Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jun 3;122(22):e2413207122.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2413207122. Epub 2025 May 15.

A universally applicable definition for domestication

Affiliations

A universally applicable definition for domestication

Kathryn A Lord et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. .

Abstract

The process of domestication is commonly perceived as a human achievement, and domestic species are typically assumed to be those under human control. Domestic species have emerged from a greater diversity of interactions than this perspective allows, and none of the many definitions proposed for domestication can readily, reliably, and consistently distinguish domestic and nondomestic populations. Here, we propose that the process of domestication should instead be defined solely as evolution of a nonhuman population in response to an anthropogenic niche and that a domestic population is one that cannot sustain itself outside of an anthropogenic niche. As a result, this definition does not require comparisons with a presumed and largely unobservable ancestor. Instead, it focuses on the observable relationship between a nonhuman population and humans. It also avoids making assumptions about how domestication happens, thus enabling an exploration of the mechanisms underlying the process of adaptation to an anthropogenic niche. By applying this definition to plants, animals, and microbes, we illustrate its utility for investigating the evolution of the relationship between humans and other species and for anticipating which species are likely to survive in an increasingly human-influenced world. Domestication is simply an evolutionary process resulting from the interaction between two species, one of which is human. As we work to protect Earth's biodiversity, this definition allows us to understand why, in response to the conditions human societies create, some species survive and thrive, while others struggle and go extinct.

Keywords: anthropogenic; biodiversity; extinction; natural selection; symbiosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Populations that thrive in areas of human disturbance. Four examples of domestic populations include (A) dogs (Image credit: G. Cimarelli), (B) house sparrows (Image credit: E. Pracht), (C) some populations of fruit flies (Image credit: D. Genereux), and (D) some populations of Arabidopsis (Image credit: M. Nordborg).
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
The domestication spectrum. Under the new definition, populations can be categorized along a spectrum of domestication types that are defined by their relationship with the anthropogenic niche. Circles and gradients indicate where populations are observed. Dashed lines demarcate categories where no populations are observed. Overlapping circles with silhouettes represent admixture between wild and domestic subspecies. Asterisks indicate populations observed only through human translocations. Expanded version in SI Appendix, Fig. S1.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Operationalizing the new definition for domestication to investigate ecological and conservation topics. We hypothesize that the distribution of populations within a species on the domestication spectrum may help predict whether the species is endangered, likely to be invasive in new environments, will tolerate captivity, and if it can be successfully established as a laboratory model.

Similar articles

References

    1. Larson G., et al. , Current perspectives and the future of domestication studies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 6139–6146 (2014). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ramankutty N., Evan A. T., Monfreda C., Foley J. A., Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB1003 (2008).
    1. Greenspoon L., et al. , The global biomass of wild mammals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 120, e2204892120 (2023). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grossi G., Goglio P., Vitali A., Williams A. G., Livestock and climate change: Impact of livestock on climate and mitigation strategies. Anim. Front. 9, 69–76 (2019). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Larson G., Burger J., A population genetics view of animal domestication. Trends Genet. 29, 197–205 (2013). - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources