Differences in the Behavior of Landraces and Breeds of Dogs - Genetics and the Behavior of Domestic Animals - page 194

Characters we diagnose as strictly “dog,” such as hypertrophied barking
( Lord et al., 2009 ), or diestrous cycling (rare or nonexistent in wild canids)
( Lord et al., 2013 ), or coat color and pattern, do not fossilize. Dog-like ske-
letons found in proximity to humans are difficult to distinguish from fossil
remains of dog-like animals not found near humans. Further, it is difficult to
distinguish wolf skulls from those of dogs if the animals being compared are
the same size. One distinguishing characteristic is that the brain case of
“big” dogs is smaller in proportion to the brain case of big wolves. However,
dogs in the 14-kg range do not have small brains, but rather have genus-
typical brain size.
Honacki et al. (1982) suggested a reclassification of the dog as a subspe-
cies of the wolf, Canis lupus familiaris. From a biological standpoint we
agree with that and only object that it doesn't go far enough. C. lupus,
C. familiaris, C. aureus, C. dingo, and C. simensis should all be classified as
incipient species or subspecies of one another ( Coppinger et al., 2010 ).Of
course, from a political standpoint, renaming the members of this genus as
one species would be problematic for endangered species policy, given the
multitude of domestic dogs.
Selection for breed-specific behavior is often interpreted as an analog to
Darwin's theory of transmutation of species by natural selection. Darwin
(1858) himself equated breed selection with natural selection:

It is wonderful what the principle of selection by man, that is the picking out of
individuals with any desired quality, and breeding from them, and again picking out,
can do.”

Darwin, 1899

Darwin was fascinated with domestic dogs and pigeons not only because of
the morphological varieties, but because roller and tumbler varieties of
pigeons, for example, displayed breed-specific behaviors. Domestication was
for Darwin a way to picture the natural selection argument, and not as a phe-
nomenon that tested his hypothesis. Using selection by humans as the model to
explain breed diversification, he then equated it to wild species diversification:

Now suppose there were a being who did not judge by mere external appearances,
but who could study the whole internal organization, who was never capricious and
should go on selecting for one object during millions of generations ... Darwin, 1858

Many scientists have applied the tenets of Darwin's theory back onto the
domestication process, following the rules of natural selection. Researchers
of domestication assign selective advantages for each observable trait,
in what Maderson et al. (1982) describe as “a posteriori rationalizations of
presumed selective advantage which cannot by definition, be experimentally
verified.” For example, Price (1984) wrote that “

characteristics of the
juvenile ... are retained into adulthood, perhaps as a result of selection to

...