Who is on the leash

The ability to understand the emotions of people is enshrined in dogs at the genetic level, a new scientific publication in the journal Science proves. In this they are helped by our - human - interpretation of the look. The wolves, the closest relatives of the home dog, eye contact means a threat. And the dogs, like people, have a look in his eyes to show attention and openness.

How did the substitution of meanings occur? Due to the circumstance that at the same time in dogs and their owners the body produces a substance called oxytocin. These common molecules helped two different biological species find a common language.

Oxytocin is generated directly in the brain. It is produced by a hypothalamus, and storage and throws the pituitary gland into the blood. It so coincided that it was this last gland the size of a pea that Professor Preobrazhensky implanted the future Sharikov in order to turn him from a dog into a person.

In the time of Professor Preobrazhensky, oxytocin was called hormone without hesitation. Hormones are the lowest caste in the world of signal molecules, shells of the “brain -thoughts” class: they give up orders of the internal organs that are not obsolete. Oxytocin helps smooth muscles of the uterus during childbirth or forces the mammary glands of a nursing mother to secrete milk. Everything seems to be simple and clear.

But closer to the 2000th, scientists began to guess that they kept oxytocin undeservedly low in the biochemical piles of ranks. It turned out that it quite often performs complex missions of the “brain -mozg” class; Molecules of this type are no longer called hormones, but neurotransmitters. At his lecture, TED about oxytocin, which collected more than 1 million 300 thousand views , the California professor Paul Zach calls him no less “molecule of morality”.

It so coincided that it was this gland the size of a pea that Professor Preobrazhensky implanted the future Sharikov in order to turn him into a person.

It seems that oxytocin regulates the noticeable part of our social interactions. It stands out when we hug friends when the mother looks at the child, when lovers communicate with each other, and thanks to him people feel the joy of all these actions that help maintain relationships. In a word, oxytocin bonds unite any human team.

But, as it turned out, through them they are connected to our communities and dogs.

In the fresh issue of Science, Japanese scientists talk about the study of the interactions of dogs and their owners . It turns out that between them there are an oxytocin feedback loops that increase the joy of communication for both participants - just like this happens in people. How does such a "loop" work? We are pleased that they listen to us, the level of oxytocin jumps, and we are blurring in a smile. From this smile, oxytocin jumps already at the interlocutor (“feedback”).

From the game of peeps with a dog the effect is the same. Scientists recorded on the video 30-minute sessions of communication of dogs and their owners, and then answered the question: how long did the owner and the dog look at each other? And also: did they touch each other and did a person talk to his dog? Before and after interaction, the concentration of oxytocin in the urine was measured in both. It turned out that those who looked at each other longer, this concentration is higher.

Of all the studies studied (visual, tactile and conversational), only the duration of visual contacts made it possible to predict how much oxytocin levels will increase among participants - that is, how much joy they would receive from communication.

What if you compare dogs with wolves that have grown up in civilization (not the most popular pets, but this happens)? Hand wolves avoid looking people in the eyes, and no oxytocin does not stand out in them or the owners in the process of communication: this Japanese team also proved experimentally. Wolves do not know how and do not learn to consolidate relations with the help of a look (and therefore seductively think that the proverb “no matter how much the wolf is fed, he looks into the forest” is not a allegory, but a literal observation of a naturalist).

For millennia, people unconsciously preferred such dogs that were in no hurry to grow up.

It turns out that it is not enough to live surrounded by people from infancy - that is, the “education effect” is not enough for the animal. Congenital biological mechanisms are needed, which for many generations are developed in animals that have passed a long way of joint development with a person.

But how did the dogs learn to manipulate human hormones? According to one version - pretending to be children.

The Biologa Professor Raymond Coppinger belongs to the “Negality in Dogs” hypothesis, which he formulated back in the late 1980s. Negality is when the body gets stuck in the children's phase of development for life. The famous example is axolotli, Mexican amphibians. They do not have metamorphosis, restructuring the body like the one that turns the tadpoles into a frog from old age.

Dogs, of course, do not have this. But adult dogs of various breeds retain a lot of “puppy” signs, from soft ears and big eyes to increased playfulness. Coppinger claimed that these children's features include parental feelings in a person, so people unconsciously prefer such dogs for millennia that they were in no hurry to grow up. Human sympathies worked as a selection factor and the driving force of evolution - and as a result, the dogs became the way we know them.

If parental feelings are the button that the dogs had to be clicked on so that people began to act in their interests, then it is time to remember that Oxytocin has a direct attitude towards parental feelings. Here is a very fresh result, published in Nature less than a month ago: if oxytocin introduces childless mice, they have restructuring in the auditory cortex, and such mice begin to react faster to the squeak of other people's cubs .

If in dogs with increased oxytocin is associated with neophy, then what about us - suddenly we ourselves became a little more children under their influence? Anthropologists and molecular biologists in all seriousness argue that neo -ness (more precisely, slow - compared to the highest monkeys - growing up), we may owe our exceptional brain with its ability to fantasize. There is no chance that the dogs have launched this process: after all, the evolution of man stretches for millions of years, and dogs with us are only a few tens of thousands. But there is some probability that they accelerated him.