Integrating the processes in the evolutionary system of domestication

Allaby, Robin G.

doi:10.1093/jxb/erp382

Cited by 73 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Next-generation DNA sequence studies (Nordborg and Weigel 2008), together with phylogenetic analyses including appropriate outgroups to establish polarity of characters, should help to clarify relationships between pale flax and the various forms of cultivated flax. In addition, specific domesticationassociated trait groups in flax may carry abundant genetic signatures of past domestication events (Allaby 2010), which should spur future research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic evidence for early flax domestication with capsular dehiscence

2011

Genet Resour Crop Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) is the earliest oil and fibre crop, but little is known about its domestication process. Attempt was made here to assess genetic relationships of 63 Linum accessions representing seven typical groups of cultivated flax and its wild progenitor, pale flax (Linum bienne Mill.), by using 49 informative expressed sequence tag-derived simple sequence repeat (EST-SSR) primer pairs. The seven groups were pale flax from Turkey, pale flax from other countries, and five groups of cultivated flax (landrace, fibre, oil, winter, and dehiscent). From these 63 samples, 366 polymorphic bands were detected, which likely represented 79 loci. These polymorphic bands had frequencies that ranged from 0.016 to 0.984 and averaged 0.284. Group-specific EST-SSR variation (Fst values) ranged from 0.339 to 0.373 and averaged 0.349 and pairwise group EST-SSR variation ranged from 0.067 to 0.507. A neighbor-joining clustering of these seven groups revealed that dehiscent flax clustered most closely to its wild progenitor, pale flax, followed by oil flax and fibre flax. Winter flax clustered most closely to oil flax and less to pale flax. These clustering patterns were essentially the same when individual samples were analyzed via neighborjoining. These findings strongly suggest that capsular dehiscence was among the first flax traits modified by human after initial domestication, reflecting the importance that reducing capsular dehiscence likely played in early flax domestication.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, genetic evidence is still largely lacking for understanding the domestication processes of many agricultural crops (Allaby 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic evidence for early flax domestication with capsular dehiscence

2011

Genet Resour Crop Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We recognize that distinguishing these options is complicated, and it is increasingly clear that incomplete archaeological evidence and genetic data are open to conflicting interpretation. This aspect highlights the importance of explicit modeling and simulation of a range of hypotheses concerning the starting conditions and processes of domestication (14,87). Factors potentially leading to confusion include the fact that multiple domestication episodes may be hidden from genetic view today as a result of both bottlenecks (in some cases leading to extinction) and introgression.…”

Section: Filling In Gaps On Mapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current perspectives and the future of domestication studies

Larson

Piperno

Allaby

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

655

544

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is difficult to overstate the cultural and biological impacts that the domestication of plants and animals has had on our species. Fundamental questions regarding where, when, and how many times domestication took place have been of primary interest within a wide range of academic disciplines. Within the last two decades, the advent of new archaeological and genetic techniques has revolutionized our understanding of the pattern and process of domestication and agricultural origins that led to our modern way of life. In the spring of 2011, 25 scholars with a central interest in domestication representing the fields of genetics, archaeobotany, zooarchaeology, geoarchaeology, and archaeology met at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center to discuss recent domestication research progress and identify challenges for the future. In this introduction to the resulting Special Feature, we present the state of the art in the field by discussing what is known about the spatial and temporal patterns of domestication, and controversies surrounding the speed, intentionality, and evolutionary aspects of the domestication process. We then highlight three key challenges for future research. We conclude by arguing that although recent progress has been impressive, the next decade will yield even more substantial insights not only into how domestication took place, but also when and where it did, and where and why it did not.The domestication of plants and animals was one of the most significant cultural and evolutionary transitions in the ∼200,000-y history of our species. Investigating when, where, and how domestication took place is therefore crucial for understanding the roots of complex societies. Domestication research is equally important to scholars from a wide range of disciplines, from evolutionary biology to sustainability science (1, 2). Research into both the process and spatiotemporal origins of domestication has accelerated significantly over the past decade through archaeological research, advances in DNA/ RNA sequencing technology, and methods used to recover and formally identify changes in interactions among plants and animals leading to domestication (2-4). In the spring of 2011, 25 scholars with a central interest in domestication and representing the fields of genetics, archaeobotany, zooarchaeology, geoarchaeology, and archaeology met at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center to discuss recent progress in domestication research and identify challenges for the future. Our goal was to begin reconsidering plant and animal domestication within an integrated evolutionary and cultural framework that takes into account not just new genetic and archaeological data, but also ideas related to epigenetics, plasticity, geneby-environment interactions, gene-culture coevolution, and niche construction. Each of these concepts is relevant to understanding phenotypic change, heritability, and selection, and they are all fundamental components of the New Biology (5) and Expanded Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (6).

