• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

Does Anyone own a Norwegian Lundehound?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: Gibsons

All evolution can basically be viewed as selective breeding. It's just a matter of what's doing the selection.

no, this is a false statment. I am not sure if you are confusing natural selection with breeding and evolution or what...but they are all different.

You are seriously confusing what breeding lends and what evolution does, but this is not the point of this thread.





 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons

All evolution can basically be viewed as selective breeding. It's just a matter of what's doing the selection.

no, this is a false statment. I am not sure if you are confusing natural selection with breeding and evolution or what...but they are all different.

You are seriously confusing what breeding lends and what evolution does, but this is not the point of this thread.

I have to agree with alkemyst here.

Breeding brings out inherent traits, where as evolution allows the traits that benefit a species to evolve.

So to sum up

Breeding = Bringing out inherent traits
Evolution = Creating new traits to better suit the environment
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
I find it interesting the Maine my excellent compatriot Cat, which is believe to be a decendent of a Norwegian Forest Cat traditionally had 6 toes as well on their paws. Until they breed it out of them. Though you can still find them in a pure breed.

 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons

All evolution can basically be viewed as selective breeding. It's just a matter of what's doing the selection.

no, this is a false statment. I am not sure if you are confusing natural selection with breeding and evolution or what...but they are all different.

It's correct, and I'm not confusing anything. Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed.

You are seriously confusing what breeding lends and what evolution does, but this is not the point of this thread.
Evolution is change in allele frequencies over time. Selective breeding, whether the selection is artificial or natural, causes a change in allele frequencies over time. That's evolution.

Tell me how it's not evolution, be as technical as you like.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Evolution is change in allele frequencies over time. Selective breeding, whether the selection is artificial or natural, causes a change in allele frequencies over time. That's evolution.

Tell me how it's not evolution, be as technical as you like.

First, where are you getting your definitions? That is the first problem.

Would you say a mutation is also selective breeding then?

in regards to your other statement, you stating breeding is selective doesn't mean it's the same as evolution.
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Evolution is change in allele frequencies over time. Selective breeding, whether the selection is artificial or natural, causes a change in allele frequencies over time. That's evolution.

Tell me how it's not evolution, be as technical as you like.

First, where are you getting your definitions? That is the first problem.

It's a commonly accepted definition, I've never heard it disputed before even in arguments with creationists. What's your definition?

Would you say a mutation is also selective breeding then?

No, a mutation is a change in a genetic sequence. It's not necessarily even inherited. It could be selected for, selected against or undergo no selection at all.

in regards to your other statement, you stating breeding is selective doesn't mean it's the same as evolution.

I'm honestly puzzled that this is a subject of debate. Dog breeds are a result of evolution, it's just a fact.

Parker et. al. "Genetic Structure of the Purebred Domestic Dog" Science Vol 304, Issue 5674, 1160-1164 , 21 May 2004

"First, the true evolutionary history of dog breeds is not well represented by the bifurcating tree model assumed by the method because existing breeds were mixed to create new breeds (a process that continues today)"

"Understanding the genetic relationships among breeds will also provide insight into the directed evolution of our closest animal companions."

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Sutter et. al. "A Single IGF1 Allele Is a Major Determinant of Small Size in Dogs" Science Vol 304, Issue 5674, 1160-1164 , 21 May 2004

"Understanding the genetic basis for the rapid generation of extreme size variability in the dog would provide critical tests of alternative genetic mechanisms and insight into how evolutionary diversification in size could occur rapidly during adaptive radiations (12)."
--------------------------------------------------------

Ostrander and Wayne; The Canine Genome, Genome Res. 5:1706-1716, 2005

"To assess the recent evolution and relationships of breeds, microsatellite loci provide a better tool, as their high variability insures allele frequency divergence through drift."

"Finally, in the more recent evolution of dog breeds, limited interbreeding has imposed a remarkable genetic structure such that nearly all breeds represent distinct genetic pools that can be divided into at least four distinct genetic groupings."
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia. Evolution is more than just breeding, end of story. Natural Selection has nothing to do with the process man applies to breeding animals. Breeding alone does not equal evolution in any sense of it although may give rise to evolution. The definition usually does include breeding leading to the allele frequencies stuff you googled up, but that is not the end of it has to be the first step in the journey (assuming that the organism is sexual) but that first step doesn't always lead to that journey.

