This is the one thing I don't understand that well, maybe I shouldn't have skipped taking genetics. I'm not sure how much 'percentage of genetics' it takes for an animal to be considered a sub-species, species, ect. All I know is that any selectively bred animal that is more suitable for the human use and a genetic shift accounts for this change could be considered domesticated. I'm not sure if that should include color variations though. I don't considered ball python morphs domesticated. Thanks for the useful information about your livestock, I know very little about them and just recently learned about the rutting season thing from a story about a camel that killed its owner recently. Also I just learned that cows are de-horned to make them less dangerous on the Dr. Pol TV show. How far does that domestication definition go if animals are mutilated to be better suited for human use? I could de-claw and de-fang a tiger (cruel obviously) and that would make it a lot safer!Simple genetics isn't enough, because you have genetic variation in wild populations, as well as captive populations. For example - among birds and reptiles you have numerous subspecies, and one way subspecies are determined is by genetics as well as geographic isolation. When enough genetic, morphological, and geographical isolation exists, then a subspecies may be graduated to full species level. Seems every year there are taxonomic revisions being made, and more so now with more emphasis being placed on genetic analysis.
Reply With Quote