Search

The continuing devastation of natural habitats is still one of the most important and acute challenges that wildlife conservation programs are presented with in the contemporary world. The insistent encroachment of agricultural lands, the irrepressible expansion of urban areas, and the widespread deforestation for various uses, including logging and mining activities, has all contributed heavily to the destruction and subdivision of critical biotas that are necessary for sustaining a rich diversity of forms of life. With the human population expanding continuously at unprecedented levels, it is almost inevitable that the rate of contacts between humans and a rich diversity of animal forms increases proportionally. This increased contact between humans and a large number of animal forms causes a substantial increase in rates of disease transmission among different animal populations that also brings with it the potential for those diseases to get transmitted to humans. Therefore, this highlights disease monitoring and management as important and priority domains of wildlife conservation programs that are necessary for containing and reducing risks posed by these diseases. Early detection of outbreaks of emergent diseases by properly organized and effective monitoring programs can be capable of having a pivotal role to play in preventing future epidemics by allowing for instantaneous and effective responses to be taken everywhere and anywhere that they are required.

The One Health framework has emerged as a central paradigm for addressing emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) by recognizing the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. Despite increasing global adoption, the ethical dimensions of One Health remain conceptually fragmented and inconsistently operationalized across research, governance, and policy. This descriptive review synthesizes ethical challenges associated with One Health approaches to EIDs across six interrelated domains: animal ethics and welfare, public health ethics, environmental and planetary ethics, governance and policy, research ethics in outbreak settings, and emerging ethical frameworks. Drawing on peer-reviewed literature, policy documents, and conceptual scholarship, the review identifies four major cross-cutting ethical tensions. First, anthropocentric priorities continue to dominate One Health implementation, subordinating animal welfare and ecological integrity to human-centered outcomes. Second, tensions between collective welfare and individual rights become acute during outbreaks, imposing disproportionate burdens on marginalized populations. Third, persistent distributive, procedural, and epistemic injustices shape global and local responses, especially affecting low- and middle-income countries, indigenous communities, and non-human populations. Fourth, a substantial implementation gap exists between the articulation of ethical principles and their translation into enforceable institutional practice. The review further incorporates emerging ethical challenges related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) within One Health contexts, empirical evidence from major outbreaks including COVID-19, Ebola, and avian influenza, and perspectives from Global South scholarship to address equity dimensions. Emerging frameworks, including One Health Ethics, Planetary Health Ethics, ethics of care, indigenous relational ethics, and epistemic justice approaches, offer promising foundations for more inclusive governance, yet remain insufficiently integrated into operational decision-making. The review argues that One Health ethics must evolve into a rigorous interdisciplinary field supported by practical governance tools, equitable research frameworks, transparent accountability mechanisms, and inclusive policymaking. Without such developments, the transformative potential of One Health will remain ethically and institutionally constrained. 

Parasites are ubiquitous evolutionary agents that, among other things, drive the diversification of hosts. This could also apply to animal domestication, one of the most striking evolutionary processes generating phenotypic diversity, which has recently been proposed as a parasite-mediated process (“The parasites-mediated domestication hypothesis”, PMD). The PMD is based on the fact that parasites can alter the (neuro)endocrine system (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, gut-brain axis, thyroid secretion, etc.), influence gene expression and ontogenetic systems, including neural crest cell development, and thus modulate physiological, behavioural and developmental components underlying the domestication. In this article, domestication is therefore placed in the context of parasite-driven diversification. The rationale for the parasite-mediated domestication process and associated diversification is supported by explanations of possible underlying mechanisms in light of the pioneering work of the Belyaev fox experiment and the later proposed hypothesis on the role of neural crest cells. Finally, a framework for plausible comparative and experimental approaches to test the PMD is proposed. Placing domestication in the context of the parasite-driven host diversification process provides a broad perspective for future research in the field of animal evolution and domestication.