The First Dog: Genes Reveal Behavior Came First

By Gemma Tarlach | June 27, 2018 7:00 pm
The dog has walked beside humans longer than any other animal, but science has only recently begun to understand how and why domestication occurred. (Credit: G. Tarlach)

The dog has walked beside humans longer than any other animal, but science has only recently begun to understand how domestication occurred. (Credit: G. Tarlach)

Who’s a good dog? The very first dogs, apparently, as a new genetic study reveals the sequence of events, begun thousands of years ago, that morphed wild wolves into (eventually) couchwarmers and ball catchers.

If you wrote a book about animal domestication, the story of turning wolves into dogs would arguably deserve the biggest chapter. For starters, all archaeological and genetic evidence suggests dogs were the first domesticated animals, and the only ones before the advent of agriculture.

Researchers digging into those past events (it seems likely they were domesticated more than once, in more than one place) are also approaching the topic collaboratively, which is speeding results. And many dog owners have proven ready to help, allowing saliva samples from their pets to be used to build ever-larger databases of doggie DNA for analysis.

So far we know that Eurasian gray wolves were domesticated into dogs more than 10,000 years ago, and possibly as early as 40,000 years ago. But the big questions — how, why and exactly where — remain open to debate. A leading theory about how this happened is that wolves were selected for specific behavioral traits which, over time, led to changes in physical traits as well. And new research out today appears to both confirm that hypothesis and explain why.

Tame Time

Before we go further, a couple things to keep in mind. When it comes to dogs, saying things like “selected for specific traits” probably brings to mind a lot of the features, mostly originating in the 18th-20th centuries, that we associate with modern purebreds, from the shortened snout of pugs to the water-resistant coats of many hunting breeds. These traits were actively selected for by fanciers and breeders.

Back in the pre-Neolithic, however, the idea of selecting wolves for specific traits was a different affair.

Imagine, theoretically, hunter-gatherers sharing a kill over a fire one night, and the next morning packing up and moving on, leaving perhaps a scrap of offal behind in the ashes. Now picture a wolf that dared to venture close to the human-scented remains of the fire to score that scrap, eat it and maybe start following the band of humans instead of actively avoiding them as most of its species would do. We could say that wolf was selected for the behavioral trait of reduced fear of humans, even though no human did any active selecting.

This may all seem kind of obvious. Of course the average hunter-gatherer is going to prioritize having a wolf-dog with certain behaviors, like, say, not eating the children, over one with spots. Obviously, you may be thinking, behavior came before looks. After all, there was that famous Russian experiment where Dmitry Belyaev bred foxes for tameness and, over decades, the animals’ appearances completely changed.

Yes, that’s all true, but the actual mechanics of it all, on a cellular level, have remained largely mysterious. Today’s paper helps to explain what’s going on at that micro-level.

My, What Big Eyes You Have

Dogs, like Belyaev’s foxes and most other domesticated animals, exhibit a suite of traits — both physical and behavioral — generally called domestication syndrome. These traits include tameness, floppy ears, smaller jaws and teeth, reduced pigmentation of skin and fur, a smaller brain and, often, larger eyes relative to the rest of the face. Ever since Charles Darwin first noted the syndrome, scientists have been trying to understand why this occurs.

Domestication of the dog involved selecting for tameness, bowtie optional. (Credit G. Tarlach)

Domestication of the dog involved selecting for tameness, bowtie optional. Floppy ears just came with the territory, for reasons researchers are now able to understand. (Credit: G. Tarlach)

In the past few years, geneticists and evolutionary biologists have focused on neural crest cells (NCCs) as the catalysts for domestication syndrome.

NCCs are stem cells found in every embryo that show up first at the crest, or top edge, of the neural tube, which will eventually become the brain and spinal cord. As the embryo develops, a number of different genes signal NCCs to activate and move, along specific paths, to different areas of the body to perform different tasks.

The range of activities that NCCs do is enormous: the adrenal and pituitary systems, which are involved in aggression, fear and other behaviors, are derived from NCCs, but these cells are also involved in regulating physical traits such as pigmentation of skin and hair.

It Takes A Village (Dog)

The team behind today’s research analyzed tiny pieces of DNA taken from different locations within entire genomes of ten wolves and 43 village dogs from four different continents.

Using village dogs is key here: These semi-feral animals live in and around villages in much of the world but are not actively bred by humans, so they are generally free of the genetic bottlenecks created by fanciers who actively manipulate bloodlines for specific traits. In short, they’re as pure “dog” as a modern dog can be.

