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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |