Italian Bears Living Near Villages Have Evolved to Be Smaller and Less Agressive
Key topics
As Italian bears adapt to village life, they're evolving to be smaller and less aggressive, sparking a lively discussion about the power of selective pressure. Commenters drew parallels with lab mice and Russian fox fur breeders, where aggressive animals were culled, leading to tamer descendants, and even noted that humans themselves show signs of "domestication syndrome." The conversation highlighted the complex interplay between humans and wildlife, with some speculating that urban raccoons' smaller snouts might be linked to avoiding being hit by cars or accessing food more easily. The thread revealed a surprising consensus that human activity can drive rapid evolutionary changes in unexpected ways.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
3h
Peak period
48
132-144h
Avg / period
12.3
Based on 74 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 15, 2025 at 8:30 AM EST
19 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 15, 2025 at 11:10 AM EST
3h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
48 comments in 132-144h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 22, 2025 at 4:54 PM EST
11 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Funny thing is something similar occurs in lab mice. Where a technician is selecting a mouse for cull the more aggressive mice are more likely to be the ones selected. Problem mice who kill their littermates can ruin experiments.
Why is it impossible the humans are not domesticated? Are you making a point about language?
I think this is certainly true. People in cities, where there are high amounts of people around act differently when they are in a small village or in nature with fewer or no people around.
My best guess is that the short snout trait is in linkage with something else that is actually what is being selected upon. At least for racoons.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/raccoons-are-show...
Something something autodomestication...
The guy who kills a family for fun is more aggressive than the guy who execute him. I'm not even sure how you could get to any other conclusion
Quite literally not... "executioner: an official who effects a sentence of capital punishment on a condemned person". An executioner is someone who is legally allowed to give death as a consequence of a judicial decision, not simply someone who kills.
Words have meaning an homicide isn't a murder, a murder isn't an execution, &c.
Even in warring countries, or countries without much rule of law, death rates (from all causes) is ~1.1%. Let's say good data is not available, and the real figure is double or triple that number.
An annual death rate of 2% just from executions would be in a society with a super aggressive dictator (or faction, I guess).
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/qI-Dd4MqYEc
tldw; raccoon study was flawed.
I watched the video ourmandave pointed us to where NessieExplains points out what she says are flaws in the study suggesting raccoons are becoming domesticated:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12983-025-00583-1
The data set and the code used to analyze the data are at https://osf.io/56xcg/overview.
Her criticisms and conclusions may well be correct, but her video is really just her saying her conclusions are correct. She downloaded the data and did her own analysis and points to results in her spreadsheets. It all flies by quite quickly. We have to take her word for it. She also made a snarky comment about this line in the R code:
But the next lines in the code are: So the authors tell us what weak data they’re removing, but the data is still available if other researchers want to put it back in. They are not hiding anything. We do not have to take their word about their conclusions. If NessieExplains does not publish her criticisms she is asking us to take her word for what she says.She says in the video that she’s an actual raccoon biologist. According to her web site she is pursuing a master’s in biology (nessieexplains.com/about-nessie-explains/) although there is no date on the page, so she may have completed the degree already.
As I say, she may well be correct, but I have no way of knowing.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/qI-Dd4MqYEc
https://nhmu.utah.edu/articles/animals-who-have-adapted-live...
Maybe it's just that many of the large aggressive bears living near villages have just been shot or scared away, but the genetics is unchanged and the offspring of large aggressive bears currently living away from villages have no aversion to trying their luck in the village ?
If there's a range of "how aggressive a bear can be", and it's mostly driven by genetics, and aggression is heavily selected against in the environment? Then you can get a considerable reduction in aggression in the span of as little as a few generations. Bear generation time is what, 5 years? They coexisted with humans for a long time now.
Now, traits with weaker genetic components (i.e. if bear aggression is only 50% genetic) can take much longer. Even more so for traits with low variance, or highly complex traits and behaviors. But evolution isn't always slow. Certain changes can happen quickly.
[0] https://time.com/5664393/bear-beekeeper-video/
They also refuse to eat in the trash bins of anybody that drink Cappuccino after 01:00pm in a sign of integration.