...Yawn. That's not even remotely comparable to domestication. There are countless examples of predators having non-feeding-related interactions with prey. Sharks swimming with fish; lions lounging near gazelles; etc, etc. If they're engaging in a cooperative hunting strategy, then that's certainly interesting, but not new or groundbreaking.
Domestication does not have to be deliberate, nor does it need to provide an immediate benefit to the party doing the domestication [1]. This is probably a common misunderstanding of the process. Plus for a little more complexity, we can expect that these aspects (to be deliberate, to provide benefit) can be recognised and emphasized during the domestication process.
[1]. It may be unsettling for us egotistic humans, but the domestication process can be mutual to the extent that it causes Speciation in both parties.
I also believe that Lions that rest near gazelles is a different scenario. If the Lion becomes hungry, it will almost certainly chase the gazelle in the right circumstances. The article made it clear that the wolves are not attacking these primates.
Also, according to the following website, sharks to eat fish. However, it's logical to assume that like the lion, they won't always eat fish if they are full or there is no return of benefit,
http://www.sharks-world.com/what_do_sharks_eat/
This one is fascinating because logically, you'd assume the wolves would attack the primates at any opportunity. It will be fascinating to see if the relationship evolves into one where the wolves defend the primates. Another poster posted the dog taming article. Maybe, just maybe, this group of primates may domesticate these wolves with time.
Yup, yawn! Why is an intelligent community getting their mammalian biology updates from some corporate press release rag? The abstract is here http://jmammal.oxfordjournals.org/content/96/1/129 The last two sentences confirm gitpusher's observation that this is nothing to do with domestication.
> For Ethiopian wolves, establishing proximity to geladas as foraging commensals could be an adaptive strategy to elevate foraging success. The novel dynamics documented here shed light on the ecological circumstances that contribute to the stability of mixed groups of predators and potential prey.
You two are reacting to nothing more than a single objectionable word ("domesticating") in the title. That's a good reason to change the title, but an unfair reason to be so dismissive of the article. It wasn't a bad popular treatment and the story is obviously interesting.
HN generally prefers the most substantive popular article on a story, as opposed to specialized academic papers, except when the specialty is one that the audience here is comfortable with (i.e. computing). A link to the original paper usually appears in the thread for those who are experts or want more.
Cool, thanks for changing it. I'm not quite sure why the slightly rebuking tone of your comment, but no worries.
> the story is obviously interesting.
That's far from obvious. I have a PhD in evolutionary biology and a background in natural history and visit Ethiopia from time to time and yet it seemed to me of interest to that journal's audience but not beyond. Definitely no particular reason to be discussing it here, but of course I'm not against doing so!
If the critical tone is because I was making a negative comment and negative comments are somehow unwelcome on HN, then I object. I don't care what the community guidelines are in that respect if they tell me to be kumbaya positive.