Like I said this thread is not the place nor you the candidate to have this debate....srsly.

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.
 

Oceandevi

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2006
3,085
1
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia. Evolution is more than just breeding, end of story. Natural Selection has nothing to do with the process man applies to breeding animals. Breeding alone does not equal evolution in any sense of it although may give rise to evolution. The definition usually does include breeding leading to the allele frequencies stuff you googled up, but that is not the end of it has to be the first step in the journey (assuming that the organism is sexual) but that first step doesn't always lead to that journey.

Like I said this thread is not the place nor you the candidate to have this debate....srsly.

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.

Truth.

This breed was line bred for hunting. All they had to do was line breed polydactyl dogs. It is interesting because I thought recessive traits like this would be more difficult to encourage.
The stretchy neck ting is rather odd.

Selective breeding is one our most powerful tools/methods to this day. Humans have used it for thousands of years.
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia.
No Google, PubMed. I'd read the Ostrander article (I do this stuff for a living) when it was first published, so I knew what I was looking for. I just went to PubMed and searched "canine genome." Then I DL'd the PDFs of the articles and pulled the quotes. Nothing particularly difficult. Give it a try and see if you can find something that supports your point of view. I'm open to being proved wrong.

Here's a link to the Ostrander and Wayne paper (link I can't link the Science papers), it's quite clear that they think breeds are a result of evolution. Why do you think they're wrong and you're right?

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.

"Not an evolution of the domestic dog?" I'm not sure what you mean. It is the result of evolution within the species. It's still a domestic dog, there's no reason to believe otherwise as far as I can tell. Are you suggesting that evolution doesn't occur unless there's speciation? Or that it can't happen within a species? I still don't understand exactly what your objection is.


Edit: I see up above I wrote "Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed. " Obviously wrong, ooops. Meant to say "breeding and selection...." My apologies if this is the source of confusion.


 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
cool dog...but this lundehund syndrome seems kind of freaky, and apparently all of them are affected. Life span is random and unpredictable b/c of this.

These kind of things happen when you try to rescue a breed, or any sort of species, from a bottleneck of 6. hmmm, not a good idea....

It said some of them are symptom free, and many have few symptoms. But yes...tight breeding always has it's flaws, like German Shepards and their hip dysplesia.

It's kind of amazing to go from 6 to a couple thousand!


it's also irresponsible from a genetic perspective.

hence, this syndrome.

honestly, the breed should be a museum piece, sorry to say.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
hardly evolution...its a dog bred for certain traits.

The dog is pretty much flawed though due to it's predisposition to have a pretty serious disease.

Selective breeding is a form of evolution.

the article talks about the natural traits of this animal.

hardly natural. directed, human intervention is hardly evolution.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
hardly evolution...its a dog bred for certain traits.

The dog is pretty much flawed though due to it's predisposition to have a pretty serious disease.

Selective breeding is a form of evolution.

I don't agree with that at all. Selective breeding demonstrates traits already inherent to the breed.

My point was more that it may have been evolution that at some point gave this dog the ability to turn it's head like that, and the extra toes for better traction and grasping, as to make it a better puffin hunter, which would be a case of evolution and natural selection.

but the syndrome, which seems to be linked to the cascade of these other traits, is a selective force against this breed. Humans intervening to prevent this natural process form happening is not evolution.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons

All evolution can basically be viewed as selective breeding. It's just a matter of what's doing the selection.

no, this is a false statment. I am not sure if you are confusing natural selection with breeding and evolution or what...but they are all different.

You are seriously confusing what breeding lends and what evolution does, but this is not the point of this thread.

an alkemyst post that I can can :beer:

;)
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Gibsons

All evolution can basically be viewed as selective breeding. It's just a matter of what's doing the selection.

no, this is a false statment. I am not sure if you are confusing natural selection with breeding and evolution or what...but they are all different.

It's correct, and I'm not confusing anything. Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed.

You are seriously confusing what breeding lends and what evolution does, but this is not the point of this thread.
Evolution is change in allele frequencies over time. Selective breeding, whether the selection is artificial or natural, causes a change in allele frequencies over time. That's evolution.

