michealb,
Those are points very well made.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

What I said is that they are all varieties of dogs. It avoid mis-understandings to ensure that what you are arguing against is what was actually said.

Do we now agree?

---

Not at all sure. What do you mean by "they"? That is, what exactly "are all varieties of dogs"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

Not at all sure. What do you mean by "they"? That is, what exactly "are all varieties of dogs"??

---

Once again, read the messages - I already explained that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by michealb

So because one guy tried a few times and failed you think something is impossible.

---

You are welcome to speak for yourself. You do a lousy job of speaking for others. I never even commented on whether it was possible or not - this goes back to a comment by Fred, not me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Don't base your beliefs on urban legends. Here is a veterinary ophthalmologist and geneticist who crossbred setters and beagles.

"We used beagles to crossbreed with the setters. Beagles have great personalities, are very fertile, and easily adapt to life in a colony. The gene turns up several generations later." As Acland approached the dog . . .

---

Acland is the same guy I cited, who said they barely got any pups when they crossed these two breeds. This experiment is probably the reason he was trying to cross them. But he clearly stated that although each breed normally has large litters, they got either no pups or only a few when they tried to crossed them. I don't see how you can cite the same guy to refute him. :) He doesn't contradict himself, in any case.

asking,

Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

To clarify what is considered true by biologists: Dogs are descended from wolves, but not from coyotes. Nonetheless, coyotes can interbreed with wolves--although they rarely do where there are healthy populations of both. Wolves are more likely to eat coyotes than mate with them. But sometimes--perhaps if a wolf or coyote cannot find another mate--they mate.

Humans are descended from a long lineage of apes. We are not descended from modern gorillas or chimpanzees, but we are descended from the same ancestor as chimps, bonobos, and gorillas. Other apes are like extremely distant cousins. Sort of like Cheney and Obama.

I also wanted to mention another cool fact about coyotes and wolves, which I read a few years ago. Wolves used to live all over the United States and coyotes lived mainly in the southwest and into Mexico.

Because wolves were hunted nearly to extinction in the contiguous U.S. a large new habitat opened up to coyotes and they began spreading north and east. Wolves, as you know, are pack animals and larger than coyotes. Coyotes tend to hunt small game--rabbits, mice, grasshoppers--and to be solitary. In the desert, they do not hunt in packs. However, as coyotes moved into the Northeast, taking over former wolf habitat, they changed. Gradually, coyotes of New England (where they didn't use to live at all) have become larger than southwestern coyotes AND they now hunt in packs, the better to bring down big game like deer and moose.

In other words, coyotes that took over wolf habitat became more wolf like. If you look at their DNA or details of skull structure, the coyotes are still clearly descended from coyotes, which are a different species--Canis latrans--from the wolf--Canis lupus. And yet New England coyotes are acting like wolves and beginning to look like them. They do have some wolf genes. One theory is that wolves whose packs were destroyed (by humans) mated with coyotes. But the coyote populations that act like wolves are fundamentally coyote in nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

asking,

Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

---

Whew! I was dying for a smoke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

Acland is the same guy I cited, who said they barely got any pups when they crossed these two breeds. This experiment is probably the reason he was trying to cross them. But he clearly stated that although each breed normally has large litters, they got either no pups or only a few when they tried to crossed them. I don't see how you can cite the same guy to refute him. :) He doesn't contradict himself, in any case.

---

I see. You saw one line in an undated article and you assumed that this meant that there was a problem in mating ALL beagles and setters. A bit of a stretch, don't you think? Perhaps you'd like to meet owners of beagle/setter crosses along with, in some cases, pictures of the dogs themselves. Some of these pages include other breeds, but on each page you will find reference to beagle/setter crosses. Do you own search, they are very easy to find.

Beagle/setter Mix "Joey-RIP" - Care2 Members who are owned by this Pet

Angel Ridge

DOG needs a Home

MySpace.com - Joey and Andy - 20 - Female - Kansas City KCMO!, MISSOURI - www.myspace.com/lauraconroy

Yahoo! 360° - The Wide Weird World of BiggFred - Bubbles

http://www.gundogchat.com/showpost.p...8&postcount=12

Stan on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Adopt a Beagle: Taz: Petfinder

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

Whew! I was dying for a smoke.

