Drawing Animals: Thylacine

 Thylacinus cynocephalus (meaning dog-headed pouched-dog) is more commonly known as the Tasmanian tiger, but I prefer it when they are referred to as thylacines. Though they are named after the island off of the Australian coast, the thylacine was once found on the Australian mainland. As such, they were one of the few mammalian large predators that were found naturally on the landmass. The species has been extinct for quite some time, with the last known individual dieing in 1933. They were fascinating animals that look quite like wolves or tigers, but their marsupial ancestry made them quite different from the placental species. They had five toes on their front feet instead of the usual four and a dewclaw. They could also open their jaws remarkably wide.

Here's a video of the last know live thylacine:

My interpretation. I couldn't get the head right. I may try to fix that.

What is your favorite?

For those of you who read this blog regularly or semi-regularly: what is your favorite part? Please tell me your favorite theme or topic and why. Also, what would you like to see in the future? Is there anything you haven't liked so far?

I'm open to suggestions as well. If you see an article or some other material you think I should comment on, feel free to send me a link at basenjibhound@gmail.com. I am also always open to receiving images for Guess the Genotype. Click "Guess the Genotype Basics" for more information.

Why Inbreeding Leads to Increased Homozygosity

These feral dogs on Sri Lanka appear to be coming from a close-breeding population, which would explain their highly similar phenotypes. Image is under a Creative Commons license on Flickr.com.

In my previous post, I mentioned that inbreeding leads to an increase in homozygosity in the population. I thought it would be best if I explained why this is true. Again, it goes back to a basic understanding of population genetics.

Let's say that there is a population of random-bred dogs that has a genotypic ratio of 1:2:1 for the gene for a long coat. That means 25% of the population is homozygous dominant, 50% of the population is heterozygous, and 25% of the population is homozygous recessive. If mating were to continue to be random, then the genotypic proportions for the next generation would continue to be 1:2:1. It is one of the basics of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.The Hardy-Weinberg principle (which states conditions under which evolution, i.e. changes in a population, cannot occur) and equilibrium are simple ways to calculate whether a population is changing over time and gauging the rate of selection. As such is a basic principle for determining the health of populations, and can be applied to incidences of both natural and artificial selection.

Even feral population can undergo heavy inbreeding, but the selection that leads to that inbreeding is natural rather than artificial and can thus produce a far healthier population. Image is copyright free from Wikimedia Commons.

The rub comes when the mating becomes nonrandom. This is most easily represented with selfing (mating with oneself, which is only possible in monoecious individuals), which is the most extreme form of inbreeding possible. So, if the individuals with the different genotypes only bred with their own genotype, the following would occur: the homozygotes would only produce other homozygous individuals, but the heterozygotes would continue to produce the 1:2:1 ratio. So, there would be a net increase in the number of homozygotes in the next generation. Generation after generation, more and more homozygotes would result, until the percentage of heterozygous individuals approaches or even reaches zero.

This same principle applies when inbreeding in less extreme ways, whether it is brother-sister, grandfather-granddaughter, or even if it is somewhat less close of a relationship. Individuals who are relatives are more likely to share the same genotype, and thus to cause a net increase in homozygosity. Many breeders see this as a positive things, as it helps fix "type," but it can also easily lead to some deleterious recessives cropping up at much higher frequencies than if mating were more random. This is why so many health problems have become serious issue in purebred populations. Rampant hip dysplasia, patellar luxation, depressed immune systems, epilepsy, bladder stones and all of the other strange issues that plague breeds are all a fault of high levels of homozygosity.

With modern medicine, many of these bad traits are ignored and continue to be bred from. Even if efforts are occurring to breed for healthy individuals, in a closed population, inbreeding is still inbreeding. Even if a breed that has a high incidence of hip dysplasia can breed it out, it is quite possible that some other serious health issue will pop up due to the continued increase in homozygosity. The newly occurring issue may be even worse than the one that was initially bred out.

If your would like to read more on inbreeding, Christopher over at Border Wars wrote a post that has a lot more in-depth information on inbreeding, particularly the coefficients thereof. Also, there is a look at inbreeding in dioecious organisms.