Cool Potential Domestications

[Simreeve]

Originally Posted by twovultures

Maybe not, but now my curiosity is piqued. What would a fancy bat look like?

I was thinking in terms of selective breeding for tolerance of human (or whatver your sapient species is...) proximity, to start with, rather than for 'fancy' breeds.

[Sven]

Originally Posted by Simreeve

I was thinking in terms of selective breeding for tolerance of human (or whatver your sapient species is...) proximity, to start with, rather than for 'fancy' breeds.

Yeah, I wasn't thinking about fancy breeds until Twovultures commented, either.

I think, in general, human tolerance isn't actively selected for by humans, but a natural consequence of an ecological mutualism. So, it's more a result of natural selection than artificial selection.

I suspect that this is how the domestication of many animals began, and the same would go for bats. "Domesticating" bats would likely be accomplished through putting out a bat house and letting bats colonize it. Of course, arboreal bats are vagrant, so they may only use the bat house temporarily. But, bats in the bat house will be protected by the human (or other sapient) exploiting them. So, as long as the protection and the exploitation result in a net benefit (i.e., humans prevent more bat deaths than they cause), this creates a positive selection pressure for docility towards humans. Of course, you can't fully eliminate the vagrant, non-tolerant bats, but the level of human disturbance at the bat house will likely keep their numbers down.

So, you'd need a long time period during which bats were largely kept for pest-control services or secondary products, with only light harvesting for slaughter. This should promote docility towards the sapient, after which more intensive exploitation can happen. Of course, like DValdron mentioned, pest-control services are "diffuse, public benefits," which would work against their use in this way. But, perhaps a species with a more public-oriented mindset (a sort of herd mentality) would be more likely to go for this.

[metastasis_d]

At the link to the article on artificial bat houses I posted a few pages ago, the guy had to figure out how to make a device that will bother bats via sound that disrupts their echolocation. Then he had to go around an area and place these devices in places where bats roosted, leaving his artificial roost as pretty much the only viable place for bats to go. It isn't as easy as simply setting it out and letting them colonize it.

That said, once he did that, it worked like a charm and he had profitable guano reserves every season as a byproduct.

[DValdron]

My dad has a couple of tame raccoons. Raised them since they were babies. He'd previously raised another one.

Looking at the literature, there's an extremely long history of tamed raccoons as pets. The animals are extremely human tolerant, reproduce readily in human captivity, are affectionate and not terribly prone to going feral. One American President had one as a pet.

I really do think that the Raccoons would have made it as a full domesticate, if only there had been some practical use for them.

[metastasis_d]

Originally Posted by DValdron

My dad has a couple of tame raccoons. Raised them since they were babies. He'd previously raised another one.

Looking at the literature, there's an extremely long history of tamed raccoons as pets. The animals are extremely human tolerant, reproduce readily in human captivity, are affectionate and not terribly prone to going feral. One American President had one as a pet.

I really do think that the Raccoons would have made it as a full domesticate, if only there had been some practical use for them.

Raccoons are New World natives, right?

[DValdron]

Originally Posted by metastasis_d

Raccoons are New World natives, right?

Correct, although they've been introduced into Asia and Europe... to the recipients eternal dismay.

[metastasis_d]

Originally Posted by DValdron

Correct, although they've been introduced into Asia and Europe... to the recipients eternal dismay.

Yeah, I bet they love that.

[Sven]

Originally Posted by metastasis_d

At the link to the article on artificial bat houses I posted a few pages ago, the guy had to figure out how to make a device that will bother bats via sound that disrupts their echolocation. Then he had to go around an area and place these devices in places where bats roosted, leaving his artificial roost as pretty much the only viable place for bats to go. It isn't as easy as simply setting it out and letting them colonize it.

The sound devices increased the bat population, but he had succeeded in attracting the bats to his bat tower even before the sound devices were installed, and they utilized the tower consistently for at least a month without the sound devices.

Dr Campbell was trying to accomplish a specific goal in a single step. But, this is certainly not how domestication events happened in human history. Neolithic peoples didn't set out to domesticate animals: they discovered and employed strategies that increased their access to prey animals, and some of these strategies eventually developed into full domestication. But, the completion of the first step probably never looked like domestication in progress.

