Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 877

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patterns and processes in crop domestication: an historical review and quantitative analysis of 203 global food crops

Meyer, Rachel S., DuVal, Ashley E., Jensen, Helen R.·2012·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: Domesticated food crops are derived from a phylogenetically diverse assemblage of wild ancestors through artificial selection for different traits. Our understanding of domestication, however, is based upon a subset of well‐studied ‘model’ crops, many of them from the Poaceae family. Here, we investigate domestication traits and theories using a broader range of crops. We reviewed domestication information (e.g. center of domestication, plant traits, wild ancestors, domestication dates, domestication traits, early and current uses) for 203 major and minor food crops. Compiled data were used to test classic and contemporary theories in crop domestication. Many typical features of domestication associated with model crops, including changes in ploidy level, loss of shattering, multiple origins, and domestication outside the native range, are less common within this broader dataset. In addition, there are strong spatial and temporal trends in our dataset. The overall time required to domesticate a species has decreased since the earliest domestication events. The frequencies of some domestication syndrome traits (e.g. nonshattering) have decreased over time, while others (e.g. changes to secondary metabolites) have increased. We discuss the influences of the ecological, evolutionary, cultural and technological factors that make domestication a dynamic and ongoing process. Contents Summary 29 I. Introduction 30 II. Key concepts and definitions 30 III. Methods of review and analysis 35 IV. Trends identified from the review of 203 crops 37 V. Life cycle 38 VI. Ploidy level 40 VII. Reproductive strategies 42 VIII. The domestication syndrome 42 IX. Spatial and temporal trends 42 X. Utilization of plant parts 44 XI. Conclusions 44 Acknowledgements 45 References 45

Overview

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04253.x

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 877

Metadata

Authors
Meyer, R. S., DuVal, A. E., & Jensen, H. R.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-08-13
Volume
196
Issue
1
Pages
29-48
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W1910920621
Cited by
877
References
5
FWCI
21.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patterns and processes in crop domestication: an historical review and quantitative analysis of 203 global food crops. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04253.x
The paper
Meyer, R. S., DuVal, A. E., & Jensen, H. R. (2012). Patterns and processes in crop domestication: an historical review and quantitative analysis of 203 global food crops. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04253.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.