The Modern Cat May Have Emerged From Ancient Egyptian Ritual Sacrifice
Mummified cats (Felis catus) were such a common offering to the Egyptian gods around 3,000 years ago that humans started breeding them (along with other sacrificial species).
It's estimated ancient Egyptians mummified up to 70 million animals including cats, shrews, falcons, crocodiles, and ibis during their reign in North Africa.
Raising cats together in large numbers to meet this demand would have favored more social and docile individuals. These tamer kitties were likely then traded across continents.
Another theory suggests cats gradually domesticated themselves in Europe during the Neolithic period, as humans transitioned into farming, providing felines with an ample supply of rodents that fed off our crops. This may have inspired rat-plagued farmers to encourage their presence for vermin control.
The discovery of a 9,500-year-old grave in 2004, containing human and cat remains in Cyprus, seemed to support the Neolithic domestication theory. But domestic cat morphology and DNA do not corroborate this scenario, two new studies, both still awaiting peer review, have now found.
University of Exeter zooarchaeoligst Sean Doherty and colleagues compared the bones of domestic cats with European wildcats (Felis silvestris) and found their features are no more similar than domestic cats are to African wildcats (Felis lybica).
What's more, the Cyprus grave kitty is morphologically more similar to the European wildcat, not African. Its genetic material is, unfortunately, too degraded for study.
A non-European origin of F. catus is also corroborated by research from paleogeneticist Marco De Martino from the University of Rome Tor Vergata. His team's genetic analysis supports African wildcats as the ancestors of domestic cats.
Examining 70 ancient cat genomes from archaeological sites across Europe, Anatolia, North Africa, Bulgaria, and Italy, the analysis appears to pinpoint the domestic cat's most likely place of origin.
"Our results demonstrate that the dispersal of present-day domestic cats can be traced back not to the Neolithic or from the Fertile Crescent, but instead several millennia later and most likely from North Africa," write De Martino and colleagues.
These genes revealed two waves of spread into the Mediterranean, the first during the 1st millennium BCE that introduced a wild population on the island of Sardinia, and a later wave that became the domestic cats we still coddle today.
The team found F. catus didn't reach China until about the 8th century CE.
Other researchers still argue the cat domestication process began centuries before Egypt's mass sacrifices. Instances of human relationships with cats certainly occurred multiple times, including the example in Cyprus as well as early Egyptian burials with cats around 3800 BCE, but these are not necessarily from the same line of cats that became F. catus.
The earliest genetically confirmed domestic cat is a mummified sacrifice as early as 500 BCE.
"Genome data from modern and ancient cats from Egypt, which are currently lacking, will allow these two hypotheses to be tested," De Martino and team concede.
If Egyptian origins of F. catus hold true, it wouldn't be the first time religious worship spurred humans to carry animals with them, both teams of researchers point out.
"Cults and religions are often drivers for animal translocations. For instance, the spread of fallow deer has been directly linked to the cults of Artemis and Diana, while chickens were associated with Mercury and Mithras," write Doherty and team.
"The Egyptian goddess Bastet … first appeared in the 3rd millennium BCE depicted with a lion's head, but during the 9th-7th centuries BCE she was increasingly represented with the head of an African wildcat. This transformation was coincident with the rise of cat sacrifice, whereby millions of free-ranging and specifically-reared cats were mummified as offerings to the goddess."
With such brutal acts at the start of our relationship with felines, it seems fitting cats have kept their temperamental reputations.
This research is awaiting peer review, and can be found here and here on bioRxiv.
Giant Prehistoric Kangaroos in Australia Were Doomed, And Now We Know Why
Wild Chimps Caught on Camera Sharing Alcoholic Fruit
Earth's Rotation Is Slowing Down, And It Could Explain Why We Have Oxygen
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
5 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Expressway work leads to discovery of peculiar 6,000-year-old settlement in Poland
Preparation for the construction of an expressway connecting two towns in southwestern Poland has revealed the remains of an ancient and unusual settlement, officials said. Work on the S8 expressway between Kobierzyce and Jordanów Śląski led to the discovery of a 6,000-year-old agricultural settlement and a 4,000-year-old cemetery, according to an Aug. 15 news release from Nauka w Polsce. Experts said the settlement, dating back to the Neolithic period, is peculiar because it was occupied for about 12 years, which is considered a long time in that historical context. Since those settlers stayed in one place for such a long time, it's no surprise there are artifacts and remains to uncover during a project such as this, archaeologist Ireneusz Klimczak said in the release. The Early Bronze Age cemetery, unrelated to the settlement, is believed to be linked to the Únetice culture, which developed south of Poland, and migrated north to the fertile lands of Poland's Lower Silesia, experts said. More than a dozen graves have been discovered, with the deceased buried in a fetal position with their arms crossed on their chests, experts said in the release. According to the release, the discoveries will not delay the construction of the expressway, which is scheduled to be completed by the fall of 2027. The discovery was made in a region about a 230-mile drive southwest from Warsaw. Google Translate was used to translate the news release from Nauka w Polsce.
