Cargando…

Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome

Altered neural crest cell (NCC) behaviour is an increasingly cited explanation for the domestication syndrome in animals. However, recent authors have questioned this explanation, while others cast doubt on whether domestication syndrome even exists. Here, we review published literature concerning t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gleeson, Ben Thomas, Wilson, Laura A. B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10031412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36946116
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.2464
_version_ 1784910601244377088
author Gleeson, Ben Thomas
Wilson, Laura A. B.
author_facet Gleeson, Ben Thomas
Wilson, Laura A. B.
author_sort Gleeson, Ben Thomas
collection PubMed
description Altered neural crest cell (NCC) behaviour is an increasingly cited explanation for the domestication syndrome in animals. However, recent authors have questioned this explanation, while others cast doubt on whether domestication syndrome even exists. Here, we review published literature concerning this syndrome and the NCC hypothesis, together with recent critiques of both. We synthesize these contributions and propose a novel interpretation, arguing shared trait changes under ancient domestication resulted primarily from shared disruption of wild reproductive regimes. We detail four primary selective pathways for ‘reproductive disruption' under domestication and contrast these succinct and demonstrable mechanisms with cryptic genetic associations posited by the NCC hypothesis. In support of our perspective, we illustrate numerous important ways in which NCCs contribute to vertebrate reproductive phenotypes, and argue it is not surprising that features derived from these cells would be coincidentally altered under major selective regime changes, as occur in domestication. We then illustrate several pertinent examples of Darwin's ‘unconscious selection' in action, and compare applied selection and phenotypic responses in each case. Lastly, we explore the ramifications of reproductive disruption for wider evolutionary discourse, including links to wild ‘self-domestication' and ‘island effect’, and discuss outstanding questions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10031412
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100314122023-03-23 Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome Gleeson, Ben Thomas Wilson, Laura A. B. Proc Biol Sci Review Articles Altered neural crest cell (NCC) behaviour is an increasingly cited explanation for the domestication syndrome in animals. However, recent authors have questioned this explanation, while others cast doubt on whether domestication syndrome even exists. Here, we review published literature concerning this syndrome and the NCC hypothesis, together with recent critiques of both. We synthesize these contributions and propose a novel interpretation, arguing shared trait changes under ancient domestication resulted primarily from shared disruption of wild reproductive regimes. We detail four primary selective pathways for ‘reproductive disruption' under domestication and contrast these succinct and demonstrable mechanisms with cryptic genetic associations posited by the NCC hypothesis. In support of our perspective, we illustrate numerous important ways in which NCCs contribute to vertebrate reproductive phenotypes, and argue it is not surprising that features derived from these cells would be coincidentally altered under major selective regime changes, as occur in domestication. We then illustrate several pertinent examples of Darwin's ‘unconscious selection' in action, and compare applied selection and phenotypic responses in each case. Lastly, we explore the ramifications of reproductive disruption for wider evolutionary discourse, including links to wild ‘self-domestication' and ‘island effect’, and discuss outstanding questions. The Royal Society 2023-03-29 2023-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10031412/ /pubmed/36946116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.2464 Text en © 2023 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Gleeson, Ben Thomas
Wilson, Laura A. B.
Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title_full Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title_fullStr Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title_full_unstemmed Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title_short Shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
title_sort shared reproductive disruption, not neural crest or tameness, explains the domestication syndrome
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10031412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36946116
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.2464
work_keys_str_mv AT gleesonbenthomas sharedreproductivedisruptionnotneuralcrestortamenessexplainsthedomesticationsyndrome
AT wilsonlauraab sharedreproductivedisruptionnotneuralcrestortamenessexplainsthedomesticationsyndrome