As a comparison, free-range chickens don't necessarily spend every night in the coop: sometimes, they prefer the hay feeder or the space behind the holly bushes. And this is after thousands of years of selective breeding. So, I don't think it's a big deal at all if pre-domesticated bats show low site fidelity. The goal of the first step isn't to make domestic bats: it's to increase bat activity in the area for pest-control purposes. But, this creates the potential for a selective environment that favors tolerant or docile bats.

Anyway, I've begun a thread for discussion of arboreal sapients (here): we can continue this discussion there, if you'd like.

[metastasis_d]

Originally Posted by Sven

The sound devices increased the bat population, but he had succeeded in attracting the bats to his bat tower even before the sound devices were installed, and they utilized the tower consistently for at least a month without the sound devices.

Dr Campbell was trying to accomplish a specific goal in a single step. But, this is certainly not how domestication events happened in human history. Neolithic peoples didn't set out to domesticate animals: they discovered and employed strategies that increased their access to prey animals, and some of these strategies eventually developed into full domestication. But, the completion of the first step probably never looked like domestication in progress.

That makes sense.

[altwere]

I have been enjoying reading this. I have some thoughts. If you could recreate extinct species for domesticates which ones would you pick.
There are several animals that are currently being looked at. The Wooly Mammoths. One group is trying to clone them and another one is trying to fine viable sperm and cross them with Indian elephants.
I like some of the early sheep sized herding rhinos and maybe Hadrosaurs ranches

[metastasis_d]

Originally Posted by altwere

I have been enjoying reading this. I have some thoughts. If you could recreate extinct species for domesticates which ones would you pick.
There are several animals that are currently being looked at. The Wooly Mammoths. One group is trying to clone them and another one is trying to fine viable sperm and cross them with Indian elephants.
I like some of the early sheep sized herding rhinos and maybe Hadrosaurs ranches

The Dodo bird!

[Danbensen]

Originally Posted by altwere

I have been enjoying reading this. I have some thoughts. If you could recreate extinct species for domesticates which ones would you pick.
There are several animals that are currently being looked at. The Wooly Mammoths. One group is trying to clone them and another one is trying to fine viable sperm and cross them with Indian elephants.
I like some of the early sheep sized herding rhinos and maybe Hadrosaurs ranches

I think it mostly hinges on the animals' behavior, which unfortunately doesn't fossilize. Do mammoths/primitive rhinos/hadrosaurs have hierarchical social structures humans can replace? Do they easily become panicked or enraged? Do they breed easily in captivity, in such a way that some of their young can be killed or neutered? Sure, why not?

I'm actually working on a project now in which the descendants of time travelers build a bronze-age civilization in the Late Maastrichtian. (http://bensen-daniel.deviantart.com/gallery/33955373) I've got them domesticating caegnathids for eggs and meat (like turkeys), native dromaeosaurs or Asian velociraptors as hunting companions (like dogs or hunting falcons), and triceratopses as draft animals. Fun times.

[metastasis_d]

Originally Posted by Danbensen

I think it mostly hinges on the animals' behavior, which unfortunately doesn't fossilize. Do mammoths/primitive rhinos/hadrosaurs have hierarchical social structures humans can replace? Do they easily become panicked or enraged? Do they breed easily in captivity, in such a way that some of their young can be killed or neutered? Sure, why not?

I'm actually working on a project now in which the descendants of time travelers build a bronze-age civilization in the Late Maastrichtian. (http://bensen-daniel.deviantart.com/gallery/33955373) I've got them domesticating caegnathids for eggs and meat (like turkeys), native dromaeosaurs or Asian velociraptors as hunting companions (like dogs or hunting falcons), and triceratopses as draft animals. Fun times.

I would want a velociraptor as a hunting companion.

[Danbensen]

Originally Posted by metastasis_d

I would want a velociraptor as a hunting companion.

I know, right? The main character's "snatcher" is named Dhraz, and he controls her by whistling.

