Docility seems much easier to breed than intelligence, because it’s about reducing the foxes ability to do things (act violently), rather than create new capabilities.
I.e. a random mutation has a high chance of increasing docility, but a very low chance of increasing intelligence.
Within humans, intelligence-related genes behave additively. That is, the predicted IQ of a child of a 95 IQ mother and a 115 IQ father follows a normal distribution centered at 105. Since “general intelligence” exists to some degree in octopuses, we’re amplifying an existing trait, rather than creating one de novo. If intelligence-related genes behave additively in octopuses as well (and we should assume that they do), then breeding octopi for intelligence should be as straightforward as breeding cows for milk.
I would agree for small increases in intelligence, but what happens when we use up all the available genes for intelligence that already exist in octopuses, and need to wait for new ones to mutate?
That’s not how it works. People bred chihuahuas from wolves, and the blue whale evolved from a goat-sized land mammal. If the additive genes that control spinal length just upregulate some pre-existing developmental process, it’s not too much of a leap to assume that the additive genes that control intelligence just turn up a similar developmental knob. That would imply that intelligence-increasing mutations are common (being less complex), and that intelligence could be selected for like any other trait.
How many generations did it take for both? I would estimate about 2000 for dogs, and many more for whales. That’s plenty of time for new mutations to occur.
Docility seems much easier to breed than intelligence, because it’s about reducing the foxes ability to do things (act violently), rather than create new capabilities.
I.e. a random mutation has a high chance of increasing docility, but a very low chance of increasing intelligence.
Within humans, intelligence-related genes behave additively. That is, the predicted IQ of a child of a 95 IQ mother and a 115 IQ father follows a normal distribution centered at 105. Since “general intelligence” exists to some degree in octopuses, we’re amplifying an existing trait, rather than creating one de novo. If intelligence-related genes behave additively in octopuses as well (and we should assume that they do), then breeding octopi for intelligence should be as straightforward as breeding cows for milk.
I would agree for small increases in intelligence, but what happens when we use up all the available genes for intelligence that already exist in octopuses, and need to wait for new ones to mutate?
Epistemic status: Shaky
That’s not how it works. People bred chihuahuas from wolves, and the blue whale evolved from a goat-sized land mammal. If the additive genes that control spinal length just upregulate some pre-existing developmental process, it’s not too much of a leap to assume that the additive genes that control intelligence just turn up a similar developmental knob. That would imply that intelligence-increasing mutations are common (being less complex), and that intelligence could be selected for like any other trait.
How many generations did it take for both? I would estimate about 2000 for dogs, and many more for whales. That’s plenty of time for new mutations to occur.