Tell me how it's not evolution, be as technical as you like.

Evolution is a natural process, with no goal. Outside forces directing the survival of unfavorable alleles in a particular environment is the opposite of evolution.

Mistakes happen all the time in evolution. and through the original breeding of this dog, it appears that a huge mistake was being righted. Humans intervened, and found it necessary to reverse that.

Hold on, I'm consulting my Gould... ;)
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
cool dog...but this lundehund syndrome seems kind of freaky, and apparently all of them are affected. Life span is random and unpredictable b/c of this.

These kind of things happen when you try to rescue a breed, or any sort of species, from a bottleneck of 6. hmmm, not a good idea....

It said some of them are symptom free, and many have few symptoms. But yes...tight breeding always has it's flaws, like German Shepards and their hip dysplesia.

It's kind of amazing to go from 6 to a couple thousand!


it's also irresponsible from a genetic perspective.

hence, this syndrome.

honestly, the breed should be a museum piece, sorry to say.

Zinfamous, I could agree with you if they were a wild animal, but these are domesticated dogs, so unless humans breed them they cannot go out in the wild, live in packs, and thrive. Not to mention the fact we nearly drove their primary hunted food to extinction. ;)

Natural selection and dogs went out the window when so many domesticated breeds became available.

It's an unnatural world, dig it!
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia.
No Google, PubMed. I'd read the Ostrander article (I do this stuff for a living) when it was first published, so I knew what I was looking for. I just went to PubMed and searched "canine genome." Then I DL'd the PDFs of the articles and pulled the quotes. Nothing particularly difficult. Give it a try and see if you can find something that supports your point of view. I'm open to being proved wrong.

Here's a link to the Ostrander and Wayne paper (link I can't link the Science papers), it's quite clear that they think breeds are a result of evolution. Why do you think they're wrong and you're right?

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.

"Not an evolution of the domestic dog?" I'm not sure what you mean. It is the result of evolution within the species. It's still a domestic dog, there's no reason to believe otherwise as far as I can tell. Are you suggesting that evolution doesn't occur unless there's speciation? Or that it can't happen within a species? I still don't understand exactly what your objection is.


Edit: I see up above I wrote "Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed. " Obviously wrong, ooops. Meant to say "breeding and selection...." My apologies if this is the source of confusion.

Here's a paraphrase for you, in reference to body mass of chihuahuas and Newfoundland breeds:

"....These cases of fast change under strong directional artificial selection contrast sharply with what we know of long-term evolutionary change under natural selection, where rates of change estimated from the fossil record over very long periods of time are many orders of magnitude slower"
Gingerich, P.D. (1983) Rates of evolution: effects of time and temporal scaling. Science 222. 159-61 qtd in Stearns and Hoekstra Evolution: an introduction Oxford University Press. 88. 2000

They go on:
"How can we explain these different rates of evolutionary change? One possibility is that continued strong directional selection, as applied in artificial selection, is rare in nature." [they go on to reference a well-documented natural example involving the finches of the Galapagos and beak selection related to climate and seed production over a short period of time]
Then, this: "Another reason for the slower rate of evolution in natural systems may be that the extreme trait values produced by directional selection reduces fitness because of negative side-effects of the alleles selected. A common experience in artificial selection is that some selection lines show a decrease in fertility, sometimes even leading to extinction of the line. Also, after relaxation of selection the the selected trait often tends to return towards its original value. This indicates that natural selection is opposed to artificial selection."

I have much more, will be back momentarily.
Sadly, I'm going through my own library here: stacks of photocopied articles, textbooks and such. Then the Gould Manifesto on all that is evolution.... ;)
This is what I found in one text so far....
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
cool dog...but this lundehund syndrome seems kind of freaky, and apparently all of them are affected. Life span is random and unpredictable b/c of this.

These kind of things happen when you try to rescue a breed, or any sort of species, from a bottleneck of 6. hmmm, not a good idea....

It said some of them are symptom free, and many have few symptoms. But yes...tight breeding always has it's flaws, like German Shepards and their hip dysplesia.

It's kind of amazing to go from 6 to a couple thousand!


it's also irresponsible from a genetic perspective.

hence, this syndrome.

honestly, the breed should be a museum piece, sorry to say.

