Human domestication and the roles of human agency in human evolution

Candidate SNP Markers Significantly Altering the Affinity of TATA-Binding Protein for the Promoters of Human Hub Genes for Atherogenesis, Atherosclerosis and Atheroprotection

Atherosclerosis is a systemic disease in which focal lesions in arteries promote the build-up of lipoproteins and cholesterol they are transporting. The development of atheroma (atherogenesis) narrows blood vessels, reduces the blood supply and leads to cardiovascular diseases. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death, which has been especially boosted since the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a variety of contributors to atherosclerosis, including lifestyle factors and genetic predisposition. Antioxidant diets and recreational exercises act as atheroprotectors and can retard atherogenesis. The search for molecular markers of atherogenesis and atheroprotection for predictive, preventive and personalized medicine appears to be the most promising direction for the study of atherosclerosis. In this work, we have analyzed 1068 human genes associated with atherogenesis, atherosclerosis and atheroprotection. The hub genes regulating these processes have been found to be the most ancient. In silico analysis of all 5112 SNPs in their promoters has revealed 330 candidate SNP markers, which statistically significantly change the affinity of the TATA-binding protein (TBP) for these promoters. These molecular markers have made us confident that natural selection acts against underexpression of the hub genes for atherogenesis, atherosclerosis and atheroprotection. At the same time, upregulation of the one for atheroprotection promotes human health.

Differentially Expressed Genes and Molecular Susceptibility to Human Age-Related Diseases

Mainstream transcriptome profiling of susceptibility versus resistance to age-related diseases (ARDs) is focused on differentially expressed genes (DEGs) specific to gender, age, and pathogeneses. This approach fits in well with predictive, preventive, personalized, participatory medicine and helps understand how, why, when, and what ARDs one can develop depending on their genetic background. Within this mainstream paradigm, we wanted to find out whether the known ARD-linked DEGs available in PubMed can reveal a molecular marker that will serve the purpose in anyone's any tissue at any time. We sequenced the periaqueductal gray (PAG) transcriptome of tame versus aggressive rats, identified rat-behavior-related DEGs, and compared them with their known homologous animal ARD-linked DEGs. This analysis yielded statistically significant correlations between behavior-related and ARD-susceptibility-related fold changes (log₂ values) in the expression of these DEG homologs. We found principal components, PC1 and PC2, corresponding to the half-sum and the half-difference of these log₂ values, respectively. With the DEGs linked to ARD susceptibility and ARD resistance in humans used as controls, we verified these principal components. This yielded only one statistically significant common molecular marker for ARDs: an excess of Fcγ receptor IIb suppressing immune cell hyperactivation.

Does the Domestication Syndrome Apply to the Domestic Pig? Not Completely

The ‘domestication syndrome’ defines a suite of features that domesticated animals possess as the result of the artificial selection operated by Homo sapiens since the Neolithic. An interesting anthropological question is whether such features, including increased tameness and reduced aggression, apply to all domesticated forms. We investigated this issue in the domestic pig (Sus scrofa). We video-recorded and analysed aggression and social play (mostly play-fighting) sessions from piglets (three litters; n = 24) and wild boar hybrids (domestic pig mother x wild boar father; three litters; n = 27) from 6–50 days of age, raised in the same woodland/grassland habitat and extensive farming management (ethical farm ‘Parva Domus’, Cavagnolo, Torino). Play and aggression session structure was assessed via Asymmetry (AI; offensive/defensive pattern balance), Shannon (H′; pattern variability), and Pielou (J; pattern evenness) indices. We found that piglets played more (especially after the 20th day of life) and engaged in less variable and uniform sessions than wild boar hybrids. Compared to hybrids, piglets showed less variable but more frequent (especially when approaching weaning) and asymmetrical aggressive events. Thus, the domestication syndrome does not seem to fully apply to either social play or aggression, possibly because artificial selection has produced greater tameness of pigs towards humans than towards conspecifics.

What is domestication?

The nature of domestication is often misunderstood. Most definitions of the process are anthropocentric and center on human intentionality, which minimizes the role of unconscious selection and also excludes non-human domesticators. An overarching, biologically grounded definition of domestication is discussed, which emphasizes its core nature as a coevolutionary process that arises from a specialized mutualism, in which one species controls the fitness of another in order to gain resources and/or services. This inclusive definition encompasses both human-associated domestication of crop plants and livestock as well as other non-human domesticators, such as insects. It also calls into question the idea that humans are themselves domesticated, given that evolution of human traits did not arise through the control of fitness by another species.

