Hyenas and dogs

Surely any animal if bred for long enough can produce a domesticate form of some kind? Breeding the animal to maybe smaller, more docile (in the thread example lets say a Hyena is reduced to the size of a Chihuahua).

That's not true for every species.

Wolves have a 'genetic plasticity', this is, the way that its own pool of genes can be combined to result in such different morphs (from Rottweilers to Chihuahuas) very high.

But not all species have this 'genetic plasticity'. If you compare dog races to the cat ones, you'll see that the different races of cats are not that diverse in sizes and morphs (there are not cats several times bigger than other ones). And this is because the cat gene pool is not that diverse and lacks of the plasticity of the dogs one.
 
Certainly not all animals have the genetic plasticity of dogs, but I think most can be domesticated. The question is, for domesticates early in human history, what animals are logical and economical domesticates?


Surely spotted hyenas and striped hyenas alike would have appreciated human company, because they could then scavenge the garbage (especially the latter), but does the social structure allow for a place for man to step in, and if so, is the animal a viable domesticate? Also, I think an animal's ability to feed itself is an important factor in its potential domestication. For example, African Wild Dogs not only have a very loose social structure that would be difficult for humans to find a place in, but also are far more efficient hunters than wolves, with like an 80% success rate. Not only is there no room for humans, but there's no need for humans. Wolves on the other hand self-domesticated, or at least we believe they did, because it was mutually beneficial to the wolves who did so. The same thing happened with cats when humans became agricultural and needed a verminator.
 
That's not true for every species.

Wolves have a 'genetic plasticity', this is, the way that its own pool of genes can be combined to result in such different morphs (from Rottweilers to Chihuahuas) very high.

But not all species have this 'genetic plasticity'. If you compare dog races to the cat ones, you'll see that the different races of cats are not that diverse in sizes and morphs (there are not cats several times bigger than other ones). And this is because the cat gene pool is not that diverse and lacks of the plasticity of the dogs one.
Gotta note that while overall true, it's not entirely true. Serval hybrids are notably larger than other domestic cats, from what I remember. Granted, this required crossing the domestic cat with another species, but nonetheless it shows potential to introduce more plasticity into a species.
 
That's not true for every species.

Wolves have a 'genetic plasticity', this is, the way that its own pool of genes can be combined to result in such different morphs (from Rottweilers to Chihuahuas) very high.

But not all species have this 'genetic plasticity'. If you compare dog races to the cat ones, you'll see that the different races of cats are not that diverse in sizes and morphs (there are not cats several times bigger than other ones). And this is because the cat gene pool is not that diverse and lacks of the plasticity of the dogs one.

I assumed that was because the starting animal, the wild cat, was much smaller than say, the wolf.

Though this is interesting. I must do more research on this genetic plasticity. It would be interesting to find out what causes it.
 
Top