When was cow domesticated

Upadhyay, MR. Genome-wide variation within and between wild and domestic yak. Molecular Ecology Resources 14 4 Genome-wide patterns of copy number variation in the Chinese yak genome. BMC Genomics 17 1 Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Use precise geolocation data. Select personalised content. Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance.

Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance. Develop and improve products. List of Partners vendors. Share Flipboard Email. Table of Contents Expand. Domestication Evidence. Three Auroch Domesticates. Lactase Persistence. And a Yak Bos grunniens grunniens or Poephagus grunniens.

Domestic Yaks. Domesticating the Yak. How Many Are There? Kris Hirst. Archaeology Expert. Kris Hirst is an archaeologist with 30 years of field experience. Her work has appeared in scholarly publications such as Archaeology Online and Science.

Twitter Twitter. Featured Video. Cite this Article Format. Hirst, K. History of the Domestication of Cows and Yaks.

The History and Domestication of Sheep. Barley Hordeum vulgare - The History of its Domestication. The Domestication and History of Modern Horses. Bottle Gourd Domestication and History. Vitis vinifera: Origins of the Domesticated Grapevine. Your Privacy Rights. To change or withdraw your consent choices for ThoughtCo.

At any time, you can update your settings through the "EU Privacy" link at the bottom of any page. These choices will be signaled globally to our partners and will not affect browsing data. We and our partners process data to: Actively scan device characteristics for identification. I Accept Show Purposes. They each provide representative sets of sequences that match the European, Anatolian and Near Eastern study area of the present paper, thereby also covering areas which are underrepresented in the aDNA dataset, e.

Italy and the Iberian Peninsula. For a complete list of GenBank accession numbers of previously published sequences see Additional file 2.

All samples were processed in the ancient DNA facilities at the Institute of Anthropology, Mainz University Germany , under strict rules for contamination prevention as described in Bramanti et al. Those include strict separation of pre-PCR and post-PCR labs, protective clothes, regular cleaning of surfaces and equipment with detergent and bleach, and UV-irradiation of rooms, laboratory hoods, and equipment.

Bone samples were UV-irradiated for 45 min from two sides. Bone cubes of about 0. Samples were pulverized using a mixer mill MM, Retsch. Generally, aliquots of 0. DNA extraction was performed using phenol-chloroform-isoamylalcohol ; Roth. At least two independent extractions per sample were performed.

Extraction blank controls were processed during each extraction. Additionally, the cleanness of the grinding jars was tested by extracting hydroxylapatite that was pulverized under the same conditions as the bone samples. PCR reactions were usually performed with 2. Blank controls were processed during each PCR.

At least three independent PCRs from two different extracts were performed. At least three sequences obtained from independent PCRs from two independent DNA extractions per sample per primer pair were usually used to create a majority rule consensus sequence. For further details on ancient DNA work and sequencing including deviations from the general laboratory procedure described see Additional file 3.

These groups were further subdivided into chronological subgroups reflecting up to four different Neolithic and post-Neolithic periods per region see Additional file 4 for detailed information on the groupings. Modern sequences were grouped according to their country of origin also see Additional file 2. P values are based on 10, random permutations. The level of missing data allowed was adjusted in order to include all nucleotide positions even if there were gaps in some ancient sequences.

Besides that, default values were used. The MDS plot was created in R 2. Geographical coordinates were determined by eye as the centre of appropriate countries per group for the modern samples and the centre of all archaeological sites per group for the ancient samples.

Coalescent simulations were performed using Bayes Serial SimCoal [ 38 ], by extending the model previously described in Bollongino et al. Similarly, we assume an intergeneration time of 6 years, an ancestral Near Eastern wild aurochs female effective population size of 45, [ 39 ] and, again, a single domestication process of parameterized size N D at time 8, years BCE i. At 6, years BCE i. Prior values for N D are drawn uniformly from the range 1 — 1,, P uniformly from the range 0 — 1, and both migration parameters uniformly from the range 0 — 0.

Out of newly analysed bones and teeth from prehistoric domesticated cattle, yielded replicable and highly reliable mitochondrial HVR1 sequences, constituting a success rate of None of the blank controls contained amplifiable amounts of bovine DNA for further detailed discussion of the validity of the ancient DNA data see Additional file 6.

The successfully analysed samples come from Bosnia-Herzegovina 3 of 5 , Bulgaria 52 of 68 , France 15 of 19 , Germany 4 of 4 , Italy 5 of 14 , Romania 15 of 16 , Syria 1 of 1 , and Turkey 18 of Using the nomenclature of Achilli et al. None of them belongs to a specific mtDNA motif referred to as haplogroup P that is dominating in the indigenous aurochs population of Europe [ 26 , 27 , 42 ].