Zinfamous, I could agree with you if they were a wild animal, but these are domesticated dogs, so unless humans breed them they cannot go out in the wild, live in packs, and thrive. Not to mention the fact we nearly drove their primary hunted food to extinction. ;)

Natural selection and dogs went out the window when so many domesticated breeds became available.

It's an unnatural world, dig it!

I agree with you, but I'm coming from a different perspective here.....

Sure, I'm not worried about this dog trying to survive in the wild, passing on unfavorable traits to other, more robust breeds.

The issue here, is one of ethics. I know puffins are still a major food source in places like Iceland. Are they depending on these dogs to hunt Puffins for their food? I'm not sure, honestly. I have an Icelandic pal, an evolutionary geneticist whom I've worked with, strangely enough, and I'll ask him (a mentor of mine at NC State, a pretty well-known evolutionary geneticist, was our PI and has become quite interested in dog genetics, actually....though I don't know where either of them stand on this) Anyhoo, is this dog that is born into sickness being kept around simply for shows? For the ASPCA? So some industry can "legitimize" the perpetuation of an unnatural animal for the sake of their show?

Yes, it sounds extremist, and I'm not an extremist. But, the argument bears merit. This is an animal that, even in the face of directed artificial selection, essentially lost out to selection processes. It was only through an advanced system of breeding, patience, and some pretty good evolutionary understanding (though, not appreciation ;)), that these dogs survived.

So again, ...why do we keep these around?

I'll be fully honest here: I only learned about this breed form this post. And I must admit...I want one. hehe ;)

 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: zinfamous
cool dog...but this lundehund syndrome seems kind of freaky, and apparently all of them are affected. Life span is random and unpredictable b/c of this.

These kind of things happen when you try to rescue a breed, or any sort of species, from a bottleneck of 6. hmmm, not a good idea....

It said some of them are symptom free, and many have few symptoms. But yes...tight breeding always has it's flaws, like German Shepards and their hip dysplesia.

It's kind of amazing to go from 6 to a couple thousand!


it's also irresponsible from a genetic perspective.

hence, this syndrome.

honestly, the breed should be a museum piece, sorry to say.

Zinfamous, I could agree with you if they were a wild animal, but these are domesticated dogs, so unless humans breed them they cannot go out in the wild, live in packs, and thrive. Not to mention the fact we nearly drove their primary hunted food to extinction. ;)

Natural selection and dogs went out the window when so many domesticated breeds became available.

It's an unnatural world, dig it!

I agree with you, but I'm coming from a different perspective here.....

Sure, I'm not worried about this dog trying to survive in the wild, passing on unfavorable traits to other, more robust breeds.

The issue here, is one of ethics. I know puffins are still a major food source in places like Iceland. Are they depending on these dogs to hunt Puffins for their food? I'm not sure, honestly. I have an Icelandic pal, an evolutionary geneticist whom I've worked with, strangely enough, and I'll ask him (a mentor of mine at NC State, a pretty well-known evolutionary geneticist, was our PI and has become quite interested in dog genetics, actually....though I don't know where either of them stand on this) Anyhoo, is this dog that is born into sickness being kept around simply for shows? For the ASPCA? So some industry can "legitimize" the perpetuation of an unnatural animal for the sake of their show?

Yes, it sounds extremist, and I'm not an extremist. But, the argument bears merit. This is an animal that, even in the face of directed artificial selection, essentially lost out to selection processes. It was only through an advanced system of breeding, patience, and some pretty good evolutionary understanding (though, not appreciation ;)), that these dogs survived.

So again, ...why do we keep these around?

I'll be fully honest here: I only learned about this breed form this post. And I must admit...I want one. hehe ;)

Most purebreeds have some kind of ailment that aflicts their breed though, such as German Shephards and hip dysplasia,

Let me pull up known genetic issues that can arise in poodles.

