Are captive-bred species "Domesticated"? NZ/Au Mallards

[Jake]

We've known, from genetic sampling, for a while that NZ Mallards are overwhelmingly a representation of European decent, with some American Mallard genes. Documentation/NZ Mallard history had formally suggested that it was the extensive "American introductions" which got them firmly established here. With genetic-testing outcomes, the next accepted story became that our "American" stock was actually via US gamefarms which were stocked with English birds.

A new paper (Lavretsky, et al. 2023) is now using the term "domestic" for the gamefarm birds. This doesn't sit well with me. The follow-on effect is that Australian Birders are now saying "all Australian and New Zealand Mallards are of domestic origin". There are a couple of big reasons I find this whole thing problematic.

The Anthropocene is affecting many animal species, which equates to selection pressures. Does the urbanisation of wild species, and their leaning on humans for food, shelter, safety etc. equate to domestication too?. Birds like Campbell Island Teal additionally have had massive selection-pressures from: being brought into captivity; extra-representation of the captive breeders' genes versus non-breeders'; adapting back into a third location, and subsequent move back to their original homeland. Other species like Takahe, Kakapo, Kaka, Kakariki etc are all captively raised for release and could have captivity-associated selection pressures. All our introduced birds, by definition, are descendants of those that survived/adapted to cages. I am not suggesting that we call any of the aforementioned "domestic" or "domesticated", as to me "domestication" should result in fair phenotype changes.

There wasn't a change in phenotypes/behaviour or survivability, of the gamefarm birds, described in the Lavretsky paper. This new label suggests there's no real difference between our feral birds and something like a Domesticated Pekin or Runner Duck, which have major phenotypic changes. I'm happy with the term "feral" for wild-type NZ Mallards. Do we need to update ebird to swap our observations out to "Mallard of domestic origin"?... surely that'd be extreme/unnecessary. Should this theoretically change protection status as a seasonal gamebird versus a domestic bird that is allowed to be kept/butchered by backyard keepers? Additionally, we have other gamebirds that don't have the "domesticated" label, which are perhaps more deserving: even Ring-necked Pheasants.

Australia had wild Mallards (possibly via gamefarms/zoos, Acclimatisation Societies etc) introduced and persisting for decades in comparatively low numbers, but this is now an uncomfortable talking point for the Australian birders, who have taken this paper and run with it. It's not clear to me that wild-type Mallards ever became extinct in Australia.

It might be interesting if my understandings catch up, and I look back on my opinion, cringing. Love to hear what others think.


Here's some background:
Australian Museum. "Mallard"(2020). Retrieved from: https://australian.museum/learn/animals/birds/mallard/#:~:text=The%20Mallard%20was%20introduced%20to,in%20eastern%20New%20South%20Wales.

Graham, J. "Australian and NZ Mallards confirmed to all be of domestic origin" (2023). retrieved from https://www.inaturalist.org/posts/83001-australian-and-nz-mallards-confirmed-to-all-be-of-domestic-origin

Lavretsky, P., Mohl, J.E., Söderquist, P. et al. The meaning of wild: Genetic and adaptive consequences from large-scale releases of domestic mallards. Commun Biol 6, 819 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-023-05170-w

[Jake]

The American Birding Association podcast discussed this topic in their "This month in birding" segment (Jan 2024) and it queries the same same thing