Cited by 51Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health

Rabbits and the Specious Origins of Domestication

Open access
Irving-Pease, Evan K., Frantz, Laurent A.F., Sykes, Naomi, Callou, Cécile, Larson, Greger·2018·Trends in Ecology & Evolution

Abstract

Rabbits are commonly thought to have been domesticated in ∼AD600 by French monks. Using historical and archaeological records, and genetic methods, we demonstrate that this is a misconception and the general inability to date domestication stems from both methodological biases and the lack of appreciation of domestication as a continuum.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tree.2017.12.009

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The divergence range between G. gallus spadiceus and the lineage from which domestic chickens were derived cannot be equated with the initiation of a domestication process and represents an upper bound on the chicken domestication timeframe.

    “Importantly, this range cannot be equated with the initiation of a domestication process. Instead, this timeframe represents the divergence between G. gallus spadiceus and the lineage from which domestic chickens were derived (17), and thus represents an upper bound on the chicken domestication timeframe.”

    From The biocultural origins and dispersal of domestic chickens (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Irving-Pease, E. K., Frantz, L. A. F., Sykes, N., Callou, C., & Larson, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Larson, Greger
Venue
Trends in Ecology & Evolution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
149-152
ISSN
0169-5347 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2785596416
Cited by
51
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Ecology & Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Research Council (ERC-2013-StG-337574-UNDEAD)
  • Natural Environmental Research Council (NE/K005243/1, NE/K003259/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Rabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health
Keywords
rabbits, historical documents, archaeological record, methodological bias
MeSH terms
Domestication, Animals, Archaeology, Biological Evolution, Rabbits

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review