Comment on Here kitty kitty

hperrin@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Mimicry in nature is never intentional on the conscious part of the mimic though (ok exception is maybe octopi). It evolves like that because it works. Perhaps cats are evolving to become more cute.

  source

  • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Mimicry not, but a lot of “cute” behaviour is absolutely learned. If our dog wants something, she pokes you with her paw while making a cute face. Must have learned that from her previous owners. Our previous dog (who we had for much longer) never did that. That shit is 100% conscious effort, as in she observed humans tapping each other on the shoulder and figuring out that it works for her as well.

    source
  • hperrin@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    They probably are, but that’s because of selective breeding.

    source

    • flora_explora@beehaw.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I think baby-like facial features are just a part of the domestication syndrome. There has been this long-going domestication experiment with silver foxes that could show that when only selected for tameness the foxes still expressed most of the traits found in other domesticated animals, too.

      Belyaev was correct that selection on tameness alone leads to the emergence of traits in the domestication syndrome. In less than a decade, some of the domesticated foxes had floppy ears and curly tails (Fig. 2).

      Over the course of the experiment, researchers also found the domesticated foxes displayed mottled “mutt-like” fur patterns, and they had more juvenilized facial features (shorter, rounder, more dog-like snouts) and body shapes (chunkier, rather than gracile limbs) (Fig. 3).

      source