Dogs source wickepidia

Taxonomy
The domestic dog was originally classified as Canis familiaris and Canis familiarus domesticus by Carolus Linnaeus in 1758,[19][20] and was reclassified in 1993 as Canis lupus familiaris, a subspecies of the gray wolf Canis lupus, by the Smithsonian Institution and the American Society of Mammalogists. Overwhelming evidence from behavior, vocalizations, morphology, and molecular biology led to the contemporary scientific understanding that a single species, the gray wolf, is the common ancestor for all breeds of domestic dogs;[21][22] however, the timeframe and mechanisms by which dogs diverged are controversial.[21] Canis lupus familiaris is listed as the name for the taxon that is broadly used in the scientific community and recommended by ITIS; Canis familiaris, however, is a recognised synonym. [23]

History and evolution

Main articles: Origin of the domestic dog and Wolves

Ancient Greek rhyton in the shape of a dog's head, made by Brygos, early 5th century BC. Jrme Carcopino Museum, Department of Archaeology, Aleria Domestic dogs inherited complex behaviors from their wolf ancestors, being pack hunters with complex body language. These sophisticated forms of social cognition and communication may account for their trainability, playfulness, and ability to fit into human

households and social situations, and these attributes have given dogs a relationship with humans that has enabled them to become one of the most successful species on the planet today.[21] Although experts largely disagree over the details of dog domestication, it is agreed that human interaction played a significant role in shaping the subspecies.[24] Shortly after domestication, dogs became ubiquitous in human populations, and spread throughout the world. Emigrants from Siberia likely crossed the Bering Strait with dogs in their company, and some experts[who?] suggest the use of sled dogs may have been critical to the success of the waves that entered North America roughly 12,000 years ago,[citation needed] although the earliest archaeological evidence of dog-like canids in North America dates from about 9,000 years ago.[25] Dogs were an important part of life for the Athabascan population in North America, and were their only domesticated animal. Dogs also carried much of the load in the migration of the Apache and Navajo tribes 1,400 years ago. Use of dogs as pack animals in these cultures often persisted after the introduction of the horse to North America.[26][page needed] The current consensus among biologists and archaeologists is that the dating of first domestication is indeterminate.[24][26] There is conclusive evidence dogs genetically diverged from their wolf ancestors at least 15,000 years ago,[6][27][28] but some believe domestication to have occurred earlier.[24] It is not known whether humans domesticated the wolf as such to initiate dog's divergence from its ancestors, or whether dog's evolutionary path had already taken a different course prior to domestication. For example, it is hypothesized that some wolves gathered around the campsites of paleolithic camps to scavenge refuse, and associated evolutionary pressure developed that favored those who were less frightened by, and keener in approaching, humans. The bulk of the scientific evidence for the evolution of the domestic dog stems from archaeological findings and mitochondrial DNA studies. The divergence date of roughly 15,000 years ago is based in part on archaeological evidence that demonstrates the domestication of dogs occurred more than 15,000 years ago,[21][26] and some genetic evidence indicates the domestication of dogs from their wolf ancestors began in the late Upper Paleolithic close to the Pleistocene/Holocene boundary, between 17,000 and 14,000 years ago.[29] But there is a wide range of other, contradictory findings that make this issue controversial. Archaeological evidence suggests the latest dogs could have diverged from wolves was roughly 15,000 years ago, although it is possible they diverged much earlier. [21] In 2008, a team of international scientists released findings from an excavation at Goyet Cave in Belgium declaring a large, toothy canine existed 31,700 years ago and ate a diet of horse, musk ox and reindeer.[30] Prior to this Belgium discovery, the earliest dog fossils were two large skulls from Russia and a mandible from Germany dated from roughly 14,000 years ago.[6][21] Remains of smaller dogs from Natufian cave deposits in the Middle East, including the earliest burial of a human being with a domestic dog, have been dated to around 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. [6][31] There is a great deal of archaeological evidence for dogs throughout Europe and Asia around this period and through the next two thousand years (roughly 8,000 to 10,000 years ago), with fossils uncovered in Germany, the French Alps, and Iraq, and cave paintings in Turkey.[21]

The oldest remains of a domesticated dog in the Americas were found in Texas and have been dated to about 9,400 years ago.[32]

DNA studies
DNA studies have provided a wide range of possible divergence dates, from 15,000 to 40,000 years ago,[6] to as much as 100,000 to 140,000 years ago.[33] These results depend on a number of assumptions.[21] Genetic studies are based on comparisons of genetic diversity between species, and depend on a calibration date. Some estimates of divergence dates from DNA evidence use an estimated wolf-coyote divergence date of roughly 700,000 years ago as a calibration.[34] If this estimate is incorrect, and the actual wolf-coyote divergence is closer to one or two million years ago, or more,[35] then the DNA evidence that supports specific dogwolf divergence dates would be interpreted very differently. Furthermore, it is believed the genetic diversity of wolves has been in decline for the last 200 years, and that the genetic diversity of dogs has been reduced by selective breeding. This could significantly bias DNA analyses to support an earlier divergence date. The genetic evidence for the domestication event occurring in East Asia is also subject to violations of assumptions. These conclusions are based on the location of maximal genetic divergence, and assume hybridization does not occur, and that breeds remain geographically localized. Although these assumptions hold for many species, there is good reason to believe that they do not hold for canines.[21] Genetic analyses indicate all dogs are likely descended from a handful of domestication events with a small number of founding females,[21][29] although there is evidence domesticated dogs interbred with local populations of wild wolves on several occasions.[6] Data suggest dogs first diverged from wolves in East Asia, and these domesticated dogs then quickly migrated throughout the world, reaching the North American continent around 8000 BC.[6] The oldest groups of dogs, which show the greatest genetic variability and are the most similar to their wolf ancestors, are primarily Asian and African breeds, including the Basenji, Lhasa Apso, and Siberian Husky.[36] Some breeds thought to be very old, such as the Pharaoh Hound, Ibizan Hound, and Norwegian Elkhound, are now known to have been created more recently.[36] There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the evolutionary framework for the domestication of dogs.[21] Although it is widely claimed that "man domesticated the wolf,"[37] man may not have taken such a proactive role in the process.[21] The nature of the interaction between man and wolf that led to domestication is unknown and controversial. At least three early species of the Homo genus began spreading out of Africa roughly 400,000 years ago, and thus lived for a considerable time in contact with canine species. Despite this, there is no evidence of any adaptation of canine species to the presence of the close relatives of modern man. If dogs were domesticated, as believed, roughly 15,000 years ago, the event (or events) would have coincided with a large expansion in human territory and the development of agriculture. This has led some biologists to suggest one of the forces that led to the domestication of dogs was a shift in human lifestyle in the form of established human settlements. Permanent settlements would have coincided with a greater amount of disposable food and would have created a barrier between wild and anthropogenic canine populations.[21]

