Since the thread is going to the dogs, and, since many posters are being dogmatic, and, since it is a dog eat dog world, it is only fitting to look at canidae..
What does man's best friend have to say about universal common descent?
I read the following study several years ago, and found a wealth of information about canidae.. many old beliefs or assumptions have been corrected by hard genetic evidence. It has interesting facts about dogs, & their genetic base.
Relaxation of selective constraint on dog mitochondrial DNA following domestication
This is a study by evolutionists, with the assumptions of evolution dispersed throughout. They even quote Darwin. Here is a summary of some of the points, with quotes from the study in italics:
1. The ancestor of wolves, coyotes, dogs, and other canidae is unknown, appears suddenly, and contained all the genetic information for each haplotype.
the origin of the huge morphological diversity that led Darwin to his speculation remains largely unknown
2. All of the current variety of dogs are recent developments, less than 200 yrs old.
Recent studies show that the origin of most dog breeds may derive from very recent selective breeding practices and are probably <200 yr old
3. Selection acts on EXISTING variability. It is not created on the fly, & is assumed to take thousands or millions of years to come about.
selection acts upon existing variability
4. ALL of this variability EXISTED in the ancestral wolf/parent, according to the time frame in the UCD model.
It is remarkable that the potential for such large diversification existed in the ancestral wolf population
5. The recent time for the variety of dog breeds is incongruent with the assumption of 'millions' or even thousands of years of evolution, to generate such variety.
Furthermore, the time since domestication seems insufficient to generate substantial additional genetic diversity.
The child branches within canidae show REDUCING variability, as the diverse genetic information became localized in the various phenotypes.
The mtDNA provides clear evidence of the descendancy within canidae, but the time frame is incompatible with the UCD model.
You can see from the following chart, where they mapped the genome sequence, & followed the trail of the mtDNA:
From the link:
"
Phylogenetic tree of wolf (W), dog (D), and coyote (C) mtDNA sequences. The tree was constructed using a Bayesian approach. The same topology was obtained with a neighbor-joining approach. Support is indicated at the nodes as percent bootstrap support for 1000 neighbor-joining replicates and Bayesian posterior probabilities. Four clades of dog sequences (I to IV) are indicated as in Vilà et al. (1997). Internal dog branches are marked in orange, and internal wolf branches are marked in light blue. The branch leading to wolf haplotype W1 was basal to the rest of the tree and it was also considered internal. Internal branches that could not be conclusively associated to dogs or to wolves are indicated in discontinuous green."
As you can see, the mtDNA shows the ancestry line. The canid ancestor preceded the wolf, the dog, & the coyote, as well as other canidae not listed. I have seen them in other genetic studies. But all this does is indicate descendancy, and shows the variability to be INHERENT in the genes. It was not created on the fly, or mutated over millions of years. There is no evidence for those speculations.
Canidae shows diversity and adaptability. There is no evidence they shared ancestry with felids, equids, or any other haplogroup. We can follow the MICRO variations within canidae, but there is NOTHING to suggest they were once of a different genetic structure, or varied to or from a MACRO change. Canids have always been canids, and always produce canids, though with reduced variability, as we reach the ends of the branches in their haplotree.
And btw, this phylogenetic tree has evidence to support it. The genetic lines can be traced, not just presumed. But leaping to 'common descent!', based on the diversity within canidae is unwarranted, unscientific, and unbelievable..
Also, to clarify terms, 'haplotype' is the specific clade or branch in this tree, like dogs, coyotes, etc. The haplogroup is all the haplotypes together. Canidae, for the most part, consists of the single haplogroup of genetic commonality and evidenced descendancy. Genetics has replaced and updated the old morphological taxonomic classifications, which were one limited to 'looks like!' correlation. Now, we have hard science, not just speculation.
