-1
$\begingroup$

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbY122CSC5w In this video it is said our DNA matches almost the dog's then it can be also said that dogs evolved from humans. Is it?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What!!! this is just too absurd. Have you even tried to read about how evolution really happens? $\endgroup$
    – WYSIWYG
    Sep 24 '15 at 17:25
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I agree the question is very introductory and I might agree with the idea that the question might deserve being closed. However, I disagree with the tone used by @WYSIWYG. It never helps to receive "it is absurd" when you have interrogations. $\endgroup$
    – Remi.b
    Sep 24 '15 at 18:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I agree with @Remi.b - especially as a moderator you should be respectful. And the homework close reason is misplaced too. $\endgroup$
    – AliceD
    Sep 25 '15 at 3:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Remi.b and AliceD, while I tend to try and give people the benefit of the doubt, the question is absurd. If the OP had watched the posted video, they understood absolutely nothing from it, as it went over, quickly, the idea of splitting from a common ancestor and also that the percent homology figures are contextual and do not necessarily imply phenotypic or even genotypic sameness. You cannot draw the conclusion that is implied by the question if you watch it. Minute Videos are geared towards non experts. It is perfectly clear. There are times where you just have to call it like it is. $\endgroup$
    – AMR
    Sep 25 '15 at 4:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AMR- admittedly, I didn't watch the video. Perhaps WYSIWYG did as well and that could explain his reaction. Nonetheless, even then a little less harsh tone would have sufficed to convey the message. $\endgroup$
    – AliceD
    Sep 25 '15 at 4:31
6
$\begingroup$

No, it means dog and human shares common ancestor. Read here for more detailed answer to such questions. See following phylogenetic tree which shows time of divergence

enter image description here

Image: Wikipedia

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ It might be important to highlight that the tree you show is not representing the whole sister group of the platypus. It focuses on humans and represents mostly species that are closely related to humans. It would also be good to include the reference as there were debates about the exact relationship of some groups. Tolweb referring to a paper of 1995 (obviously outdated today) is showing a big polytomy. $\endgroup$
    – Remi.b
    Sep 24 '15 at 16:18
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That's true however I used diagram and reference assuming person asking question has no (or little) idea about evolution (as it is obvious from his/her question). This is what I can find which is easy to understand + is scientific enough. $\endgroup$
    – Dexter
    Sep 24 '15 at 16:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I was mainly scared that the OP could bare in mind the wrong feeling that in the goal of evolution by looking at a tree that display man (the common chimpanzee actually) at it's last tip. $\endgroup$
    – Remi.b
    Sep 24 '15 at 18:14
6
$\begingroup$

Species A evolving from species B makes no sense for extant species

It makes no sense to say from two extant (living) species that one evolved from the other one. Two extant species share a common ancestor though. The most recent common ancestor (MRCA) might have existed a very long time ago (as it is the case between an oak tree and a Ostrich for example) or be relatively recent (as it is the case between a reindeer and a blue whale for example).

Humans and dogs - phylogenetic relationships

Humans and dogs are both mammals. Their MRCA is about 100 millions years old. They are therefore relatively closely related and therefore share a lot of DNA in common. In other words, dogs and humans were the same species during 3.5 billions years. About 100 millions years ago, their lineage split (speciation) into two. One lineage became dogs, bears, bats and other Carnivorans (through succesive speciation events). The other lineage became elephants, orang-outans, humans, pigs, horses, rhinoceros, sea cows and many other things according to (oneZoom.org who is often nicely updated).

You can explore the tree of life by yourself. Either go on tolweb.org (Here are the Eutheria) or on oneZoom.org. I think that oneZoom is more up-to-date than tolweb.

Introductory course to evolutionary biology

You probably want to follow an introductory course of evolutionary biology. The Understanding Evolution project at Berkeley would be a great introduction

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.