4.5 Article

Insularity and early domestication: anthropogenic ecosystems as habitat islands

期刊

OIKOS
卷 2022, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/oik.09549

关键词

archaeobotany; domestication; ecosystem engineering; origins of agriculture; zooarchaeology

类别

资金

  1. Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
  2. European Research Council [851102]
  3. Projekt DEAL
  4. European Research Council (ERC) [851102] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, research on early domestication has been greatly influenced by genomics and archaeological investigations. Although some aspects of early domestication have been clarified, scholars still believe that evolution is a response to human innovations. Studying evolutionary parallels in the wild can provide insights into the evolution of the first domestication traits.
Over the past decade research into early domestication has been transformed by the genomics revolution and increased archaeological investigation. Despite clarification of the timing, locations and genetic processes, most scholars still envision evolutionary responses to human innovations, such as sickle harvesting, tilling, selection for docility or directed breeding. Stepping away from anthropocentric models, evolutionary parallels in the wild can provide case studies for understanding what ecological pressures drove the evolution of the first domestication traits. I contrast evolutionary trends seen among plants and animals confined on oceanic islands with the changes seen in the first cultivated crops and animals. I argue that the earliest villages functioned as habitat islands, applying parallel selective pressures as those on oceanic islands. In this view, the collective assemblage of parallel evolving traits that some scholars refer to as either an island syndrome or domestication syndrome results from similar ecological pressures of insularity, notably ecological release.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据