Toy:

* Progressive Retinal Atrophy a disorder of the eye in which the light cells in the retina wither and die due to insufficient blood supply. the disease progresses Gradually, results in blindness and has no known cure. Its onset in the Poodle is between 5 to 6 years old. The presence of PRA can be detected by ophthalmascopic examination by a veterinary ophthalmologist.
* Corneal Dystrophy - Corneal dystrophies" are diseases of the cornea that are bilateral, non-inflammatory and inherited.
* Legg-Calve'-Perthes - a disorder in which non-inflammatory a vascular necrosis of the femoral neck and head result in one of both of a young dog's rear legs becoming lame. Irritability and pain are other primary symptoms. Some dogs recover and function without treatment, but in severe case surgical removal of the femur head is indicated.
* Patella Sub-luxation - or slipped kneecap, a condition in which the patella slides in and out of the groove where it is normally held in place by ligaments. This causes hopping or favoring of the leg until the kneecap slips back into place. In some cases, in can be surgically corrected.
* Epilepsy - a neurological disorder marked by recurring seizures that follow episodic, abnormal discharges of electrical impulses by nerve cells in the brain. As in humans, it is controlled with drugs such as Phenobarbital or Dilantin.
* Hypothyroidism - a condition resulting from an inadequate production of thyroid hormone. Also treated with drug therapy, its symptoms include a coarse, brittle coat that falls out, thickening and discoloration of the skin, lethargy, obesity, mental slowness and irregular heart cycles.
* Cryptorchidism - or undescended testicle, a condition in which one or both testicles are retained in the abdominal cavity. Hormone injections, given to stimulate testicular descent, sometimes are successful. When the treatment is unsuccessful, removal of the testicles is recommended because cryptorchid testicles may become cancerous.
* Mitral Valve Disease - The heart consists of 4 chambers - 2 atria and 2 ventricles. The atrioventricular (AV) valves ensure that the blood flows from the atria to the ventricles when the heart beats. A defect in the mitral valve (the left atrioventricular valve) causes backflow of blood into the left atrium, or mitral regurgitation. Less commonly, a narrowing or stenosis of the valve can be identified. Because of the leaky valve, the heart is less efficient at pumping blood to the body.
*
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia (AIHA) - A decrease in the number of red blood cells (RBC's) or the amount of hemoglobin, resulting in a decrease in the oxygen- carrying capacity of the blood.
* Cushings Disease - This is a disease that occurs from the overproduction of cortisone by the adrenal glands.








The Standard is also subject to:

* Hip Dysplasia - a condition in which the head of the femur fits improperly into the hip joint socket, causing Pain and lameness. Pain killers and/or surgery are the usual treatments.

Genetically based disorders in The Standard Poodle include:

* PRA, Epilepsy, and Hypothyroidism (same as with the Toy and Miniature above.)
* Corneal Dystrophy - Corneal dystrophies" are diseases of the cornea that are bilateral, non-inflammatory and inherited (same as Toy and Miniature).
* Hip Dyplasia (see above, same as Miniature. The Toy does not seem to suffer from this one.)
* Addisons Disease - A disorder caused by a deficiency in adreno cortical hormonesmost commonly occurring in young to middle aged dogs.
* Cushings Disease - This is a disease that occurs from the overproduction of cortisone by the adrenal glands.
* Von Willebrand's Disease - a disorder that involves a tendency to bleed easily, is caused by a deficiency in the von Willebrand factor, a protein found in the blood plasma. As with PRA and hip dysplasia, VWD testing is recommended.
* Sebaceous Adenitis - a chronic skin disorder resulting from abnormal and/or inflamed, or in some cases a total absence of, sebaceous glands. Symptoms include hair loss, formation of silver-gray scales and secondary skin infections with an offensive odor. Therapeutic baths and antibiotics for secondary infections are the recommended treatments.
* Bloat/Gastric Torsion - a life Threatening condition that occurs when the stomach swells with gas and then twists cutting off its blood supply.
* Liver Shunts - Liver Shunts are abnormal vascular connections between the hepatic portal vein and systemic circulation. Such anomalies cause blood in the gastrointestinal tract to be diverted past the liver, there by limiting the liver's vital functions in metabolism and detoxification of compounds.
* JRD - Juvenile renal disease (JRD) and other congenital or familial forms of renal dysplasia are seen in about twenty breeds of dogs including The Standard Poodle. According to Kenneth Bovee, DVM, (Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania), the clinical entity has considerable variation from breed to breed and has completely different prevalence rates. A table which lists all of the congenital and familial renal diseases of dogs by breed can be found in Veterinary Pediatrics Dogs & Cats from Birth to Six Months.
* Mitral Valve Disease - The heart consists of 4 chambers - 2 atria and 2 ventricles. The atrioventricular (AV) valves ensure that the blood flows from the atria to the ventricles when the heart beats. A defect in the mitral valve (the left atrioventricular valve) causes backflow of blood into the left atrium, or mitral regurgitation. Less commonly, a narrowing or stenosis of the valve can be identified. Because of the leaky valve, the heart is less efficient at pumping blood to the body.
* Entropian - An eye condition in which the eyelids are grown inward, causing the eye lashes to come into contact with the eye itself.
* Autoimmune Disease - If a dog has an autoimmune disease, the immune system mistakenly attacks self, targeting the cells, tissues, and organs of a dogs own body. A collection of immune system cells and molecules at a target site is broadly referred to as inflammation.
* Hereditary Eye Disease - Genetic Eye Problems
* Elbow Dysplasia or O.C.D. - Elbow Dysplasia has been coined to describe three developmental conditions, osteochondrosis/ osteochondritis dissecans (OC/OCD) of the humeral condyle, ununited anconeal process (UAP), and fragmented coronoid process (FCP), that commonly affect the elbow of many large and giant breeds of dogs.
*
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia (AIHA) - A decrease in the number of red blood cells (RBC's) or the amount of hemoglobin, resulting in a decrease in the oxygen- carrying capacity of the blood.



