If you say so, Dr.Evegene...
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
Your interpretation does not follow from the quote (nor the context).
Here is the quote in context:
In The Origin of Species, Darwin (1859) suggested that “several wild species of Canidae have been tamed and that their blood, in some cases mingled together, flows in the veins of our domestic [dog] breeds”. We now know that dogs (Canis familiaris) are entirely derived from the domestication of wolves (Canis lupus) (Vilà et al. 1997); however, the origin of the huge morphological diversity that led Darwin to his speculation remains largely unknown (Sutter and Ostrander 2004). The domestic dog is the most phenotypically diverse mammal on earth. The large differences in size, conformation, behavior, and physiology between dog breeds exceed the differences among species in the dog family, Canidae (Coppinger and Coppinger 2001; Wayne 2001). Recent studies show that the origin of most dog breeds may derive from very recent selective breeding practices and are probably <200 yr old (Parker et al. 2004). However, selection acts upon existing variability. It is remarkable that the potential for such large diversification existed in the ancestral wolf population from where the domestication process was initiated. Furthermore, the time since domestication (at least 14,000 yr; Vilà et al. 1997; Sablin and Khlopachev 2002; Savolainen et al. 2002) seems insufficient to generate substantial additional genetic diversity. What is the origin of this diversity? We hypothesize that changes in the living conditions of dogs as a result of domestication resulted in the release of selective constraint allowing a faster accumulation of functional (non-silent) genetic diversity in a large array of genes.
Further, nothing in the paper indicates that the origins of wolves, etc., are "unknown." That is your editorializing.
This more recent paper (2017) indicates:
Abstract
There are nearly 400 modern domestic dog breeds with a unique histories and genetic profiles. To track the genetic signatures of breed development, we have assembled the most diverse dataset of dog breeds, reflecting their extensive phenotypic variation and heritage. Combining genetic distance, migration, and genome-wide haplotype sharing analyses, we uncover geographic patterns of development and independent origins of common traits. Our analyses reveal the hybrid history of breeds and elucidate the effects of immigration, revealing for the first time a suggestion of New World dog within some modern breeds. Finally, we used cladistics and haplotype sharing to show that some common traits have arisen more than once in the history of the dog. These analyses characterize the complexities of breed development resolving long standing questions regarding individual breed origination, the effect of migration on geographically distinct breeds, and by inference, transfer of trait and disease alleles among dog breeds.
and
Previous studies have addressed the genomic makeup of a limited number of breeds, demonstrating that dogs from the same breed share common alleles and can be grouped using measures of population structure (Irion et al., 2003; Koskinen, 2003; Parker et al., 2004), and breeds that possess similar form and function often share similar allelic patterns (Parker et al., 2004; Parker et al., 2007; Vonholdt et al., 2010). However, none of these studies have effectively accounted for the variety of mechanisms through which modern breeds may have developed, such as geographic separation and immigration; the role of hybridization in the history of the breeds; and the time-line of the formation of breeds. In this study we overcome these barriers by presenting an expansive dataset including pure-breeds sampled from multiple sections of the globe and genotyped on a dense scale. By applying both phylogenetic methods as well as a genome-wide analysis of recent haplotype sharing, we have unraveled common population confounders for many breeds leading us to propose a two-step process of breed creation beginning with ancient separation by functional employment followed by recent selection for physical attributes. These data and analyses provide a basis for understanding which and why numerous, sometimes deleterious, mutations are shared across seemingly unrelated breeds.
And regarding the origin of the Canidae ("The ancestor of wolves, coyotes, dogs, and other canidae is unknown, appears suddenly"), well, you are way wrong:
Carnivora
Man's Best Friend
"Domestic dogs, wild dogs, and wolves all belong to the Family Canidae, which also contains jackals, coyotes, and foxes. Canidae is contained within the group caniformia which is contained within the Order Carnivora, one of the eighteen current groups of Eutherians, or placental mammals. A full list of the groups contained in Canidae is provided below.
Within the Canidae are 14 groups, or genera. Contained within those 14 genera are at least 34 species and two subspecies (a chart showing all members in the Canidae is provided below). The genus Canis contains dogs, jackals, and wolves. The gray wolf, Canis lupus, is among 7 species of canids and also related to two subspecies, Canis lupus dingo and Canis lupus familiaris, which are known commonly as the dingo and the domestic dog, respectively."
Some relevant references (follow link for refs)
Parts 2 and 3 followed - if the reader is interested in seeing usfan's Canidae claims refuted
Then ask him why he keeps making the same claims re: Canidae when his take on the paper has been refuted and supplanted with a more recent paper using more data.
I'm predicting that you will be called a heckler as a pretense for ignoring you, also.
