Skip to main content
Log in

Lentil domestication: On the quality of evidence and arguments

  • Published:
Economic Botany Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current views on lentil domestication are based on biological attributes of the wild progenitorLens culinaris ssp. orientalis and on assumptions which have never been tested. Seed dormancy, a major factor in the adaptation of ssp.orientalis to its natural habitat, makes it inappropriate for cultivation, because poor germination causes seed yield following cultivation to be equal to the amount of sown seeds. Higher yield, resulting from the evolution of a non-dormant type can be obtained only after five or six cycles of unprofitable cultivation. It is doubtful that incipient farmers would have undertaken such an endeavor without preexisting knowledge that non-dormant types could eventually be obtained. Experiments involving the sowing of wild lentil would have been much more successful if the non-dormant types were present in appreciable quantities in the seed stock. Establishment of that type in the natural population would have required a period of seven to eight years with favorable growing conditions allowing the non-dormant type to become widespread in the population, followed by massive predation by man reducing the hazard of a population explosion. The close similarity between isozyme profiles of the cultivated lentil and its wild progenitor indicates that lentil cultivation was attempted with seeds derived from different populations and in different areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Blunder, M. A. 1991. Modelling the origin of legume domestication and cultivation. Economic Botany 45:243–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D., E. D. Soltis, F. J. Muehlbauer, and G. Ladizinsky. 1986. Isozyme polymorphism inLens (Leguminosae). Systematic Botany 11:392–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladizinsky, G. 1985. Genetics of hard seed coat in the genusLens. Euphytica 34:539–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1987. Pulse domestication before cultivation. Economic Botany 41:60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1989. Pulse domestication: fact and fiction. Economic Botany 43:131–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muehlbauer, F. J. 1974. Seed yield component in lentil. Crop Science 14:403–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkas, R., D. Zamir, and G. Ladizinsky. 1985. Allozyme divergence and evolution in the genusLens. Plant Systematics and Evololution 153:1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosun, O., and D. Eser. 1979. Studies of plant density in lentil. Lens Newsletter 6:8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohary, D. 1989. Pulse domestication and cereal domestication: how different are they? Economic Botany 43:31–34.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ladizinsky, G. Lentil domestication: On the quality of evidence and arguments. Econ Bot 47, 60–64 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02862206

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02862206

Key Words

Navigation