It is also markedly higher than in all other ancient European groups e. See Additional file 4 for detail on haplogroup composition and frequency of haplogroup Q across the 13 spatiotemporal groups. There are 35 different mitochondrial lineages in the prehistoric individuals, eight of which occur more than once in the dataset.

Non-unique haplotypes H were named according to their haplogroup and numbered consecutively H1-H8. Additional files 4 and 7 provide a detailed overview on the distribution of haplogroups and shared and unique haplotypes across the 13 spatiotemporal groups.

MDS Plot of d-loop sequences from 13 spatiotemporal groups of ancient domesticated cattle. Numbers represent the age of samples in BCE per group; brackets contain the number of sequences per group. Subgroups comprising only the earliest Neolithic cattle of each geographical group were used to further evaluate the influence of sample age and geographical location on genetic distances.

Figure 2 maps significant pairwise F ST values between the resulting eight groups. These groups also show the greatest geographical distances. Population pairwise F ST s between d-loop sequences from eight Neolithic groups of ancient domesticated cattle. Coloured rings surround geographical groups. Grey and white dots within the circles represent geographical location of archaeological sites.

Numbers within dots represent the number of d-loop sequences per site. Numbers on the lines between coloured circles are population pairwise F ST s. Solid lines stand for significant F ST s at the 0.

Grey and white colours of squares on the lines encode which chronological groups per geographi groups are being compared. There is a weaker correlation of genetic and geographical distances in modern samples Rxy: 0.

Complete population pairwise F ST matrices can be found in Additional file 8. Summary statistics of d-loop sequences from 13 spatiotemporal groups of ancient domesticated cattle. Numbers in the first column indicate the age of the samples in BCE. Haplotype diversity clearly decreases in a southeast to northwest direction with Iran 7,, BCE 0.

The haplotype diversity of the earliest domesticated cattle on the European continent in Southeastern Europe 6,, BCE 0. Following the northern Mediterranean coast, the values also drop sequentially from Western Anatolia 6,, BCE 0.

Haplotype diversity estimates increase with time in the two regions where samples from two Neolithic periods are available: from 0. Similar patterns are observed when considering the mean numbers of pairwise differences. The Neolithic subgroups also show a tendency of decreasing values with distance from Iran. This is not the case for Southeastern Europe.

Diversity estimates of the modern cattle sequences only show a slight tendency towards an east to west gradient for both haplotype diversity, and the mean number of pairwise differences. All diversity estimates and graphical visualisations of chronological and geographical diversity trends can be found in the Additional file 9.

We performed 5 million coalescent simulations under the demographic model described above, and used a tolerance proportion of 0.

While it is not possible to infer much from the relatively uninformative posterior for M E top, mode 0. Further simulations were performed in order to test the sensitivity of these parameter estimations to our assumed fixed values of N NE and N E. Increasing or decreasing both N NE and N E by an order of magnitude produced estimates that did not significantly differ from those given above see Additional file 5 for details.

Joint posterior density for the domestication bottleneck N D and the proportion moving into Europe P. The approximate joint posterior probability density of the proportion of the population P allowed to move into Europe at the time of the split 6, BCE and the effective female population size at the time of the domestication event N D. The marginal approximate posterior probability densities of the two migration rate parameters.

This result is consistent with the previous estimate based on 15 ancient Iranian and 27 modern Near Eastern and Anatolian cattle [ 23 ], and demonstrates that this initial finding of a very strong Near Eastern bottleneck is robust even with a greatly expanded continent-wide data set, and is not biased by theoretically possible subsequent introgression from aurochs populations outside the Near East.

It can therefore be concluded that domestic cattle indeed have a discrete and rather localised origin, very likely in Southeastern Anatolia and the Near East, a view that is consistent with a huge body of archaeozoological evidence from the 9 th millennium BCE [ 44 - 46 ].

Subsequent to the first domestication phase, the ancient DNA data, together with archaeological evidence, point to an intermittent expansion scenario.

From here, they spread simultaneously across Southeastern Europe and along the Mediterranean coast into Central, Northern, Southwestern, and Western Europe. In essence, the observed strong correlation between genetic and geographical distances together with decreasing genetic diversity roughly in a southeast to northwest and southwest direction is consistent with the idea of serial dilution of diversity by a series of recurring founder events.

Smaller genetic distances are observed between more adjacent areas, such as between Iran and Western Anatolia and between Iran and Southeastern Europe 0. Other statistics are equally consistent with the serial dilution model: Neolithic cattle from Iran yield the highest value for haplotype diversity in the whole dataset 0.

