The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersGene Expression Blog
Cats: They Would be Assimilated
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
Asian wild cat

Asian wild cat

There is a paper in PNAS, Earliest evidence for commensal processes of cat domestication, which raises some interesting questions about the emergence of Felis silvestris catus, the domestic cat. I state questions, because the answers it provides are quite narrow, if plausible. In sum the authors found that ~5,000 years ago a group of cats, possibly Asian wildcats, Felis silvestris ornata, seem to have entered into coexistent relationship with humans. This itself is not entirely surprising. ~10,000 years ago a specimen of Felis silvestris lybica, a Near Eastern wildcat, seems to have been interred at a human grave site on Cyprus. The PNAS paper correctly notes that mitochondrial data also point to Near Easter wildcats has being the wild silvestris group that gave rise to the domestics. Strangely they leave out that autosomal microsatellites, highly variable repetitive regions in the genome, also indicate a clustering of domestic lineages with Near Eastern wildcats (to be clear, this is in the same paper that they cite for the mitochondrial results).

A confluence of results, phylogenetic, phylogeographical, archaeological and morphological, do seem to support the proposition that catus and lybica form a monophyletic clade (or, perhaps more precisely catus is a derived branch of lybica). I won’t put 100% confidence on this, but that’s our best guess. So where do these Chinese results fit into the big picture? You can imagine how the media have reacted. Here’s the marginally staid (by British standards) The Guardian: Ancient Chinese cat bones shake up domestication theory.

Actually there’s that much domestication theory to shake up. The term “domestication” is genuinely problematic in a precise sense, in that it isn’t a precise term. There is a live debate as to whether domestic cats are genuine domestics, whatever that means. Setting this non-trivial semantic aspect of the debate aside, to my knowledge there is no strong genetic evidence that East Asian domestic cats exhibit any signs of deep ancient population structure. That is, that they derive from hybridizations of western and eastern silvestris lineages. That doesn’t mean that it can’t happen. The popular Bengal breed was developed in the past few decades by hybridization domestic cats with Asian leopard cats, which aren’t even in the genus Felis (though the ones adopted out are usually F4 individuals and the product of backcrosses with domestics). But we don’t have widespread evidence of hybridization, though the geographical coverage and marker density leave something to be desired (yes, I’m hedging here, but that’s what the data are telling us).

So then the Chinese cats who coexisted with humans are a “false dawn” of domestication? Perhaps a dead end? If you view them in isolation, perhaps. But they shouldn’t be. Rather, they are another datum in a sequence of results which implies that the “Anthropocene” has been characterized by humans refashioning their environment so that a range of other organisms enter into coexistent, and sometimes domestic, relations with them. The domestication of dogs and cattle seem rather complex affairs, and may have had multiple starts, stops, and dry runs. The coexistence of some small (or, if you are a Drosophila geneticist, megafaunal) metazoans with humans as they began to co-opt a larger fraction of the earth’s biosphere should be no surprise. Instead of one single domestication it is possible that many organisms had multiple domestications, even if in many cases only a single event leaves a genetic traces today. That’s because domestication is a selective event, and works with the phylogenetic variation which is available to it. That variation is often wide enough that different lineages may develop “domestic” morphs rather readily. That may be what was happening in East Asia before the extant catus populations overwhelmed the nascent oranta derived domesticates.

Citation: Earliest evidence for commensal processes of cat domestication.

• Category: Science 
Hide 5 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “though the ones adopted out are usually F4 individuals … ”

    What does this mean? I googled a variety of things along the lines of “F4 genetics” and didn’t see anything (always, only checked the first page) that explained this at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. the first gen hybrids, F1, are crossed back to the domestic cats multiple generations. so an F4 may be only 1/16 asian leopard cat, 15/16 domestic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. I suppose if you were an early farming community, the other critter you’d want around would be snakes. But, not furry, don’t purr, make lousy memes… thus less likely to make it into your grave to keep you company in the after life. Probably trickier to breed selectively too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. mmmmwwwwwrrrrrr.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. […] Marijuana use rates in 12-17 year olds is highest in medical marijuana states Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. Why don’t all newspapers do the same? Pertinent and Non-pertinent Genomic Findings The hobbit — an unexpected deficiency Cats: they would be assimilated […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Razib Khan Comments via RSS