[Prism]

I'm wondering about the mastadon myself. Cousin to the elephant, smaller then mammoths and browsers instead of grazers. Plus they were around at the same time as humans so maybe they could've been domesticated easier as opposed to elephants.

[Umbral]

Hypothesis: Slow-breeding animals possesing traits such as calm temprament, lack of fear/aggression reactions towards humans and hearding behavior would be far more likly to be hunted to extinction by early humans emerging from Africa.

In a shorter sentence: Many of the traits that make a species a good candidate for domestication would make said species a lot more likly to go extinct on contact with humans. Well before domestication really got to be a serious option.

[Danbensen]

Originally Posted by Umbral

Many of the traits that make a species a good candidate for domestication would make said species a lot more likly to go extinct on contact with humans. Well before domestication really got to be a serious option.

Now that's interesting. So what makes OTL domesticated animals an exception? Simply the fact that wild goats and llamas bred quickly enough to stave off extinction until the people got civilized enough to domesticate them?

[twovultures]

Originally Posted by Danbensen

Now that's interesting. So what makes OTL domesticated animals an exception? Simply the fact that wild goats and llamas bred quickly enough to stave off extinction until the people got civilized enough to domesticate them?

In the case of goats, llamas, and sheep, their wild ancestors were mountain animals. They were able to escape predation-even predation by humans-by hiding on remote mountain tops and sheer slopes. They weren't completely isolated from humans, of course, but enough of their population managed to avoid human hunters that they survived the hurdle of the Pleistocene extinctions.

In the case of cattle, they would have been exposed to millions of years of predation by hominids in North Africa, Europe, and Asia before coming into contact with modern humans. This helped them adapt, but ultimately they didn't adapt enough, as wild cattle were eventually hunted to extinction. A similar thing occurred with horses, with the only surviving wild horses living in the very remote, harsh environments of central Asia.

Of course, I have to add the caveat (once again) that human predation was not the only factor in the Pleistocene extinctions, even for animals that might be vulnerable to it.

[Sven]

Originally Posted by Danbensen

I think it mostly hinges on the animals' behavior, which unfortunately doesn't fossilize. Do mammoths/primitive rhinos/hadrosaurs have hierarchical social structures humans can replace? Do they easily become panicked or enraged? Do they breed easily in captivity, in such a way that some of their young can be killed or neutered? Sure, why not?

I'm not convinced that any of these characteristics really existed in wild populations before humans arrived. I'm also dubious on the requirement that these conditions be met before domestication happens. For example, horses don't have hierarchical social structures: they have convoluted, pairwise dominance structures with no clear hierarchy. And, even after thousands of years in captivity, most breeds of chickens still have a panic response to humans: they just can't fly as far as their wild ancestors could.

Behaviors in animals are pretty easily modifiable in an evolutionary context: this is because changing behavior is an "easy" way to adapt to novel conditions, and because most animals are "built" for behavioral flexibility, anyway. So, I tend to avoid thinking about domestication in terms of a single, magical formula: like most things in the real world, the plausibility of an alternative domestication event is going to be heavily context-dependent.

Originally Posted by Danbensen

I'm actually working on a project now in which the descendants of time travelers build a bronze-age civilization in the Late Maastrichtian. (http://bensen-daniel.deviantart.com/gallery/33955373) I've got them domesticating caegnathids for eggs and meat (like turkeys), native dromaeosaurs or Asian velociraptors as hunting companions (like dogs or hunting falcons), and triceratopses as draft animals. Fun times.

I love dinosaur timelines! I tend to be skeptical of any dinosaur domestications, and conservative in proposing them myself: basically, any of the ones that would be awesome, like Triceratops or Velociraptor, would probably be too outlandish.

[DValdron]

Actually, I've always considered Dinosaur domestications at least somewhat plausible.... in a crazy ass way.

I would consider a lot of dinosaurs to be comparable to waterfowl. Waterfowl imprint on the first thing they see as their mothers, and show strong attachment.

I suspect that newborn dinosaurs probably imprinted in the same way. So you could probably socialize them much more easily.

Of course, as they matured, they'd get more independent and aggressive. But then again, that's what selective breeding is for. Kill them when they get nasty. The ones that remain docile get to breed more.