#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If you want the animals to look a certain way, you are very limited on which particular genes are needed. To make matters worse, many physical traits are poly-genetic, so you need an exact set of multiple genes to interact. Change one and you get a mutt. That's why pure breds need to be almost identical. It won't work otherwise. It's also why you see a drift in phenotype over time. That also has to happen. I do not think a purebred can remain stable without drift in type. The drift is probably always in a negative direction too. And if you really want to make matters worse, the physical traits - our genes, are only about 2% of our genome. What the other 98% of the genome does, scientists are still guessing. Some of it may have to do with stability of the genome itself and the ability to repair itself. Truth be told, modern human selected plants, and animals are all a bit Frankenstein's Monsters. Last edited by verticaldoug; 05-10-2024 at 03:07 PM. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
If they genetically tested every potential dog they were going to breed and relaxed some of those physical standards they could certainly improve. All I meant was specifically test to make sure they are as genetically diverse as possible.
But maybe it only works for true working breeds that are not based on appearance standards. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
BTW - even after 20+ years, the foxes still weren't truly domesticated and prone to wild animal stuff. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Yah this isn't exactly rocket science.
Two people can meet on a dating app and if they wanted to it is quite easy to go Ancestry or 23 and me or such and if you pair yourselves in the ancestry app it will tell you how far apart you are. They could do *something* to mix in other cross breeds in a way to try and increase diversity while still getting somewhere in the ballpark of what they wanted. But it seems the hardest part of this would be breaking the incredible desire to malform the dogs for appearance. This for example is a fascinating article that shows just how much they want the inferior physical traits: https://dognews.com/german-shepherd-...og-shows-today Basically the AKC champion GSD from 1937 wouldn't rate today because of things like having a more functional spine/hip shape. Agreed that fox experiment article was fascinating. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
A blue-eyed man might select blue-eyed mates - if any brown-eyed children appear, he knows it's not his. And the inverse, a blue-eyed woman who wanted multiple mates might be averse to selecting a blue-eyed partner. (yes I realize eye colors isn't a strictly simple Mendelian trait). |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
I have no idea what breeds they are, and that's ok.
|
#39
|
||||
|
||||
Interesting article and discussion so far.
I wont knock those who like pure bred dogs, but I will say they are not what our family wants and I cant see a time when we will ever intentionally seek out a pure bred dog. My first dog as an adult was a dog I adopted at college in Mississippi, and my wife adopted one at college in New Orleans. Its been 3 other adopted dogs since. We definitely have a type- 50-70# dogs that are athletic, but we have had hounds and terriers. Our current younger dog is a mix between a Border Collie and the Devil. Each time we have gotten a dog it has been due to us going to an adoption group and asking about a specific dog that we saw on their website. There are too many dogs looking for homes for me to be interested in paying 4-8x more to get a purebred dog that is often times not even born yet. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I guess that there are actually two somewhat distinct issues. First, unconditionally deleterious mutations that are fixed in the breed by founder effects and/or inbreeding. These in principle could be removed by a sustained breeding program (or CRISPR if the alleles in question can be identified) without notable change to the physical characteristics. Second bucket is when the breed standard itself creates unhealthy dogs, like the extremely short nosed pugs—that means the human conception of the breed needs to change. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Luna is a purebred Redbone Derphound.
Leo has to be a rat terrier / Tasmanian devil cross. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Is this even reality? What a sad world we live in if it is. Yeah, I'm an old geezer shouting at the clouds. Oh, and I'm serious. Do people really do this before committing to a relationship? |
#45
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, this was done in Russia. One of the interesting findings was that selecting for domesticability also meant that the foxes started getting white toes/socks - just like many domestic dogs have. Apparently, there is some genetic interplay between those traits.
|
|
|