From the Editors: The human–animal bond and domestication: Through the ages … animals in our lives
Year: 2014
Type: editorial
Abstract: As animal scientists, our lives and our livelihoods are intimately connected to animals. We study the physiology, nutrition, genetics, management, behavior and health and disease of livestock; companion, laboratory, and exotic animals; and wildlife. In this issue of Animal Frontiers, “The Human–Animal Bond and Domestication: Through the ages…Animals in our lives,” we explore the bond between humans and animals and the domestication of cattle and dogs from their ancient predecessors to their modern counterparts. The study of the human–animal bond or our psychological and social relationship with animals is a true scientific “animal frontier.” One of the more recent animal frontiers to be studied is the nature of the psychological and social relationship we have with the animals that share our world. In the late 1970s, the term “human–animal bond” was coined by Leo Bustad and Michael McCulloch (Hines, 2003). Drs. Bustad and McCulloch were just developing the Delta Society, a society dedicated to understanding the relationship between animals, people, and the environment; hence, the delta. The term “the human–animal bond” was unashamedly borrowed from the respected association found between parents and their offspring, the so-called “parent–infant bond.” The human–animal bond is now being recognized as a scientific discipline; it is a theoretic construct for the behavioral, psychological, physiological, ecological, social, and ethical consequences of the relationship between people and animals that is different from when either partner occurs independently. The new commitment to animals stems not only from our general sensitivity to the welfare of animals, but also from a newer appreciation of the many roles animals play in our lives. But we must remember that to be a “bond,” the effect on each partner has to be mutually beneficial and significant. The association between humans and their animals is indeed mutually beneficial and significant. This issue of Animal Frontiers looks at the human–animal bond from several facets. First, we explore the domestication of cattle and dogs. David Magee and David MacHugh from University College Dublin in Ireland and Ceiridwen Edwards from Oxford University in the UK discuss the use of modern genetics to track the development and migration of cattle from the now extinct wild ox or aurochs (Bos primigenius) to Bos taurus and Bos indicus cattle of the era (Magee et al., 2014). Magee and his colleagues discuss the gradual nature from wild to truly domesticated animals and use of modern genetic tools, coupled with archeological finds, to identify pre- and post-domestication patterns of genomic variation to reveal novel aspects of the demographic history of cattle. The domestication of the dog is the subject of the paper by Marie-Pierre Horard-Herbin from the Université François-Rabelais in France and Anne Tresset and Jean-Denis Vigne from the Archéozoologie et Archéobotanique, Sociétés, Pratiques et Environnements in Paris (Horard-Herbin, 2014). These authors identify that dogs were the first species to be domesticated by the Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers. In addition, archaeological and genetic analyses have clearly demonstrated that the only ancestor of the dog is the wolf (Canis lupus), and this is true across all the continents. Horard-Herbin and colleagues then follow the development of the dog and their uses from the Paleolithic to the Iron Age. Alan Beck from Purdue University discusses the inevitability of the bond between people and animals (Beck, 2014). There are good and understandable reasons for the bond to develop based on human and animal development, and it is rooted in recognized evolutionary development. Pet ownership, especially, is both normal and beneficial. Karen Thodberg from Aarhus University in Denmark, Bente Berget from Buskerud and Vestfold University College in Norway, and Lena Lidfors from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in Sweden provide an introduction to research in the therapeutic use of animals, and present some ideas as to how we can identify and measure a potential causal relationship between animal contact in a therapeutic setting and the longer-term effects (Thodberg et al., 2014). Sandra McCune and colleagues from the WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition in the United Kingdom follow with the evolution of research on human–animal interaction (McCune et al., 2014). Their paper traces the research that documents that interaction with our pets can have profound health benefits, including improved cardiovascular health, and can provide specific therapeutic value in a variety of settings. By 1987, the National Institutes of Health noted that, “All future studies of human health should consider the presence or absence of a pet in the home and, perhaps, the nature of this relationship with the pet, as a significant variable” (NIH, 1987). In addition to our normative interactions with animals, there are now specifically trained animals that serve a variety of roles to assist people with special needs. Sally Irvin, from the Indiana Canine Assistant Network, explores the many roles animals have served since the first guide dogs in 1929 (Irvin, 2014). Similarly, Erika Berg from North Dakota State University and Amy Causey from Horsedust Ltd. in Texas discuss the benefits of equine-assisted activities and therapies (Berg and Causey, 2014). While most of the research on the health benefits of animal contact has focused on companion animals, there are bonds with livestock as well. Candace Croney from Purdue University examines how our concerns and care of livestock species influences productivity and society's perception of animal agriculture, which has many ramifications (Croney, 2014). The scientific study of the human–animal bond, and its many implications, is a rapidly expanding area of academic, clinical, and commercial interest. Human–animal bond studies are 1) interdisciplinary, bringing together researchers from the disciplines of medicine, nursing, public health, veterinary medicine, and animal agriculture; 2) international, with important centers of activity around the world; and 3) dispersed, with practitioners and scholars inside and outside the walls of the academic institutions. Christopher Charles from Purdue University and HABRI Central explores the challenges of such study and introduces HABRI Central (http://habricentral.org/), a free open-access resource for information and collaboration for all around the world (Charles, 2014). This issue of Animal Frontiers focuses on the human–animal bond and domestication of cattle and dogs. As with all issues of Animal Frontiers, we welcome feedback and input; including letters to the editor discussing content in any of the published articles, suggestions to the managing board for topics for future issues of Animal Frontiers, and feedback to the editors and managing board on ways to improve the magazine as we continue move forward.
Source: Animal Frontiers
DOI: 10.2527/af.2014-0016
Authors: Steven A. Zinn, Alan M. Beck
Institutions: University of Connecticut, Purdue University West Lafayette
Language: English
Subfield: Genetics
Domain: Life Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,500
OpenAlex ID: W2009027525