show abstract

“…Such adaptation complexity is consistent with the large number of genes (i.e., 27-70 genes) thought to underlie domestication traits in wheat, maize, and sunflower (76)(77)(78)(79). Furthermore, because the number of genes that can be under selection simultaneously is constrained (80), it is necessary to consider gene interactions in models of adaptation (75,81). A case in point is the adaptation of crops to higher latitudes as they were moved out of their location(s) of origin (82)(83)(84).…”

Section: How Well Did Domesticates Adapt To Diverse Anthropogenicmentioning

confidence: 55%

Storytelling and story testing in domestication

Gerbault¹,

Allaby

Boivin

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The domestication of plants and animals marks one of the most significant transitions in human, and indeed global, history. Traditionally, study of the domestication process was the exclusive domain of archaeologists and agricultural scientists; today it is an increasingly multidisciplinary enterprise that has come to involve the skills of evolutionary biologists and geneticists. Although the application of new information sources and methodologies has dramatically transformed our ability to study and understand domestication, it has also generated increasingly large and complex datasets, the interpretation of which is not straightforward. In particular, challenges of equifinality, evolutionary variance, and emergence of unexpected or counter-intuitive patterns all face researchers attempting to infer past processes directly from patterns in data. We argue that explicit modeling approaches, drawing upon emerging methodologies in statistics and population genetics, provide a powerful means of addressing these limitations. Modeling also offers an approach to analyzing datasets that avoids conclusions steered by implicit biases, and makes possible the formal integration of different data types. Here we outline some of the modeling approaches most relevant to current problems in domestication research, and demonstrate the ways in which simulation modeling is beginning to reshape our understanding of the domestication process.T he emergence of agriculture beginning some 10,000 y ago marked more than a change in human patterns of subsistence. The beginnings of food production ushered in an era of radically new relationships between humans and other species, dramatic new evolutionary pressures, and fundamental transformations to the earth's biosphere. The evolutionary process of plant and animal domestication by humans led to morphological, physiological, behavioral, and genetic differentiation of a wide range of species from their wild progenitors (1, 2). The selection pressures that were placed on such species continue today, sometimes through direct genetic modification, and both the processes and their outcomes are accordingly of significant broader interest. Domestication is also part of a cultural evolutionary process (3, 4), and some human genes have evolved in response to cultural innovations (5-8), much as the genes of domesticated species have changed under the impact of human artificial selection. The study of domestication today is a multidisciplinary enterprise in which archaeologists and agricultural scientists have been joined by evolutionary biologists and population geneticists (2, 9).At least five major sets of questions tend to reoccur in the domestication literature. The first three are demographic: (i) When, where, and in how many geographic locations was a given species domesticated? (ii) What were the dispersal routes from the original domestication centers? (iii) To what extent did hybridization between domesticates and local wild relatives occur? The remaining questions relate to adaptation: (i...

show abstract

Integrating the processes in the evolutionary system of domestication

Cited by 73 publications

References 47 publications

Genetic evidence for early flax domestication with capsular dehiscence

Genetic evidence for early flax domestication with capsular dehiscence

Current perspectives and the future of domestication studies

Storytelling and story testing in domestication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About