Shiba dog's DNA found to be most similar to the Wolf but....

[Bandersnatch]

I was not the one making the phenotypical claim tieing it with DNA overlap, the researchers were...

But they haven't done any such thing!
You're talking about this fragment again, I presume:

This cluster includes Nordic breeds that phenotypically resemble the wolf, such as the Alaskan Malamute and Siberian Husky, and shows the closest genetic relationship to the wolf, which is the direct ancestor of domestic dogs.

What they're saying is this:
Say, we've got this study that tells us which breeds are the closest relatives of the grey wolf (hence, of the first domesticated dogs). Can we make a guess which breeds are the most likely candidates for the closest resemblance of the genetic makeup of the first domesticated dogs?
Let's take the closest relatives of the wolf (the wolf-like cluster) and pick all the breeds that also look the most like the wolf. This group includes the e.g. the Malamute and the Husky, but not the Chow Chow, nor the German Shepherd.

As far as I know, every dog breed has an ancestor that was mutated from the wolf. No dog breed is a direct descendent of the wolf. This distinction you speak of does not exist. Other studies which I am glad to dig up for you, claimed that the northern breeds were not more similar to the Wolf than a mere chihuaha. That's why this study confuses me.

Fair enough, not 'directly'. I should have kept to 'closest relative'. How close is the point of the study. Like this graph shows:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3459646/

I'm not sure what other studies you have that contradict this, but why not show them.

 

[Drakkith]

They insinuate that it is correlated

I don't agree. I think it was simply an offhand comment.

The fact that the malamute anatomy is much robust than the Wolf, while the working line German Shepherds body is a virtual copy, yet one is wolf-like DNA- wise and the other (GSD) is bottom of the of the list.. .. , puts a nail in the coffin to that "suggestion"

Not true. The genes controlling body shape, size, color, etc are only a tiny proportion of all genes. These can be manipulated to make a breed look like a wolf while the rest of its genes grow further and further from those of its ancestor.

 

[Pleonasm]

I'm not sure what other studies you have that contradict this, but why not show them.

"Purebred Alaskan Malamutes and Siberian Huskies are not wolves, or part-wolves, were not bred from wolves, and these breeds were not developed by breeding to wolves anytime recently (that is a separate animal called a http://www.wayeh.com/aboutsleddogs/wolves.htm#wolfdog). Based on studies by Dr. Robert Wayne at UC Berkeley, sled dogs are no more closely related to wolves than Chihuahuas."

 

[Pleonasm]

Here's more:

Q&A with Dona Miller, Research Associate http://www.tigerden.com/Wolf-park/Hybrid2.html12/97

Q: Is it true that dogs are all equally related to wolves per genetic tests, that the Siberian is no more related than the Fox Terrier?

A: This is true. All dogs are "equally related". It is believed that domestication of all breeds happened during the same era. However, depending on what humans needed from their animals, they selectively breed for very different traits.

 

[Pleonasm]

Please explain then how this discussed DNA study paints a completely different picture...

 

[Bandersnatch]

Please explain then how this discussed DNA study paints a completely different picture...

I don't see any study. Just a 15-years old Q&A with some person.

 

[Pleonasm]

I don't see any study. Just a 15-year old Q&A with some person.

Then read again because I just referenced it in the post above..
"Based on studies by Dr. Robert Wayne at UC Berkeley, sled dogs are no more closely related to wolves than Chihuahuas."

 

[Pleonasm]

The DNA for sled dogs does not retroactively change in the 2000s does it? Or did the northern breeds suddenly get wolfy?

How on Earth can these discrepencies exist?

 

[Bandersnatch]

You're only giving us the name of the researcher. No date or place of publication, no title.

DNA for the sled dogs does not retroactively change in the 2000s does it? Or did the northern breeds suddenly get wolfy?

How on Earth can these discrepency exist?

Without seeing the study, I'd venture a guess that it did not have the benefit of modern genetics. But do find it so that we may take a look.

 

[Pleonasm]

You're only giving us the name of the researcher. No date or place of publication, no title.Without seeing the study, I'd venture a guess that it did not have the benefit of modern genetics. But do find it so that we may take a look.

The wolf lady in the Q & A from the same time period made genetic claims, so I presume the berkeley researcher did just that. I would love to find it.

 

[Drakkith]

The DNA for sled dogs does not retroactively change in the 2000s does it? Or did the northern breeds suddenly get wolfy?

How on Earth can these discrepencies exist?

The study we were discussing was made in 2004, while that interview was done in 1997. Therefor it seems likely that at the time of the interview there was not as much information about dog and wolf genetics available.

 

[Pleonasm]

Please turn your volume down a bit before opening the clip.


Here's the body language and vocalisation of an enraged Shiba dog. The teeth are bigger than regular dog, including sled dogs, but I don't think this is wolf-like mannerism.

