Cattle are our most important livestock species because of their production and role in human culture. Many breeds that differ in appearance, performance and environmental adaptation are kept on all inhabited continents, but the historic origin of the diverse phenotypes is not always clear. We give an account of the history of cattle by integrating archaeological record and pictorial or written sources, scarce until 300 years ago, with the recent contributions of DNA analysis. We describe the domestication of their wild ancestor, migrations to eventually all inhabited continents, the developments during prehistory, the antiquity and the Middle Ages, the relatively recent breed formation, the industrial cattle husbandry in the Old and New World and the current efforts to preserve the cattle genetic resources. Surveying the available information, we propose three main and overlapping phases during the development of the present genetic diversity: (i) domestication and subsequent wild introgression; (ii) natural adaptation to a diverse agricultural habitat; and (iii) breed development.

Classification of cattle breeds contributes to our understanding of the history of cattle and is essential for an effective conservation of genetic diversity. Here we review the various classifications over the last two centuries and compare the most recent classifications with genetic data. The classifications devised during the 19th to the late 20th century were in line with the Linnaean taxonomy and emphasized cranial or horn morphology. Subsequent classifications were based on coat color, geographic origin or molecular markers. Several theories were developed that linked breed characteristics either to a supposed ancestral aurochs subspecies or to a presumed ethnic origin. Most of the older classifications have now been discarded, but have introduced several Latin terms that are still in use. The most consistent classification was proposed in 1995 by Felius and emphasizes the geographic origin of breeds. This is largely in agreement with the breed clusters indicated by a biochemical and molecular genetic analysis, which reflect either groups of breeds with a common geographic origin or single breeds that have expanded by export and/or crossbreeding. We propose that this information is also relevant for managing the genetic diversity of cattle.

SUMMARYFocusing on cattle (Bos taurus, Bos indicus), the present paper discusses the concept of the breed in the context of the dynamic history of livestock domestication. A breed categorization is proposed on the basis of how the breeds came into existence. The online Appendix (available at http://journals.cambridge.org/AGS) presents a survey of the cattle breeds of the world consisting of: (1) a list of breeds per country and then subdivided according to the proposed categories; (2) a list of breed names, including synonyms and translations, ordered according to a comprehensive breed classification; and (3) an alphabetical list of these names. The commonly accepted perceptions of breeds and how these are influenced by the nomenclature are described. Considering the history of breeds, it is argued that conservation of genetic diversity does not necessarily imply conservation of breeds. However, breeds are instrumental for the conservation of genetic diversity as independent genetic management units. These considerations may very well be extrapolated to other domestic species.

Abstract. In the 1940s and 1950s, Dutch scientists became increasingly critical of the practices of commercial dairy cattle breeders. Milk yields had hardly increased for decades, and the scientists believed this to be due to the fact that breeders still judged the hereditary potential of their animals on the basis of outward characteristics. An objective verdict on the qualities of breeding stock could only be obtained by progeny testing, the scientists contended: the best animals were those that produced the most productive offspring.Some scientists had been making this claim since the beginning of the twentieth century. Why was it that their advice was apparently not heeded by breeders for so long? And what were the methods and beliefs that guided their practices? In this paper I intend to answer these questions by analysing the practical realities of dairy farming and stock breeding in The Netherlands between 1900 and 1950. Breeders continued to employ traditional breeding methods that had proven their effectiveness since the late eighteenth century. Their methods consisted in inbreeding -breeding in 'bloodlines,' as they called it -and selection on the basis of pedigree, conformation and milk recording data. Their aims were 'purity' and 'uniformity' of type. Progeny testing was not practiced due to practical difficulties.Before World War II, scientists acknowledged that genetic theory was of little practical use to breeders of livestock. Still, hereditary theory was considered to be helpful to assess the value of the breeders' methods. For instance, striving for purity was deemed to be consistent with Mendelian theory. Yet the term purity had different connotations for scientists and practical workers. For the former, it referred to homozygosity; for the latter, it rather buttressed the constancy of a distinct commercial 'brand. ' Until the 1940s, practical breeders and most scientists were agreed that selecting animals purely for production was ill-advised. Cows of the extreme dairy type were believed to be prone to bovine tuberculosis. This conviction was at the basis of the development of 'the modern Friesian,' a rather robust type of dairy cow that was also valued for its aesthetically pleasing conformation and that became a commercial success.Journal of the History of Biology (2008) 41:637-676 Ó Springer 2008 DOI 10.1007 Contrary to the scientists' claims, it was not only for commercial reasons that breeders were reluctant to give up their modern Friesians after World War II, when the introduction of artificial insemination opened up the possibility of breeding more productive types by means of progeny testing. The political economy of breeding did indeed require breeders to protect their breed as a recognisable brand. Yet the moral economy of breeding must also be taken into account: the modern Friesian was also a product of widely shared normative standards of good and responsible farming.

No abstract