"". UA-20896369
Showing posts with label Science Section of The Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science Section of The Times. Show all posts

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Dogs' Genetic Roots:The DNA Is A Bit Murky...

Photo of a Saluki, one of six "basal" breeds, by Alen Popov, courtesy of  The New York Times

Ever wondered about the long-ago, genetic origins of your dog? Neither did we!  But we still think this article from a recent New York Times Science Section is fascinating. Although the general consensus among among scientists and anthropologists is that dogs are descended from wolves, it turns out that there is consensus on little else. "It seems dogs appeared sometime between 15,000 and 100,000 years ago, in Asia of Africa or multiple times in multiple places." That's quite a time span in years and geography, but that hasn't stopped scientists from trying to nail things down a bit more. 

As part of a research paper published just a few weeks ago in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, scientists declared that "...all the so-called modern breeds had been so mixed that their deep genetic history was obscured." But they also found what they called  "basal breeds", or breeds whose DNA was less mixed: the basenji, shar-pei, Saluki, Akita, Finnish spitz and Eurasier...and this caused another conundrum: these breeds with the purest DNA were not found in the oldest fossils, like logically expected. 

Now, we don't pretend to know what all this means, but we still think it's darn interesting for dog lovers-and there's a glimmer of good news at the end of this long and murky tunnel: since humans have buried their dogs for millennia, "there are fossils of truly ancient dogs, in the neighborhood of 15,000 years old, from which DNA can be extracted." And this DNA should help shed some light on when dogs were first domesticated, and thus help us better understand our shared history.

Would you like to understand more about humans and dogs shared history? Let us know what you think!


Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Are Small Humans "Enriched" By Pets?

Adorable illustration by Joyce Hesselberth, courtesy of The New York Times
                           

By small humans, we of course, mean children, and we can't believe that doctors are still debating the merits of pets as part of a household, and whether they "enrich" a child's formative years. Doesn't anyone remember how many times Lassie saved Timmy's life? Hello!

But in today's Science section of The Times, there's an article written by a frequent contributor Perri Klass, MD, titled, Can Fido and Whiskers Enrich Children's Lives?  Dr. Klass admits right away that she's not a "pet person" and has raised three children "without benefit of in-house canines, felines or invited rodents," and doesn't seem to feel a bit guilty about it. The latest research is showing, however, that some children do benefit from relationships with animals: "The hope that children may learn empathy and communication skills from animals has led to speculation about pets in the lives of people with autism. And even recent allergy research suggests that "early exposure to animals may have a protective effect." And...?

Well, we say, the "scientific evidence" is as plain as the nose on our face-helping to raise a pet will most likely teach a child at least a modicum of empathy, how to take responsibility for another living creature, discipline, boundaries, unconditional love...and so much more. And let's not forget getting those youngins' up and out of the house for some exercise.

But these are just a few of what we think are a myriad of life lessons that living with a pet teaches us, young or old. What can you add to this list? Let us know!
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...