 

[Pleonasm]

The study we were discussing was made in 2004, while that interview was done in 1997. Therefor it seems likely that at the time of the interview there was not as much information about dog and wolf genetics available.

DNA has not changed since 97. Either he examined it or he didn't.

 

[Pleonasm]

Maybe you guys can help me with this at least. Is there a statistical significance between the Shiba Inu, Chow Chow and Akita in wolfiness? I can't read this data properly.

 

[Drakkith]

DNA has not changed since 97. Either he examined it or he didn't.

Genetic studies are very complicated and involve a lot of time and effort. Even if you have the full genetic code of animal you still have to choose what you're going to study and limit yourself. DNA sequencing also takes time and costs money. I don't know the state of the industry back then, but it may not have been within the capability of the scientists at UC Berkely in 1997 to sequence and study hundreds of individual dogs and wolves. Or it may just be that no one had gotten around to doing this detailed of a study until 2004.

Maybe you guys can help me with this at least. Is there a statistical significance between the Shiba Inu, Chow Chow and Akita in wolfiness? I can't read this data properly.

I don't know. The authors did not provide raw numbers in their article, only a graph that makes it difficult to tell when several different breeds are very close to each other in 'wolfiness'.

Edit: I'm referring to the article linked by Bandersnatch it post #7.

 

[Pleonasm]

Genetic studies are very complicated and involve a lot of time and effort. Even if you have the full genetic code of animal you still have to choose what you're going to study and limit yourself. DNA sequencing also takes time and costs money. I don't know the state of the industry back then, but it may not have been within the capability of the scientists at UC Berkely in 1997 to sequence and study hundreds of individual dogs and wolves. Or it may just be that no one had gotten around to doing this detailed of a study until 2004.
I don't know. The authors did not provide raw numbers in their article, only a graph that makes it difficult to tell when several different breeds are very close to each other in 'wolfiness'.

Edit: I'm referring to the article linked by Bandersnatch it post #7.

So the red bar distinctions are pretty meaningless between the top even if you have experience of previous studies with these tools? It seems foolish to use them then?

 

[Pleonasm]

I also question their phrasing "wolf-like" genes as opposed to literal wolf gene structures. By saying "wolf-like" is it gene structures that resemble the DNA structures of wolfes, but are in fact not literal wolf structures??

Very confusing.

 

[Drakkith]

So the red bar distinctions are pretty meaningless between the top even if you have experience of previous studies with these tools? It seems foolish to use them then?

I expect that the graphs are only there to serve as a quick way to visualize the data. A table with the raw numbers would probably give you more information but wouldn't look as good for the publication. The beginning of the article states that high resolution figures might be available online, but the link leads to a paywall, so I can't access them.

I also question their phrasing "wolf-like" genes as opposed to literal wolf gene structures. By saying "wolf-like" is it gene structures that resemble the DNA structures of wolfes, but are in fact not literal wolf structures??

Very confusing.

I can't say that I know either.

 

[Pleonasm]

If it means genes that resemble wolf gene structures, then the result of the study is meaningless. In other words: which dog breed has genetic structures that most resemble structures of wolfes, even though it's not the same ones.

You guys see where I am going with this?

 

[Drakkith]

If it means genes that resemble wolf gene structures, then the result of the study is meaningless. In other words: which dog breed has genetic structures that most resemble structures of wolfes, even though it's not the same ones.

You guys see where I am going with this?

What's the difference between a gene resembling a wolf gene vs a gene that is a wolf gene? Does a change of one nucleotide mean that the gene is no longer a wolf gene? How similar do they need to be, given that there is often variability even within individuals of the same species/breed?

 

[Pleonasm]

What's the difference between a gene resembling a wolf gene vs a gene that is a wolf gene? Does a change of one nucleotide mean that the gene is no longer a wolf gene? How similar do they need to be, given that there is often variability even within individuals of the same species/breed?

What's the difference between code similar to a computer vs the actual code? One is the computer, the other might not produce any computer operations at all, or very ineffecient ones.

No dog breed is technically more related to the wolf if none of their targetted structures are verbatim copies of the wolf code. It's just meaningless code aesthetics, if one overlaps more than the other.

 

[Drakkith]

What's the difference between code similar to a computer vs the actual code? One is the computer, the other might not produce any computer operations at all, or very ineffecient ones.

One could also compare it to different versions of the same program. If a programmer changed the name of a variable in one of the functions, is that function still the same function as it used to be? Note that microsatellites are simply repeated patterns of short DNA code, typically 1-6 nucleotides long. They don't code for proteins and are not subject to stringent conservative evolutionary pressure, meaning that mutations in them aren't as detrimental as they might be elsewhere in the genome. This makes it convenient to use for genetic analysis.