Haplotype diversity consistently decreases along the proposed two main Neolithisation routes, with the lowest values in remote areas, i. Alternative scenarios of secondary domestications or traceable female gene-flow from wild aurochs in Europe have been discussed several times in the literature [ 29 , 47 - 51 ].

The arguments are mainly based on scarce findings of the mtDNA haplogroup P, pre-dominating in European aurochs, in the domesticated stock [ 49 , 50 ] on the one hand, and the presence of mtDNA lineages in pre-Neolithic Italian aurochs that resemble those of the imported domesticated animals [ 29 , 48 ] on the other, thereby impeding the detection of introgression by mere comparison of haplogroup composition.

However, realistic expectations under such models would also include i a larger inferred founder population due to introgressions of diverse aurochs lineages and ii significant deviations from the serial dilution of genetic diversity model.

None of the two has been observed in or can be inferred from the data presented here. Detection of potential introgression of Italian aurochs through time deserves further attention, e. However, the existing dataset from the rest of Europe suggests that introgressions of local genes into the imported domestic cattle populations are rare and geographically restricted exceptions, or coming from male aurochs.

Separate independent domestication s of European aurochs can almost with certainty be excluded. The strict separation of domestic cattle from their wild European relatives is very different to what can be observed in other animals. For example, pigs were imported to Europe in a similar way to cattle, but after a few centuries all their mitochondrial lineages were replaced through admixture with local wild boar [ 52 , 53 ].

The summary statistical patterns described here may be partly biased by the fact that the analysed data come from heterochronous and spatially diverse samples [ 54 ]. Therefore, we used coalescent simulations to estimate the key parameters of taurine cattle population history upon their arrival in Europe in a realistic evolutionary demographic framework. It is noteworthy that the data from Western Anatolia, Southern Italy, and Southern France come from very few sites with less than ten samples each eight, five, and eight, respectively and therefore have to be evaluated cautiously.

However, the drastic decline in haplotype diversity and mean number of pairwise differences from 0. Low diversity estimates are also congruent with the fact that cattle did not play a major role in the domesticated faunal spectrum of Neolithic economies from Mediterranean Europe Impressa and Cardial , in contrast to Neolithic Cultures in Central Europe, where domesticated cattle were generally well represented [ 56 , 57 ].

Haplotype diversity decreases drastically from 0. There are several additional lines of evidence that point to the region between Southeastern Europe and Central Europe as a kind of core area where the Neolithic idea was re-consolidated: i From archaeology: The Linearbandkeramik culture LBK, engl.

Linear Pottery culture developed here and spread rapidly over Central Europe starting around 5, BCE [ 58 ]; ii From palaeogenetics: A migration of farmers from Southeastern to Central Europe has been inferred using ancient mtDNA [ 18 ]; iii From gene-culture coevolutionary modelling: Spatially-explicit computer simulations of the spread of an allele associated with lactase persistence in humans i.

We therefore suggest that the observed substantial loss of genetic diversity and the increasing genetic distance in prehistoric cattle are the result of a significant founder event along with the spread of the LBK. It probably coincides with a major wave of human migration and is followed by a period of intensified cattle breeding resulting in a rising importance of dairying. This picture becomes even more comprehensive when we look at how patterns change after the early Neolithic.

Cattle herding becomes more and more important with the onset of the LBK. Interestingly, there is no indication for population growth in Southeastern Europe.

The observed diachronic increase in haplotype diversity in the Southeastern European sample groups appears in tandem with new, previously absent mitochondrial haplotypes also see Additional file 7. However, it is clear that there is support at least for some level of migration during this early period as the estimated modal migration rate is clearly greater than 0.

We therefore suggest that a probable underlying scenario for our observations is one of continuous gene-flow into Europe following the initial colonization at around 6, BCE.

This scenario also fits in with archaeological evidence for accelerated westward acculturation occurring in the first half of the 6 th millennium BCE [ 6 , 60 ]. It is of note that this pattern has changed again in later periods. The variety of breeds across the Continents not only maintains the diversity of the genetic resources but also preserves a potential adaptation to other environments and climate change Lenstra et al.

Finally, we cannot forget how many benefits wild cattle, through the process of domestication, have brought to human being in the last thousands years. We should keep in mind this, considering that most wild cattle species are still overlooked and severely threatened by human pressure. He has edited three books with Cambridge Universi Keep up with the latest from Cambridge University Press on our social media accounts.

Share this Article today Tweet. Maremmana Bull. Photo: Marco Di Luca. Cattle Domestication: from Aurochs to Cow The link between wild cattle and humans has existed for thousands of years. Enjoyed reading this article? Share it today: Tweet. About the Author: Mario Melletti. Find more articles like this:. Latest Comments Have your say! Find a subject View all posts from our subject areas.

Looking for more? View all posts from our subject areas.