---

I'll meet you out back in five.

Not one line in an undated article, but an interview with Acland.

Science Netlinks: Science Updates

This is a transcript from a radio interview sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Quote:

---

Are there some dogs that don't mix? I'm Bob Hirshon and this is Science Update.

Perhaps hoping to cross-breed a Chihuahua and a pit bull, Mary Beckman of Idaho Falls, Idaho recently called the Why Is It line.

Beckman:
Species are partly defined by the ability to interbreed. With all the dog breeds in the world, are there any two dog breeds that could be considered different species?

We asked Gregory Acland, of Cornell University's Center for Canine Genetics and Reproduction. He says you're right to use the term "partly."

Acland:
But that rule, even if it was true, isn't a rule that divides species anyway, because there are many species of birds for example, or fish, or lots of organisms, that if you put them in captivity and give them the opportunity to do, they will breed. So that you could cross wolves with dogs. You can certainly cross wolves with coyotes.

That said, he's found that there are certain combinations of dogs that don't cross-breed easily: for example, beagles and Irish setters.

Acland:
These were dogs with family lines, where they routinely produce big litters, and yet when we tried to breed these fertile beagles to fertile setters, we got no pups at all, despite many attempts to do so, and then eventually, we were able to produce one litter with two pups in it.

He says subtle genetic incompatibilities between these breeds may get in the way.

If you've got a science question, then doggone it, call us at 1-800-WHY-ISIT. If we use it on the show, you'll get a free Science Update mug. I'm Bob Hirshon for AAAS, the Science Society.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

Not one line in an undated article, but an interview with Acland.

Science Netlinks: Science Updates

This is a transcript from a radio interview sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

---

It remains a line in an undated article. I see nothing that says that they do not breed:

"That said, he's found that there are certain combinations of dogs that don't cross-breed easily: for example, beagles and Irish setters."

Now as any good scientist would know, if you find anecdotal evidence from one source, there could be many possible reasons for it which may make a generalization inappropriate. Indeed until wider evidence is available, a generalization is wrong.

But in any case, you point is still lost because Setters and Beagles DO breed, whether it is proven that the litters are smaller or the same as other cross-breeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

I see nothing that says that do not breed:

---

They do not breed easily.

Acland stated:

Quote:

---

when we tried to breed these fertile beagles to fertile setters, we got no pups at all, despite many attempts to do so, and then eventually, we were able to produce one litter with two pups in it.

---

"many attempts" from a Cornell geneticist, for me, trumps Youtube. For you, maybe not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

\"many attempts" from a Cornell geneticist, for me, trumps Youtube. For you, maybe not.

---

Can't trust those Ivy-leaguers. They actually think the earth orbits the sun!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

They do not breed easily.

---

Anecdotal evidence from a single source. But again, the fact that they DO breed makes your point moot. They still breed. They produce viable offspring. You have proven my point.

Quote:

---

"many attempts" from a Cornell geneticist, for me, trumps Youtube. For you, maybe not.

---

Once again, you might want to read more carefully. Where did I mention "youtube"?

Tj3,
PLEASE answer the question.
What is YOUR definition of what a species is?
The answer to that may clear up this situation.
How many times will you need to be asked?
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Akoue,
Thanks for posting the transcript of that interview.
The ability to interbreed or not is PARTY in the definition of a species.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Tj3,
PLEASE answer the question.
What is YOUR definition of what a species is?
The answer to that may clear up this situation.
How many times will you need to be asked?

---

How many times must you be answered?

Go to post 89.

Here's what I found at Wikepedia, under "species":

Quote:

---

biologists define species as populations of organisms that have a high level of genetic similarity.

---

Here's what Tj3 said at post #90 (#89 is by Fred):

Quote:

---

simply being able to reproduced and produced viable offspring, which is and has been the generally accepted definition

---

So, Tj3, would you care to clarify or amend your answer?

Tj3,
Post 89 was where I asked you the question.
Post 90 is where you answered it.
I'm sorry but I did not see that till now.
Thanks for your personal answer of what you think a species is.
However it is NOT what professional geneticists consider to be a species.
Now I understand why you stand as you do on the subject.
Peace and kindness,
Fred