No dog breed is technically more related to the wolf if none of their targetted structures are verbatim copies of the wolf code. It's just meaningless code aesthetics, if one overlaps more than the other.

I'm not sure how the authors of the article evaluated the DNA. The microsatellite loci may have been identical in all the wolves, or there may have been some variability between individuals. Hence why I asked you what the difference between the two were. If there is variability in these microsatellite loci between individuals, that would make it impossible for the loci to match up exactly between breeds and wolves, as there would be no single template from either dogs or wolves with which to compare.

 

[Pleonasm]

One could also compare it to different versions of the same program. If a programmer changed the name of a variable in one of the functions, is that function still the same function as it used to be? Note that microsatellites are simply repeated patterns of short DNA code, typically 1-6 nucleotides long. They don't code for proteins and are not subject to stringent conservative evolutionary pressure, meaning that mutations in them aren't as detrimental as they might be elsewhere in the genome. This makes it convenient to use for genetic analysis.
I'm not sure how the authors of the article evaluated the DNA. The microsatellite loci may have been identical in all the wolves, or there may have been some variability between individuals. Hence why I asked you what the difference between the two were. If there is variability in these microsatellite loci between individuals, that would make it impossible for the loci to match up exactly between breeds and wolves, as there would be no single template from either dogs or wolves with which to compare.

If similarity between code structures is sufficient for wolf connections, then dogs like the Shiba Inu would likely reflect this overlap as being more wolfy. You wouldn't even need a study. I have outlined how this is not the case. While the Shiba Inu has several primal attributes and is no way an ordinary, domesticated dog (far from it), it is not wolfy in body language, behavior, vocalisation etc. The Siberian Husky exhibits far wolfier behavior, yet it doesn't even make the top 5 list.

 

[Drakkith]

If similarity between code structures is sufficient for wolf connections, then dogs like the Shiba Inu would likely reflect this overlap as being more wolfy. You wouldn't even need a study. I have outlined how this is not the case.

Tell me. How much do you know about genetics? Why would I trust your explanation over the articles referenced earlier in the thread?

While the Shiba Inu has several primal attributes and is no way an ordinary, domesticated dog (far from it), it is not wolfy in body language, behavior, vocalisation etc. The Siberian Husky exhibits far wolfier behavior, yet it doesn't even make the top 5 list.

Which suggests that the appearance of an animal doesn't necessarily correspond directly to how distantly related it is to another animal.

 

[Pleonasm]

Tell me. How much do you know about genetics? Why would I trust your explanation over the articles referenced earlier in the thread?

Because I know my history.. Neither the modern day Shiba Inu or Alaskan malamute is the oldest dog breed. Far from it. Both went nearly extinct and both were reinstated by the use of three distinct, but similar breeds of dogs. The only logical conclusion to draw from this, concidering that they are 1 and 4th respectively on the list, is that other breeds mixed in were ancient too. I don't know if I would bet on that with a "design dog" like the Alaskan malamute, so I am very surprised and sceptical of how high it placed. There was also near certain reinjection of wolf blood in early incarnations of Malamutes, which is not detectable by regular samples but possibly by a deeper DNA study. This should disqualify it from the study altogether if true.

 

[Drakkith]

Because I know my history. Neither the modern day Shiba Inu or Alaskan malamute is the oldest dog breed. Far from it. Both went nearly extinct and both were reinstated by the use of three distinct, but similar breeds of dogs.

Can you provide any references supporting this?

There was also near certain reinjection of wolf blood in early incarnations of Malamutes, which is not detectable by regular samples but possibly by a deeper DNA study.

And this.

 

[Pleonasm]

Can you provide any references supporting this?
And this.

Here's an extensive account of Malamutes. The shiba extinction threat is in any bio on the net. http://omalmalamutes.com/omal/kotzebuevsmaloot.htm

 

[Drakkith]

Here's an extensive account of Malamutes. The shiba extinction threat is in any bio on the net. http://omalmalamutes.com/omal/kotzebuevsmaloot.htm

Awesome, thanks.

Well, I wish I could help you further, but I don't believe I know enough about this topic. I trust that there's an explanation that accounts for both the breed history and the genetic analysis though. But I certainly don't know it.

 

[Pleonasm]

Awesome, thanks.

Well, I wish I could help you further, but I don't believe I know enough about this topic. I trust that there's an explanation that accounts for both the breed history and the genetic analysis though. But I certainly don't know it.

Wouldn't you agree that if if a working breed is resurrected with new blood lines, it's rather unlikely so many years after its conception that those blood lines are ancient too?

 

[Pleonasm]

Here is the deceased mother of my Alaskan Malamute dog. She appears to be from the original blood line, concidering the smaller size. She was as small as a retriever dog.