Calvin and Hobbes definitely got this one right! I agree that Zeder’s theories about different “pathways” to domestication make so much sense. And by extension, it seems we should also resist the temptation to see domestication as an event that “happened” in the past. Dunn and Zeder both emphasize relationships of interdependence and interaction that are (always) dynamic. What happens if we think about domestication this way?

Her stealth and beauty were incredible. Loshy, powerful and graceful as he was, seemed almost clumsy by comparison. That time they decided to excavate the ice from the pond was hilarious! The time(s) they tangled with skunks – not so much.

I think you are on to something by reminding us that the “paleo diet” can’t be a one stop antidote for our contemporary dependence on processed food.
But setting aside the blame game (agriculture = bad) for a bit, what insights does Dunn offer about how domestication changes the biological makeup and social behavior of humans and cows?
P.S. I’m sure human breast milk is not part of Dunn’s critique.

Studies of stray / feral dog populations offer additional insight on how quickly the domestication process can be reversed and how many gradations there along the continuum of socialization with humans: Sternthal, S. (2010, Jan 16). A wolf in dog’s clothing. Financial Times. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/250253043?accountid=14826
(you’ll have to sign in on the proxy server to see the full text.) Also, I forgot to thank Corinne for mentioning my favorite subway riding dogs in Moscow. I posted about them last year here: http://blogs.lt.vt.edu/domesticate/dogs/moscow-strays/

I hope everyone checked out the video about how essential wolves (and apex predators) are to the health of the broader ecosystem — it’s such an important message.

I like your musings about the tame vs. domestic distinction, which is super important, and this discussion of cats is really helpful. As I mentioned elsewhere, it’s hard to keep our own biases in perspective when we evaluate the “intelligence” of another species. And thanks so much for questioning the “dogs domesticated as food” in China theory. I think most scientists agree that it is extremely unlikely that a predator was domesticated primarily as a food animal. Sounds like way too much work. Eating dogs is (still) common in many parts of Asia, but it still seems unlikely that eating dogs was the primary impetus for domestication. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090904-dogs-tamed-china-food.html

It’s interesting how each new piece of the puzzle enriches (and complicates) the broader picture. I think it will take a while (and more research) before this new view of the common ancestor displaces the consensus about the ancestral linkages between dogs and wolves. Even the authors of this study were surprised that the wolf lineages from the hypothesized domestication centers did not seem to be the source lineage for the dogs. Much of the talk for the last couple of years has been about the development of starch digestion (in dogs especially, but also in people), and this study offers some new insight there as well – confirming the long-held view that dogs pre-date agriculture.

Some really interesting ideas here re: cats and intelligence! I wonder if it would be helpful to think about the different contexts for domestication of dogs vs. cats? Dogs are the oldest domesticate by far. They scavenged from and hunted with humans long before the advent of agriculture. Cats became domesticated after humans settled down and started storing grain, which attracted rodents, and then cats. How do you think that what comes across as independence and intelligence in today’s house cats reflects the circumstances of their incorporation into human society? I was just reading the other day about some exciting new finds about cat domestication here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive
/2013/12/how-humans-created-cats/282391/

It’s so hard for us humans to keep our own anthropocentric preferences in perspective and this discussion of wolf-dog “intelligence” really brings that out! Kara does a good job of reminding us that intelligence is situational and in the eye of the beholder. Inyo (and wolves, and wolf-dogs) do have more “smarts” in terms of their resourcefulness and perception of the environment (i.e. moving cars), while dogs have evolved to communicate with humans and in many situations to rely on them for direction. In some contexts we think the dogs are smarter because they display a higher level of social-interspecies intelligence. And yet the wolves clearly prevail in other settings. It’s complicated!

What intrigues me most about this post is your reminder that the debate about dog domestication just recently shifted in light of new findings about the dog-wolf common ancestor. The study is cited in this article. http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/0117/Did-dogs-really-evolve-from-wolves-New-evidence-suggests-otherwise
This confounds the long held understanding about “friendly wolves” you allude to in your post. Although it’s clear that dogs and wolves interbred quite a bit after the split, this new research could signal a major shift in how we think about the origins of the dog. Very cool.