Roles with humans

A Si

Husky used as a pack ani al

Earl rol s Wol es, and t ei dog descendants, would have derivedsigni icant benefits from living in human campsmore safety, more reliable food, lesser caloric needs, and more chance to breed.[38] They would have benefited from humans upright gait that gives them larger range over which to see potential predators and prey, as well as color vision that, at least by day, gives humans better visual discrimination.[38] Camp dogs would also have benefitted from human tool use, as in bringing down larger prey and controlling fire for a range of purposes.[38] Humans would also have derived enormous benefit from thedogs associated with their [39] camps.[39] For instance, dogs would have improved sanitation by cleaning up food scraps. Dogs may have provided warmth, as referred to in the Australian Aboriginal expression three dog night (an exceptionally cold night , and they would have alerted the camp to the presence of predators or strangers, using their acute hearing to provi e an early warning.[39] d Anthropologists believe the most significant benefit would have been the use of dogs' sensitive sense of smell to assist with the hunt.[39] The relationship between the presence of a dog and success in the hunt is often mentioned as a primary reason for the domestication of the wolf, and a 2004 study of hunter groups with and without a dog giv quantitative support es to the hypothesis that the benefits of cooperative hunting was an important factor in wolf domestication.[40] The cohabitation of dogs and humans would have gr eatly improved the chances of survival for early human groups, and the domestication of dogs may have been one of the key forces that led to human success.[41]

A British Bulldog shares a day at the park. As p ts

[39] The most widespread form of interspecies bonding occurs between humans and dogs [42] and the keeping of dogs as companions, particularly by elites, has a long history. However, [42] pet dog populations grew significantly after World War II as suburbani ation increased. In [43] the 1950s and 1960s, dogs were kept outside more often than they tend to be today (using the expression in the doghouse to describe exclusion from the group signifies the distance between the doghouse and the home) and were still primarily functional, acti g as a guard, n childrens playmate, or walking companion. From the 1980s, there have been changes in the role of the pet dog, such as the increased role of dogs in the emotional support of their owners.[44] People and dogs have become increasingly integrated and implicated in each others lives,[45] to the point where pet dogs actively shape the way a family and ho are me experienced.[46]

There have been two major trends in the changing status of pet dogs. The first has been the commodification of the dog, shaping it to conform to human expectatons of personality and i behaviour.[46] The second has been the broadening of the concept of the family and the home to include dogs-as-dogs within everyday routines and practices.[46] There are a vast range of commodity forms available to transform a pet dog into an ideal companion.[47] The list of goods, services and places available is enormous: from dog perfumes, couture, furniture and housing, to dog groomers, therapists, trainers and care [47] takers, dog cafes, spas, parks and beaches, and dog hotels, airlines and cemeteries. While dog training as an organi ed activity can be traced back to the 18th century, in the last decades of the 20th century it became a high profile issue as many normal dog behaviors such as barking, jumping up, digging, rolling in dung, fighting, and urine marking became increasingly incompatible with the new role of a pet dog.[48] Dog training books, classes and [49] television programs proliferated as the process of commodifying the pet dog continued.

A pet dog taking part in Christmas traditions The majority of contemporary dog owners describe th dog as part of the family,[46] eir although some ambivalence about the relationship is evident in the popular reconceptualisation of the dog-human family as a pack.[46] A dominance model of dog-human relationships has been promoted by some dog trainers, such as on the television programDog Whi . However it has been disputed that "trying to achieve status" is characteristic of doghuman interactions.[50] Pet dogs play an active role in family life; for example, a study of conversations in dog-human families showed how family members use the dog as a resource, [51] talking to the dog, or talking through the dog, to mediate their interactions with each other. Another study of dogs roles in families showed many dogs have set tasks or routines undertaken as family members, the most common of which was helping with the washing -up [46] by licking the plates in the dishwasher, and bringing in the newspaper f om the lawn. r Increasingly, human family members are engaging in activities centred on the perceived needs and interests of the dog, or in which the dog is an integral partner, suchas Dog Dancing and Doga.[47] According to the statistics published by the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association in the National Pet Owner Survey in 20092010, it is estimated there are 77.5 million dog owners in the United States.[52] The same survey shows nearly 40% of American households own at least one dog, of which 67% own just one dog, 25% two dogs and nearly 9% more than two dogs. There does not seem to be anygender preference among dogs as pets, as the statistical data reveal an equal number of female and male dog pets. Yet, although several programs are undergoing to promotepet adoption, less than a fifth of the owned dogs come from a shelter.