The Onion
10 hours ago
- The Onion
Study: Elephants Only Other Species Capable Of Leveraging Synergies In Brand Portfolio
ITHACA, NY—In a groundbreaking study published in the journal Animal Behaviour , researchers at Cornell University revealed Monday that elephants are the only known nonhuman species capable of leveraging synergies across a diversified brand portfolio. 'Conventional wisdom has long held that leveraging omnibrand fluidity to unlock cross-platform capital efficiencies was a behavior unique to humans, but in the wild we have observed multiple African elephant groups with a highly evolved capacity for optimizing cross-vertical integration through holistic brand harmonization at scale,' said Professor Mia Sherin, who noted that elephant corporate structures are matriarchal, and females consistently serve as project managers across multiplatform activations, seamlessly executing cross-functional touchpoints and asynchronous ideation cycles. 'This marks one of the most advanced examples of nonhuman tool use ever recorded. We've observed elephants utilizing Microsoft Excel for longitudinal KPI tracking, assembling low-fidelity mood boards to map brand essence, and creating rudimentary LinkedIn profiles to strengthen B2B positioning. In one case, a juvenile even led a rapid-fire ideation sprint that resulted in a fully actualized multichannel activation plan. This study brings us one step closer to the dream of true interspecies communication, should we ever manage to put some time down on their calendars to connect over a coffee.' At press time, Sherin's team traveled back to Tanzania to study how different elephant groups mourn, as they are thought to be the only other animals known to grieve their profit losses.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Using AI Made Doctors Worse at Spotting Cancer Without Assistance
Credit - Getty Images Health practitioners, companies, and others have for years hailed the potential benefits of AI in medicine, from improving medical imaging to outperforming doctors at diagnostic assessments. The transformative technology has even been predicted by AI enthusiasts to one day help find a 'cure to cancer.' But a new study has found that doctors who regularly used AI actually became less skilled within months. The study, which was published on Wednesday in the Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology journal, found that over the course of six months, clinicians became over-reliant on AI recommendations and became themselves 'less motivated, less focused, and less responsible when making cognitive decisions without AI assistance.' It's the latest study to demonstrate potential adverse outcomes on AI users. An earlier study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that ChatGPT eroded critical thinking skills. How the study was conducted Researchers across various European institutions conducted an observational study surveying four endoscopy centers in Poland that participated in the Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy for Cancer Prevention (ACCEPT) trial. The study was funded by the European Commission and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. As part of the trial, the centers had introduced AI tools for the detection of polyps—growths that can be benign or cancerous—in late 2021. The study looked at 1,443 non-AI-assisted colonoscopies out of a total 2,177 colonoscopies conducted between September 2021 and March 2022. The colonoscopies were performed by 19 experienced endoscopists. Researchers compared the quality of colonoscopy conducted three months before and three months after AI was implemented. Colonoscopies were conducted either with or without AI assistance, at random. Of those conducted without AI assistance, 795 were conducted before regular AI use was implemented and 648 were conducted after the AI tools were introduced. What the study found Three months before AI was introduced, the adenoma detection rate (ADR) was around 28%. Three months after AI was introduced, the rate dropped to 22% when clinicians were unassisted by AI. ADR is a commonly used quality indicator for colonoscopies and represents 'the proportion of screening colonoscopies performed by a physician that detect at least one histologically confirmed colorectal adenoma or adenocarcinoma.' Adenomas are precancerous growths, and a higher ADR is associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer. The study found that AI did help endoscopists with detection when used, but once the assistance was removed, clinicians were worse at detection. Researchers attributed it to 'the natural human tendency to over-rely' on the recommendations of decision support systems like AI. 'Imagine that you want to travel anywhere, and you're unable to use Google Maps,' Marcin Romańczyk, co-author of the study and an assistant professor at the Medical University of Silesia, told MedPage Today. 'We call it the Google Maps effect. We try to get somewhere, and it's impossible to use a regular map. It works very similarly.' Implications of the study Omer Ahmad, a consultant gastroenterologist at University College Hospital London who wrote an editorial alongside the study but was not involved in its research, tells TIME that it's likely that exposure to AI weakened doctors' visual search habits and alerting gaze patterns, which are critical for detecting polyps. 'In essence, dependence on AI detection could dull human pattern recognition,' Ahmad says. He adds that regular use of AI could also 'reduce diagnostic confidence' when AI assistance is withdrawn, or that the endoscopists' skill of manoeuvring the colonoscope could be reduced. In comments to the Science Media Center (SMC), Catherine Menon, principal lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire's Department of Computer Science, said: 'Although de-skilling resulting from AI use has been raised as a theoretical risk in previous studies, this study is the first to present real-world data that might potentially indicate de-skilling arising from the use of AI in diagnostic colonoscopies.' Menon raised concerns that overreliance on AI could leave health practitioners at risk to technological compromise. Other experts are more cautious about drawing conclusions from a single study. Venet Osmani, a professor of clinical AI and machine learning at Queen Mary University of London, noted to SMC that the total number of colonoscopies—including both AI-assisted and non-AI-assisted ones—increased over the course of the study. The increased workload, Osmani suggested, could have led to clinician fatigue and poorer detection rates. Allan Tucker, a professor of artificial intelligence at Brunel University of London, also noted that with AI assistance, clinician performance improved overall. Concerns about deskilling due to automation bias, added Tucker to SMC, 'is not unique to AI systems and is a risk with the introduction of any new technology.' 'The ethical question then is whether we trust AI over humans,' said Tucker. 'Often, we expect there to be a human overseeing all AI decision-making but if the human experts are putting less effort into their own decisions as a result of introducing AI systems this could be problematic.' 'This is not simply about monitoring technology,' says Ahmad. 'It's about navigating the complexities of a new human-AI clinical ecosystem.' Establishing safeguards is critical, he adds, suggesting that beyond this study, people may need to focus on 'preserving essential skills in a world where AI becomes ubiquitous.' Contact us at letters@