A bioinformatic search for correspondence between differentially expressed genes of domestic versus wild animals and orthologous human genes altering reproductive potential

One of the greatest achievements of genetics in the 20th century is D.K. Belyaev’s discovery of destabilizing selection during the domestication of animals and that this selection affects only gene expression regulation (not gene structure) and inf luences systems of neuroendocrine control of ontogenesis in a stressful environment. Among the experimental data generalized by Belyaev’s discovery, there are also f indings about accelerated extinc tion of testes’ hormonal function and disrupted seasonality of reproduction of domesticated foxes in comparison with their wild congeners. To date, Belyaev’s discovery has already been repeatedly conf irmed, for example, by independent observations during deer domestication, during the use of rats as laboratory animals, after the reintroduction of endangered species such as Przewalski’s horse, and during the creation of a Siberian reserve population of the Siberian grouse when it had reached an endangered status in natural habitats. A genome-wide comparison among humans, several domestic animals, and some of their wild congeners has given rise to the concept of self-domestication syndrome, which includes autism spectrum disorders. In our previous study, we created a bioinformatic model of human self-domestication syndrome using differentially expressed genes (DEGs; of domestic animals versus their wild congeners) orthologous to the human genes (mainly, nervous-system genes) whose changes in expression affect reproductive potential, i. e., growth of the number of humans in the absence of restrictions caused by limiting factors. Here, we applied this model to 68 human genes whose changes in expression alter the reproductive health of women and men and to 3080 DEGs of domestic versus wild animals. As a result, in domestic animals, we identif ied 16 and 4 DEGs, the expression changes of which are codirected with changes in the expression of the human orthologous genes decreasing and increasing human reproductive potential, respectively. The wild animals had 9 and 11 such DEGs, respectively. This difference between domestic and wild animals was signif icant according to Pearson’s χ2 test (p < 0.05) and Fisher’s exact test (p < 0.05). We discuss the results from the standpoint of restoration of endangered animal species whose natural habitats are subject to an anthropogenic impact.

Domestication Explains Two-Thirds of Differential-Gene-Expression Variance between Domestic and Wild Animals; The Remaining One-Third Reflects Intraspecific and Interspecific Variation

Belyaev's concept of destabilizing selection during domestication was a major achievement in the XX century. Its practical value has been realized in commercial colors of the domesticated fox that never occur in the wild and has been confirmed in a wide variety of pet breeds. Many human disease models involving animals allow to test drugs before human testing. Perhaps this is why investigators doing transcriptomic profiling of domestic versus wild animals have searched for breed-specific patterns. Here we sequenced hypothalamic transcriptomes of tame and aggressive rats, identified their differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and, for the first time, applied principal component analysis to compare them with all the known DEGs of domestic versus wild animals that we could find. Two principal components, PC1 and PC2, respectively explained 67% and 33% of differential-gene-expression variance (hereinafter: log2 value) between domestic and wild animals. PC1 corresponded to multiple orthologous DEGs supported by homologs; these DEGs kept the log2 value sign from species to species and from tissue to tissue (i.e., a common domestication pattern). PC2 represented stand-alone homologous DEG pairs reversing the log2 value sign from one species to another and from tissue to tissue (i.e., representing intraspecific and interspecific variation).

Targeted conspiratorial killing, human self-domestication and the evolution of groupishness

Groupishness is a set of tendencies to respond to group members with prosociality and cooperation in ways that transcend apparent self-interest. Its evolution is puzzling because it gives the impression of breaking the ordinary rules of natural selection. Boehm's solution is that moral elements of groupishness originated and evolved as a result of group members becoming efficient executioners of antisocial individuals, and he noted that self-domestication would have proceeded from the same dynamic. Self-domestication is indicated first at ~300,000 years ago and has probably gathered pace ever since, suggesting selection for self-domestication and groupishness for at least 12,000 generations. Here I propose that a specifically human style of violence, targeted conspiratorial killing, contributed importantly to both self-domestication and to promoting groupishness. Targeted conspiratorial killing is unknown in chimpanzees or any other vertebrate, and is significant because it permits coalitions to kill antisocial individuals cheaply. The hypothesis that major elements of groupishness are due to targeted conspiratorial killing helps explain why they are much more elaborated in humans than in other species.