Yet people still breed them. Why? The same reasons as the lungehound.

1) To keep the species alive.
2) For their wonderful traits
3) Because it isn't a given they would be in pain, many of these animals live healthy lives.

I suppose it's similar to people, even if you might be predisposed to some disorders, many people would still be happy they were born. =)

I hope that answers your questions on my thoughts of the issues at hand!
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia.
No Google, PubMed. I'd read the Ostrander article (I do this stuff for a living) when it was first published, so I knew what I was looking for. I just went to PubMed and searched "canine genome." Then I DL'd the PDFs of the articles and pulled the quotes. Nothing particularly difficult. Give it a try and see if you can find something that supports your point of view. I'm open to being proved wrong.

Here's a link to the Ostrander and Wayne paper (link I can't link the Science papers), it's quite clear that they think breeds are a result of evolution. Why do you think they're wrong and you're right?

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.

"Not an evolution of the domestic dog?" I'm not sure what you mean. It is the result of evolution within the species. It's still a domestic dog, there's no reason to believe otherwise as far as I can tell. Are you suggesting that evolution doesn't occur unless there's speciation? Or that it can't happen within a species? I still don't understand exactly what your objection is.


Edit: I see up above I wrote "Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed. " Obviously wrong, ooops. Meant to say "breeding and selection...." My apologies if this is the source of confusion.

The point of their paper is to show that domesticated dogs are a valuable model for investigating specific trait selection. In fact, I can't but help assume that you cited this sentence: "Understanding the genetic relationships among breeds will also provide insight into the directed evolution of our closest animal companions," simply due to to the phrase, "directed evolution," and that you're using this an argument for dog breeding as an example of evolution.

Dog breeding is an example of selective trait pooling. It has become, especially in recent years (in large part to the work in your article and others), a valuable model for genetic drift in non-evolutionary environments. It's a way to understand evolution, but it isn't evolution.

you like simple definitions, so here is one.

-evolution occurs through natural selection
-modern dog breeds exist through directed artificial selection.
-therefore, modern dog breeds do not occur as a process of evolution.

Hell, even in the face of directed artificial selection, this breed was selected against. If anything, the continued existence of this particular breed is a clear insult to evolutionary processes.
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ahh Gibsons discovered Google/Wikipedia.
No Google, PubMed. I'd read the Ostrander article (I do this stuff for a living) when it was first published, so I knew what I was looking for. I just went to PubMed and searched "canine genome." Then I DL'd the PDFs of the articles and pulled the quotes. Nothing particularly difficult. Give it a try and see if you can find something that supports your point of view. I'm open to being proved wrong.

Here's a link to the Ostrander and Wayne paper (link I can't link the Science papers), it's quite clear that they think breeds are a result of evolution. Why do you think they're wrong and you're right?

