
| falling out of favor. He probably learned that trick when
| someone did it to him, because he would let the other guy know
| how he was rumbled before graciously bowing out.
| inahga wrote:
| Mostly, if not entirely due to intentionally poor breeding
| practices. Who betrayed who?
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Mostly, if not entirely, due to poor raising.
|
| I've gotten "BEWARE OF DOG!" pitbulls and rottweilers to
| befriend me simply by speaking kindly to them, and then over
| a period of days raising that to handsniffs, then petting.
|
| Misanthropic dogs are taught that behavior, which contradicts
| 10,000+ years of training. They don't enjoy being assholes.
|
| This is not to say dogs aren't naturally barky and suspicious
| of strangers; that is also part of their millenia of
| training. Lots of nice people are also suspicious of
| strangers. But aggressively attacking people is basically
| psychotic behavior for a social animal that considers humans
| part of its society.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| The quote doesn't insist all dogs are infinitely loyal.
|
| Your disgusting prejudice aside, I've never met a pitbull in
| public that wasn't sweet and loving - which reinforces my
| suspicion that the real problem with them is the sort of
| psychotic, uncaring owner they attract.
|
| When I was young, it was Dobermans that were demonized, and
| likewise the dog of choice for assholes who abused them as mere
| security devices.
| macspoofing wrote:
| Next up: Raccoons.
| srean wrote:
| Wouldn't mind killer whales and dolphins while we are at it. We
| aren't that great about sharing the environment though.
| thedudeabides5 wrote:
| positive sum games
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I watch the genetic studies and it seems always presumed, in
| these articles, that dogs derive from wolves, not that dogs
| derive from siblings of wolves that derive from a common proto-
| canine ancestor.
|
| The wikipedia entry considers the issue, presents data that are
| curious with respect ot the data in the Economist article, saying
| domestication is presumed from wolves roughly 14,000 years or so
| ago.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog#Taxonomy
|
| The Economist article hints at the curiosity, in mentioning pre-
| Colombian dogs in the Americas were distinct some 23,000 years
| ago, but then returns to the standard presumptions.
|
| An article in Nature also considers the ancestry presumptions
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/505589e
| griffzhowl wrote:
| The wiki article doesn't say domestication occurred roughly 14k
| years ago, it says at least 14k years ago, because that's the
| earliest definitive evidence of a domesticated dog. Here are
| the next two sentences from the wiki article:
|
| "The remains of the Bonn-Oberkassel dog, buried alongside
| humans between 14,000 and 15,000 years ago, are the earliest to
| be conclusively identified as a domesticated dog.[9][7] Genetic
| studies show that dogs likely diverged from wolves between
| 27,000 and 40,000 years ago."
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| agreed. in one of the articles linked, they further summarize
|
| "Dog ancestors diverged from modern wolf ancestors at least
| 27,000 years ago"
|
| which is still compatible with the two diverged ancestries
| sharing a proto-canid ancestor from which proto-wolves and
| proto-dogs both were derived.
|
| Interestingly, the article about Belgian prehistoric canid
| dna says the genetics are so varied that they don't form a
| clear group.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| We have fossil records of wolves that do not seem much
| different from modern grey wolves. We do not have fossil
| records of ancestors to the grey wolves that share much of
| their DNA coexisting with the grey wolves.
|
| Occam's Razor says that the posited ancestor of Canus
| domesticus that shared grey wolf DNA was... the grey wolf.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I believe the linked articles number 10 and 11 in the
| wikipedia article have a counterexample to what you just
| wrote.
|
| they do also emphasize that the "northern dogs" (huskies,
| malamute, akita?) are very close to wolves in shared
| ancestry.
| jebarker wrote:
| Highly recommend the book "How to tame a fox" about the Russian
| fur farm fox domestication experiment
| mooreds wrote:
| But see also https://www.the-scientist.com/famous-fox-
| domestication-exper...
|
| > Famous Fox Domestication Experiment Challenged
|
| > The tamed foxes, whose appearances changed with breeding,
| weren't wild to begin with, say the authors of a new study.
| softwaredoug wrote:
| One clue is in mythology.
|
| Across many cultures, dogs exist in a transitory space between
| life and death (ie Cerebus). Hinting at dogs being "transitory"
| from here (camp) and out there (the wilderness). Going between,
| getting scraps, staying for a while, leaving. You can imagine a
| process unfolding over Millenia of gradual domestication this
| way. You see it in Ancient North Eurasians myth across different
| cultures. Ancient North Eurasians are genetic precursors
| Eurasian, Western Europe, and American lineages where dog
| domestication originated, and arguably where many cultures have
| the deeper associations with dogs.
| feintruled wrote:
| Interesting article, though is there really much new there? Also
| it discounts the alternative hypothesis of some bright spark
| acquiring wolf pups and doing it purposefully because that would
| take 'weeks'. Weeks, you say?
|
| Surely some enterprising hunter-gatherer had sufficient time on
| their hands. I can't help but think strutting around with a
| feared predator at your beck and call would have been the
| ultimate status symbol, and once you saw it would have to be the
| must have accessory for the self-respecting hunter. Aficionados
| would no doubt breed their stock amongst themselves to save the
| hassle of having to abduct more wolf cubs, which would naturally
| tend to the more suited specimens (friendliness being one trait
| as you don't want them eating the kids). Once it was realised
| what an incredible force multiplier they are in hunting and their
| utility in defence, any time investment would pay for itself many
| times over.
|
| I find this no less as unlikely as thinking humans would let
| wolves help themselves to their excess food. Fascinating subject
| all round, no matter the reason. I hope they can figure out more.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| I see this as likely as becoming more amenable to humans over a
| long time due to free food.
|
| Falconers often acquire and train wild birds. With wolves
| abducting pups or adopting orphans seems like a reasonable path
| to domestication.
| SJC_Hacker wrote:
| > I find this no less as unlikely as thinking humans would let
| wolves help themselves to their excess food
|
| Wolves can extract nutrition from animal tissue which humans
| discard, such as bone and the tougher cartilage/connective
| tissue. Modern dogs still absolute love bones.
|
| They also have much better night vision than humans, sense of
| smell and hearing.
|
| So, follow human tribes and pick off the remains when they move
| camp. Maybe eventually escalate to sneaking in at night. The
| human tribes now become a "resource" which the wolves will
| start guarding from other predators, such as bears or competing
| wolf packs. The humans eventually catch on that the wolves are
| providing a benefit at very little cost - food remains which
| they are not eating anyway. They even start to share kills -
| the wolves being better at tracking game while the humans
| finish the kill with spear/bow.
|
| When animal and crop domestication occurs, you get another
| benefit - protecting the flocks/herds/crops from marauders.
| Especially at night.
| Beijinger wrote:
| Previously: Our dogs' diversity can be traced back to the Stone
| Age https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45922997
|
| Me: Not sure man. The closest relative to the dog is the likely
| extinct, Japanese Wolf
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_wolf Maybe they were very
| tame to begin with? Like the extinct Falkland wolf:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_wolf
|
| "There were no forests for the animal to hide in, and it had no
| fear of humans;[citation needed] it was possible to lure the
| animal with a chunk of meat held in one hand, and kill it with a
| knife held in the other"
| craig552uk wrote:
| A good (if slightly dated) book on the subject:
|
| How the Wolf Became the Dog by Mark Derr
|
| This is an active, and fast-moving, research area and I'd be keen
| to read something more up-to-date.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-10 23:00 UTC)