• AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    For the new study, she and 16 graduate and undergraduate students gathered nearly 20,000 photographs of raccoons across the contiguous U.S. from the community science platform iNaturalist. The team found that raccoons in urban environments had a snout that was 3.5 percent shorter than that of their rural cousins.

    Or maybe people in cities take more photos of “cuter” animals?

    • Voyajer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      If they’re iNaturalist photo submissions then they’re submitting every raccoon (and other animal) they see

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I mean every raccoon in the study was photographed. So this wouldn’t explain any difference within that sample.

    • leadore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I don’t think someone would notice a 3.5% shorter snout when they took the picture.

      • Hegar@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        If humans are more likely to take photos of racoons they find cute, we’d expect those racoons to have cuter features than the average racoon. It might not be actual change going on, is the point being made.

        We don’t conciously notice the snout length, just the ones we think are cute are probably slightly more likely to have a shorter snout.

        • leadore@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          My point is that the change in length is only 3.5%, not more than someone would notice when deciding to taking a photo.

          The 3.5% change in snout length is one sign of domestication starting to happen, not a sign that people will be more likely to take a photo—that idea was just the speculation of a commenter.

          • angrystego@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            If it was not noticeably cuter, then it would cause no advantage and the theory falls. (Which is possible, of course.)

            • _stranger_@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              On a 5cm snout, 3.5% is less than 2 mm. You not only wouldn’t notice it with the naked eye, it’s almost a small enough difference to get lost in the noise .

              The study is saying they’re already seeing these imperceptible differences in racoons they’re measuring.