2017
DOI: 10.1101/122093
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic costs of domestication and improvement

Abstract: 26The 'cost of domestication' hypothesis posits that the process of domesticating 27 wild species can result in an increase in the number, frequency, and/or 28 proportion of deleterious genetic variants that are fixed or segregating in the 29 genomes of domesticated species. This cost may limit the efficacy of selection 30 and thus reduce genetic gains in breeding programs for these species. 31Understanding when and how deleterious mutations accumulate can also provide 32 insight into fundamental questions abo… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
66
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 145 publications
1
66
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the inbreeding coefficient in C. moschata was lower than that reported for other domesticated plants native to Mesoamerica, such as common bean Phaseolus vulgaris L. ( F IS = 0.81; Blair et al., ) and papaya Carica papaya ( F IS = 0.58; Matos et al., ). Domestication and crop improvement often involve increased inbreeding (Robinson, ; Moyers et al., ). For instance, in order to increase crop productivity (by ensuring pollination) or to reduce variability in the crop, farmers sometimes select geitonogamous individuals (Escalante et al., ; Montes‐Hernández and Eguiarte, ), in which flowers may be fertilized with the pollen of a male flower from the same plant (Hessing, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the inbreeding coefficient in C. moschata was lower than that reported for other domesticated plants native to Mesoamerica, such as common bean Phaseolus vulgaris L. ( F IS = 0.81; Blair et al., ) and papaya Carica papaya ( F IS = 0.58; Matos et al., ). Domestication and crop improvement often involve increased inbreeding (Robinson, ; Moyers et al., ). For instance, in order to increase crop productivity (by ensuring pollination) or to reduce variability in the crop, farmers sometimes select geitonogamous individuals (Escalante et al., ; Montes‐Hernández and Eguiarte, ), in which flowers may be fertilized with the pollen of a male flower from the same plant (Hessing, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Domesticated species are an excellent model to investigate the consequences of population bottlenecks on genetic and deleterious variation. This is because their demographic history is characterized by multiple population contractions associated with domestication, breed formation and intense selective breeding (Bosse, Megens, Derks, Cara, & Groenen, ; Makino et al, ; Mardsen et al, ; Moyers, Morrell, & McKay, ). Domestication involves the (partial or complete) isolation of a number of individuals from a wild progenitor population and entails drastic changes in the nature and strength of selective forces acting on the population, as well as its size (Larson & Fuller, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In many previous studies, it has been shown that crop plants experienced a strong selection pressure during the domestication process (Gepts, ; Zohary, ; Purugganan and Fuller, ), which often results in the independent appearance of multiple spontaneous adaptive mutations, most of which are base substitutions (Hall, ). The process of increased prevalence (an increase in the number, frequency and/or proportion) of deleterious mutations in domesticated species, has been described as the ‘cost of domestication’ (Kono et al ., ; Moyers et al ., ). An excess of non‐synonymous substitutions was observed in different domesticated germplasm (Liu et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Recently, the effects of domestication on the genome have been presented as the ‘cost of domestication’ hypothesis. According to this, domesticated species have acquired an increased prevalence (an increase in the number, frequency and/or proportion) in deleterious genetic variants during the process of domestication (Kono et al ., ; Moyers et al ., ). In different crop species (rice, maize, barley, soybean and sunflower), an increased proportion of non‐synonymous mutations in domesticated taxa relative to their wild progenitors has been documented (Mezmouk and Ross‐Ibarra, ; Renaut and Rieseberg, ; Kono et al ., ; Liu et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%