uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Rethinking dog domestication by integrating genetics, archeology, and biogeography
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology. Uppsala University, Science for Life Laboratory, SciLifeLab.
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, ISSN 0027-8424, E-ISSN 1091-6490, Vol. 109, no 23, 8878-8883 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The dog was the first domesticated animal but it remains uncertain when the domestication process began and whether it occurred just once or multiple times across the Northern Hemisphere. To ascertain the value of modern genetic data to elucidate the origins of dog domestication, we analyzed 49,024 autosomal SNPs in 1,375 dogs (representing 35 breeds) and 19 wolves. After combining our data with previously published data, we contrasted the genetic signatures of 121 breeds with a worldwide archeological assessment of the earliest dog remains. Correlating the earliest archeological dogs with the geographic locations of 14 so-called "ancient" breeds (defined by their genetic differentiation) resulted in a counterintuitive pattern. First, none of the ancient breeds derive from regions where the oldest archeological remains have been found. Second, three of the ancient breeds (Basenjis, Dingoes, and New Guinea Singing Dogs) come from regions outside the natural range of Canis lupus (the dog's wild ancestor) and where dogs were introduced more than 10,000 y after domestication. These results demonstrate that the unifying characteristic among all genetically distinct so-called ancient breeds is a lack of recent admixture with other breeds likely facilitated by geographic and cultural isolation. Furthermore, these genetically distinct ancient breeds only appear so because of their relative isolation, suggesting that studies of modern breeds have yet to shed light on dog origins. We conclude by assessing the limitations of past studies and how next-generation sequencing of modern and ancient individuals may unravel the history of dog domestication.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 109, no 23, 8878-8883 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-176416DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1203005109ISI: 000304991100028PubMedID: 22615366OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-176416DiVA: diva2:535179
Available from: 2012-06-19 Created: 2012-06-19 Last updated: 2012-06-26Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Webster, Matthew TAndersson, LeifLindblad-Toh, Kerstin
By organisation
Department of Medical Biochemistry and MicrobiologyScience for Life Laboratory, SciLifeLab
In the same journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 364 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link