Science indicates domestic cats are still pretty wild, unlike dogs

June 20, 2017 11:12 AM

University of Leuven geneticist Claudio Ottoni worked with an international team of almost 30 researchers to analyze the mitochondrial DNA of more than 200 ancient and modern cats, going back 9,000 years, to document the palaeogenetics of cat dispersal in the ancient world (full study on Nature) and the result is what many cat lovers have said for quite a while: cats are still close to their wild relatives. As reported on Ars Technica by Annalee Newitz, cats are an extreme outlier among domestic animals, noting that "humans have been intermittently guiding cat breeding for less than 1,000 years," unlike other domestic animals, like dogs and goats.

Domestic goats are believed to have a single point of origin in the Zagros Mountains 10,000 Years Ago, and according to a study by another large team of researchers (both paywalled reports), dogs may have been domesticated twice.

What’s more, genetic studies tell us that no living group of wolves is more closely related to dogs than any other, which means that the wolves that originally gave rise to dogs are now extinct. Sequencing living wolves and dogs will never truly reveal their shrouded past; it’d be, as [archaeologist and geneticist Greger Larson] says, like trying to solve a crime when the culprit isn’t even on the list of suspects.

posted by filthy light thief (16 comments total)

Summary: Ancient Egyptians may be to thank for modern cats, with trading routes the source of the spread of cats around the world. For an interesting overview of cats in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Egypt Online has a page on cats. If you want to know more about the Persian strategy to use cats as hostages of sorts in their war against Egypt, here's an article from Ancient.eu.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:22 AM on June 20, 2017 [2 favorites]

I'm curious about how to think about the relative role of cats vs other domesticated animals. "Useful" cats like barn cats and ships cats are often pretty aloof and independent, a mouser can do its job even if you never interact with the fluffy little death machine. By contrast dogs and horses and donkeys and the like are work animals, you have to train them to work with people to be useful. And food animals like cows or goats are also in close proximity to people and at least need to be manageable, if not friendly.

So it's not clear a cat even needs to be domesticated much to be useful to humans. OTOH that doesn't really explain the recency of the genetics in the Nature paper.
posted by Nelson at 11:34 AM on June 20, 2017 [4 favorites]

Cats may not actually be domesticated, by some rubrics, anyway.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 11:42 AM on June 20, 2017 [6 favorites]

Cats may not actually be domesticated, by some rubrics, anyway.

It is a work in progress.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 11:45 AM on June 20, 2017 [4 favorites]

They've learned to grudgingly tolerate us, what more do we want?
posted by Sangermaine at 11:52 AM on June 20, 2017 [12 favorites]

As we are well beyond the utility of domestic pets, Annalee Newitz makes an interesting point about comparing dogs and cats:

Arguably, we are at the dawn of cat domestication. Today's wildcats and house cats are still virtually the same. But in 8,000 years, we might have as many breeds of domestic cats as we do dogs. Imagine having a golden retriever-sized cat, with the same sunny disposition. Tomorrow's cat lovers might be living with baby-faced tigers or ultra-fluffy purse cats who look like kittens forever.

Or maybe cats will continue to defy domestication. They could carve out a place as one of the only animals to befriend humans without ever falling completely under our control.

posted by filthy light thief at 11:52 AM on June 20, 2017 [12 favorites]

Or humans will be bred with extra-large comfy laps, and extra arms for more scritchings.
posted by happyroach at 11:57 AM on June 20, 2017 [32 favorites]

I predict more along the lines of people genetically modifying themselves to be more like cats. Much like the prophetic, post-apocalyptic musical masterpiece by Andrew Lloyd Webber.
posted by Badgermann at 12:09 PM on June 20, 2017 [8 favorites]

Helps explain why they mostly don't give a shit. Rebellion hasn't been bred out of them. Keep feeding the mean ones, or someday our human offspring may have cats that do *gasp hiss* tricks.

On a side note, does this mean I can get a Puma? It's barely domesticated already!
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 12:58 PM on June 20, 2017 [5 favorites]

happyroach: Or humans will be bred with extra-large comfy laps, and extra arms for more scritchings.

I refute point 1, as it has been proven that cats are liquid and will fill (or simply spill out of) any container, so the size of the container or surface is of no concern. Extra arms, though, are definitely useful.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:23 PM on June 20, 2017 [2 favorites]

> They've learned to grudgingly tolerate us, what more do we want?

I ask for and expect little more from other humans so honestly cats are functionally indistinguishable.
posted by parm at 1:48 PM on June 20, 2017 [5 favorites]

I once heard Dr. Stephen O'Brien speak on cat evolution, and he felt that cats adapted to living in/near houses. They were not actually domesticated, they just, through conditioning at a crucial developmental stage, lost their fear of humans. This pretty much describes my cat.
posted by acrasis at 3:37 PM on June 20, 2017 [2 favorites]

Thank you, science, for your sympathy. Now back to cleaning up all this cat urine...
posted by eustatic at 9:20 PM on June 20, 2017

Imagine having a golden retriever-sized cat, with the same sunny disposition.

On one hand, that seems just wrong. Really wrong. On the other hand, I'll take a black panther please.
posted by mikeand1 at 8:15 AM on June 21, 2017 [2 favorites]

Humans have not yet been fully domesticated. Cats have taught many of them to feed and care for their young, and to perform certain grooming techniques upon request, but still, there remains work to be done.

Ca4$t on keyOD9baoard.

BRB.
posted by mule98J at 10:52 AM on June 21, 2017 [2 favorites]

This doesn't surprise me in the least. Whenever people bring this up, I have a simple question for you. Would you allow a 120 pound dog in your house? Most people would. While some people with bad experiences might be nervous around a Great Dane or somesuch, generally, we don't balk at the concept of keeping a dog that size at home, trust that good training is enough to make it safe, allow it to play with children, etc.

Would you keep a 120 pound cat in your house? Because that's about the weight of a mid-size female cougar, or a cheetah. Most people would not be comfortable with that, because we all basically know deep down that cats would not be able to get much bigger and still be house pets.
posted by gloriouslyincandescent at 9:41 PM on June 21, 2017 [1 favorite]