ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2025
Seeking consensus on the domestication concept.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Refocusing the study of human-plant relations to the genus scale: Indigenous selection pressures in Xanthosoma.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2026Article
- Exploring the role of plant-animal interactions in the long-term development of heritage landscapes in Europe.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Unravelling domestication: introduction to the theme issue.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Seeking consensus on the domestication concept.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The domestication of plants and animals permitted the development of cities and social hierarchies, as well as fostering cultural changes that ultimately led humanity into the modern world. Despite the importance of this set of related evolutionary phenomena, scholars have not reached a consensus on what the earliest steps in the domestication process looked like, how long the seminal portions of the process took to unfold, or whether humans played a conscious role in parts or all of it. Likewise, many scholars find it difficult to disentangle the cultural processes of cultivation from the biological processes of domestication. Over the past decade, the prevailing views among scholars have begun to shift towards unconscious and protracted models of early domestication; however, the nomenclature used to discuss these changes has been stagnant. Discussions of early domestication remain bound up in prevailing definitions and preconceived ideas of what the process looked like. In this paper, we seek to break down definitions of domestication and to construct a definition that serves equal utility regardless of the views that researchers hold about the process.This article is part of the theme issue 'Unravelling domestication: multi-disciplinary perspectives on human and non-human relationships in the past, present and future'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.