While the dogs we have today would be something evolution based, the Lundehound is not an evolution of the domestic dog, but a breed of them.

"Not an evolution of the domestic dog?" I'm not sure what you mean. It is the result of evolution within the species. It's still a domestic dog, there's no reason to believe otherwise as far as I can tell. Are you suggesting that evolution doesn't occur unless there's speciation? Or that it can't happen within a species? I still don't understand exactly what your objection is.


Edit: I see up above I wrote "Breeding is selection and that's all that's needed. " Obviously wrong, ooops. Meant to say "breeding and selection...." My apologies if this is the source of confusion.

The point of their paper is to show that domesticated dogs are a valuable model for investigating specific trait selection. In fact, I can't but help assume that you cited this sentence: "Understanding the genetic relationships among breeds will also provide insight into the directed evolution of our closest animal companions," simply due to to the phrase, "directed evolution," and that you're using this an argument for dog breeding as an example of evolution.

Directed evolution is still evolution. That's my point. They also refer to "evolutionary history of dog breeds." What else could they mean by this?

Dog breeding is an example of selective trait pooling. It has become, especially in recent years (in large part to the work in your article and others), a valuable model for genetic drift in non-evolutionary environments. It's a way to understand evolution, but it isn't evolution.
Agree with the first part, not the second.

you like simple definitions, so here is one.

-evolution occurs through natural selection
-modern dog breeds exist through directed artificial selection.
-therefore, modern dog breeds do not occur as a process of evolution.

Hell, even in the face of directed artificial selection, this breed was selected against. If anything, the continued existence of this particular breed is a clear insult to evolutionary processes.

Directed artificial selection is still selection. To have evolution, the selection need not be "natural', that's your own arbitrary restraint. If you require that the selection be "natural" or in the wild, then it doesn't fit that definition (and I don't agree with that definition). Otherwise though, you have a pool of individuals and they are selected for breeding based on phenotype. This breed was selected by people determining which dogs did the breeding, in spite of their inbreeding problems. It's evolution, just not the "classic" or "natural" kind. It's a change in alleles over time based on a process of selection, i.e. evolution. I think our disagreement simply stems from the artificial nature of selection that gave rise to dog breeds - my argument is that we're still seeing changes in allele frequency based on selection (regardless of the source of selection) and that is evolution. Everything I know about genetics (and I teach genetics) supports this.

Do you agree with the statement "dogs evolved from wolves?" What about symbiotic bacteria in plants, is that a result of evolution? Viral genes in the human genome? Long term changes in human allele frequencies due to changes in our environment arising from technology, is that evolution?

Furthermore, the molecular genetic events causing different breeds are, individually, virtually indistinguishable from most of those that have led to natural speciation (there are no gross cytogenetic change within dog breeds, but then again, there are none between dogs and wolves). The methods used to map the relationships between breeds are virtually the same as that used to map species, (with the exception noted for the bifurcating tree model) the data is generated and interpreted in the same way.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: Gibsons
No Google, PubMed. I'd read the Ostrander article (I do this stuff for a living) when it was first published, so I knew what I was looking for. I just went to PubMed and searched "canine genome." Then I DL'd the PDFs of the articles and pulled the quotes. Nothing particularly difficult. Give it a try and see if you can find something that supports your point of view. I'm open to being proved wrong.

if anyone has hired you in the capacity as a biologist, they really fucked up.

Your only saving grace is to possibly be assuming things that you did not post...however I'd have expected you to respond to my quests.

But what do you do for a living...
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: TruePaige

Zinfamous, I could agree with you if they were a wild animal, but these are domesticated dogs, so unless humans breed them they cannot go out in the wild, live in packs, and thrive. Not to mention the fact we nearly drove their primary hunted food to extinction. ;)

Natural selection and dogs went out the window when so many domesticated breeds became available.

It's an unnatural world, dig it!

domesticated dogs can form packs and be very dangerous and self-sufficient.

There is still a TON of natural selection going on.

If you ever left your home or your parent's you'd see quite a bit of unowned animals about.

Some domesticated breeds are very borderline. Like the Siberian Husky that decides to make a den out of your couch when she becomes pregnant.