News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour by astrange on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @07:11PM (#31254784)
Genes run in families, not villages. How are the traits spreading across the entire population in that 1000 years enough to make the "large difference" instead of being averaged out again? Existing cases of that are founder effects or mating with someone truly different like a Denisovan[0].

More importantly this knowledge would be useless if you found it, because the only reason to know things is to make predictions, and this doesn't let you predict anything about the next generation. We're in modernity now and they can just move somewhere else.

[0] which funny enough isn't considered a subspecies and doesn't have a Latin name because the scientist who discovered them thinks Latin names are pretentious.

Re:Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour by barry-cotter on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @07:37PM (#31255010)
> How are the traits spreading across the entire population in that 1000 years enough to make the "large difference" instead of being averaged out again?

Mating isn’t random. People are more likely to mate with those who live near them. So Southern Chinese are more like each other than Northern Chinese. Geography matters. Distance matters. If there’s reproductive isolation difference can emerge and persist. If there isn’t it won’t.

Geography isn’t the only way populations stay distinct. Religion, language, means of sustenance can do it too but interbreeding can reduce difference very, very quickly as you note.