Why not analyze the whole genome? Well, that would be a lot of data, and take a long time (and cost more). Instead, the researchers identified 246 locations (83 percent of them found for the first time), for a total of 429 genes, that were likely associated with domestication and focused their energies there.

They compared the genetic material from modern village dogs with that of ancient dogs older than 5,000 years. Similar genetic signatures in both populations at those specific locations in the genomes meant that the signatures were likely the result of the original domestication events, and not later active selection by breeders.

When I say dog scientist, this is not what I mean. (Credit: G. Tarlach)

The new research confirms that, as dogs were domesticated, behavioral traits such as tameness occurred first, and physical traits such as floppy ears followed. No word yet on when the gene allowing the patience to pose for silly pictures arose. (Credit: G. Tarlach)

Most of the genes that differed significantly between the village dogs and the wolves (and appear to have changed during domestication) are linked to NCC development and migration. Selecting for behavioral traits such as reduced fear of humans, a key element of tameness, favored certain genetic signatures. In turn, those genetic signatures changed how the NCCs they activated actually migrated around the body and performed.

And you know how it is in the universe: Change one thing and there’s an unforeseen knock-on effect. The genes regulating NCC activity associated with behavior also regulate NCCs involved in traits such as pigmentation and whether your ears stand up or flop over. By reinforcing genetic changes associated with desirable behavior, the genetic changes associated with coat color and floppy ears were then also reinforced.

We still don’t know exactly how domestication took place on an individual level. Some researchers believe hunter-gatherers may have begun to trap and then keep wolf pups around, perhaps training them to hunt as they matured. (Don’t try this at home. Researchers whom I’ve interviewed about dog domestication, and who have worked with wolves, maintain a healthy respect for the animals and strongly caution against any backyard domestication re-enactment attempts. It ends badly for everyone, wolves included.)

Others believe wolves self-domesticated by following the humans in search of edible scraps. Truth be told, we’ll probably never know how wolves became the first dogs. Now, however, researchers have a better idea of what was happening deep inside the developing wolf pup embryos during that transition.

There are a few caveats to the new work, which the authors acknowledge. For example, a few dozen village dogs, despite hailing from all over the world, represent only a small portion of the genetic history of the dog, which continues to tangle with that of the wolf thanks to post-domestication interbreeding events. The amount of ancient dog DNA available for comparative study is also limited. More DNA from more village dogs and especially more ancient dogs will help future work in this area.

But for now, it’s a great step forward on the road to truly understanding how dogs came to be our oldest friends.

The study appears today in BMC Biology.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Living World, top posts
MORE ABOUT: animals, genetics
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Hemmö

    How does the African wild dog fit in to this narrative?

    • http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/EquivPrinFail.pdf Uncle Al

      Add the New Guinea singing dog and the Australian dingo.

    • GemmaTarlach

      The African wild dog, Lycaon pictus, is only distantly related to both gray wolves and domesticated dogs. They last shared an ancestor about 2.5-3 million years ago. The taxonomic status of both NG singing dogs and Aus dingos within the greater canid family tree is debated, but genetic analysis a few years ago (I want to say around 2012-ish?) indicated the NGSD and AuDs are fairly closely related both to each other and, somewhat less so, to modern wolves and domesticated dogs. Whether they represent a separate domestication event or a lineage that split from domesticated dogs soon after the original domestication events in the pre-Neolithic is, to my knowledge, not yet settled.

      • neoritter

        I thought the NGSD had ties to many dogs found in East Asia and Japan as well (in particular Jindos and the Nihon Ken breeds). I have a biased interest in this, so please correct me if I’m wrong.

        • GemmaTarlach

          As I mention above, NGSDs are fairly closely related to dingos and, somewhat less so, to modern wolves and domesticated dogs. Different studies have yielded slightly different results. It’s unclear to me what you mean by “ties” but NGSDs are related to modern dogs in general. How closely they are related depends on which study you’re talking about. I encourage you to search for them at Google Scholar, which will send you to all the studies.

  • Felix

    Sooner or later, I expect the morphing of wolves into dogs will find a link to our becoming the humans we are. I believe we will eventually discover the 40,000 year guess is quite a bit shy of the start time for interactions that formed the present models of the two co-predating species.

  • Erik Bosma

    Picture a little Cro-Magnon kid with a pup or two on his trail, “Mommy, can I keep him, ho followed me home?” Mommy Wolf was probably killed in some way and the kid was at the right place and the right time to begin our mutual history. Now picture that scenario over and over again with tribes coming together here and there for whatever reasons bringing their new ‘dogs’ along. And the dogs mating somewhere in the back of the cave (this was before they invented buckets of water). Eventually those pups weren’t wild anymore, became dependant on the humans and vice-versa.

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+