4 ms·
> "The scientists compared wild African elephants from the species Loxodonta africana with bonobos and humans on 19 social, cognitive and physical traits. The r
by ftxbro 3y ago
> "The scientists compared wild African elephants from the species Loxodonta africana with bonobos and humans on 19 social, cognitive and physical traits. The researchers found that elephants, like bonobos and humans, are not very aggressive, play a lot, have a long childhood. [...] By comparing the genome of wild African savannah elephants with those of 261 domesticated mammals such as dogs, cats and horses, the scientists identified 79 genes linked to domestication in other species that seem to have become more common in elephant generations over time."
what if we've been 'domesticating' them by killing the tuskiest ones for ivory or because we don't like their musth rampages, neotenizing even the wild populations
- rirze 3y agoThese behaviors have been present in oral histories of elephants for the last two thousand years or so. As far as I know, the intense hunting for tusks responsible for the endangerment of elephant species has only been present in the last few centuries. My bet is that this self-domestication has been occurring for a long time. At most, the recent selection for killing those with aggressive behavior, large tusks, would be an additional factor in this process.
- chewbacha 3y agoRapid population bottlenecks can easily cause non-linear evolutionary change by drastically changing the histogram of phenotypes.
- nerdponx 3y agoIs it also possible that elephants have enough awareness to notice who among them is more likely to be murdered by humans, and start selecting partners differently?
- chewbacha 3y agoOf course there could be sexual selection at play! I would argue though, that form of selection will take at many generations to take hold where as genocide of a species happens in a single generation. Of course, the smaller the population, the faster sexual selection will take effect but it might be hard to disambiguate with other fitness factors. Fwiw, a very similar thing happens during selection for bacterial resistance. You eliminate all the cells susceptible leaving a population of resistant cells. This population then grows to replace the previous generation. You could analogize this with the elephants. Small tusk and docile elephants have a "resistance" to being murdered by poachers. The poachers eliminate all the others and suddenly the population seems domesticated.
- kelseyfrog 3y agoSure, but we need to keep in mind that when hearing hooves we should think horses not zebras.
- hutzlibu 3y ago"At most, the recent selection for killing those with aggressive behavior, large tusks" Are million+ years recent? Humans successfully hunt big animals since we exist and all the hunter societies that still exist, share the idea that the biggest trophies come from killing the most fearsome animals. And if an animal killed a tribe member, killing that specific animal comes with great respect for the hunter. So the organized hunting of elephants especially for their tusks might be a recent thing, but killing dangerous individuals is not.
- thatguy0900 3y agoMakes me curious what animals were like before we started killing everything that looked at us funny and eating anything that didn't immediately run away
- AdmiralAsshat 3y agoMost of our modern farm animals and even wildlife have been domesticated in some way to the point that they're not really equipped to deal with predators, so you can look to their ancestors to see how they used to function. See: the aurochs (ancestor of the modern cow) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs The boar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_boar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_boar The jackrabbit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare The junglefowl: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_junglefowl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_junglefowl etc.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoBe careful with these sorts of generalizations when it's to related, but not identical, species. We can see with Bonobos and Chimpanzees that even within a genus there can be big behavioral differences. For instance, your Hare link goes to Lepus. Non-domesticated European rabbits (Oryctolagus) exist. If you don't trust that there hasn't been cross-breeding with domesticated rabbits, then Caprolagus would be a better comparison. Even Sylvilagus, phylogenetically closer to Oryctolagus than Lepus, is behaviorally distinct (not existing in warrens).
- ftxbro 3y ago> Coprolagus would be a better comparison Coprolagus (the 'poop hare') is a lesser known relative of the genus Caprolagus (the 'goat hare').
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoI thought what I wrote looked wrong. Thanks. I'm correcting the initial comment.
- dncornholio 3y agoNot sure what I'm reading. Wild elephants are super unpredictable and are more times aggressive than they are not, especially when they have youngs..
- ftxbro 3y agoMaybe you can imagine it like an analogy. Imagine you saw a very big thing. Now later you see that the thing is still big, but it's a little bit less big. Someone might even say that it has become smaller. But this is a paradox because even though it is big how can you say that it is smaller, when the word 'smaller' itself contains the word 'small' which is the opposite of 'big'?
- technothrasher 3y agoI'm confused why your analogy is a paradox. "Big" and "small" are always in reference to something else. In the first instance where you are establishing that the "thing" is big, you are referencing something unstated (perhaps the size of the observer). In the second instance, you are referencing the old size of the "thing" when you are establishing that it is smaller. Because the reference has changed, there is no paradox to it being both big and smaller at the same time.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mmmBacon 3y agoI’m sure it’s true that wild elephants can be aggressive. I was surrounded by a herd of elephants in Pilansberg National Park in South Africa. We remained calm and they just walked around our vehicle. Was simultaneously terrifying and thrilling at the same time.
- p_j_w 3y agoLess aggressive doesn't mean not aggressive. It's a comparison. They're far less aggressive than most any other animal that could give you a bad day is. I'd rather run into a wild elephant than a wild wolf, lion, hippo, giraffe, etc.