"In research published Thursday [Nov 14] in the journal Science, evolutionary biologists analyzed the mitochondrial genomes of 18 ancient dogs and wolves. Then they compared them to an array of modern counterparts, and even a few coyotes. The authors concluded that dog domestication most likely occurred in Ice Age Europe, between 18,800 and 32,100 years ago -- much earlier, and much farther north, than previously believed.
"Dogs, the authors argued, evolved from a now extinct species of European wolf * * * However, the [that] robust [but now extinct] European wolf * * * left no other living descendants besides dogs. 'Wolves living on the planet today are not the closest group to the ancestor of dogs,' [Robert] Wayne[, an evolutionary biology professor at UCLA and the principal investigator of the Science paper] said.
"Until recently, many archaeologists and biologists believed that dogs were first domesticated no more than 13,000 years ago, either in East Asia or the Middle East. * * * Peter Savolainen, an associate professor of evolutionary genetics at Sweden’s Royal Institute of Technology, argues that evidence shows dogs were first domesticated in China, probably as a source of food. * * * He pointed out too that the paper lacks animal samples from the Middle East or China.
"Wayne said he and his colleagues did not include samples from those areas because they were too recent, only about 7,000 or 8,000 years old. 'That’s well after dogs were domesticated, so we’re kind of limited in that sense,' he said. Study authors said they hope to confirm their findings with additional testing of genetic material. This new DNA will be taken from the nucleus of ancient cells, which contain abundantly more information than DNA taken from cell mitochondria.
------------------------
(2) The LA Times report is based on the current issue of Science, whose cover is a modern dog.
(a) Elizabeth Pennisi, Old Dogs Teach a New Lesson About Canine Origins; Ancient DNA. Science, 342: 785-786 (Nov 15, 2013; in the section of News & Analysis, which gives an overview, aiming at academics and laypersons alike). https://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6160/785.full
Quote:
"the leading theories suggest[ed] dogs were domesticated either in the Middle East [based on analysis of chromosomal DNA of modern dogs and wolves, by Prof Wayne and reported in 2010] or in [southern] East Asia [based on analysis of mitonchondrial DNA of modern dogs and wolves]. A study on page 871 draws on a new source of evidence, DNA from the fossils of ancient dogs and wolves, and comes to a third conclusion: Dogs originated in Europe, from a now-extinct branch of gray wolves.
"Nor has the distribution of wolf-dog fossils, mostly found in Europe so far, clearly pointed to dogs' birthplace. While the wild ancestors of sheep and goats, for example, lived in only one small Middle Eastern region, wolves once ranged from Portugal to Siberia and throughout North America. Given that, several researchers have suggested that dogs originated more than once, in different places.
"The analysis yielded two surprises. First, most living dogs turned out to be more closely related to ancient wolves than to modern ones. * * * The second surprise was geographic: The ancient remains most closely related to modern dogs were all European. * * * Some geneticists argue that dogs became domesticated once agriculture arose, but the new study reinforces the idea that domestication happened much earlier, among hunter-gatherers.
"The researchers were unable to get suitable DNA from ancient Middle Eastern canids and had no access to ancient specimens from East Asia. That's a major flaw, says Savolainen, who remains convinced that dogs originated in southern China.
Note: Savolainen P, Zhang YP, Luo J, Lundeberg J, Leitner T, Genetic Evidence for an East Asian Origin of Domestic Dogs. Science, 298: 1610-1613 (2002) www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12446907
, which links to the abstract because full text is locked behind a pay wall.
My comment: Please take notice that scientists (I was one) usually publish a report while further study is in progress (to confirm the corollary of the theory, to get a head start on competitors, etc). Indeed this is what (2)(a) explicitly states. I suspect that Prof Wayne has inside information, yet to be published, that makes him confident about this Science report.