There are two very different interpretations of the prehistory of Island Southeast Asia (ISEA), with genetic evidence invoked in support of both. The “out-of-Taiwan” model proposes a major Late Holocene expansion of Neolithic Austronesian speakers from Taiwan. An alternative, proposing that Late Glacial/postglacial sea-level rises triggered largely autochthonous dispersals, accounts for some otherwise enigmatic genetic patterns, but fails to explain the Austronesian language dispersal. Combining mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), Y-chromosome and genome-wide data, we performed the most comprehensive analysis of the region to date, obtaining highly consistent results across all three systems and allowing us to reconcile the models. We infer a primarily common ancestry for Taiwan/ISEA populations established before the Neolithic, but also detected clear signals of two minor Late Holocene migrations, probably representing Neolithic input from both Mainland Southeast Asia and South China, via Taiwan. This latter may therefore have mediated the Austronesian language dispersal, implying small-scale migration and language shift rather than large-scale expansion.
"Late Holocene expansion of Neolithic Austronesian speakers from Taiwan".
Interesting.
It is a bunch of malarkey. The original people to settle the Islands came from Africa after 2000 BC bearing a megalithic culture.
They were followed by the Lapita culture which was also non-Austronesian, mainly Dravidian and Ethiopian speakers from Southeast Asia.
The Polynesians, Filipinos , Indonesians and etc., came after these migrations--not during the Holocene.
As I have said repeatedly the major sign of a unreliable paper concerning population migrations is the absence of archaeological evidence. Genomic evidence alone relating to the population presently living in an area tells us very little about past migrations events. See: https://www.academia.edu/12196288/A_PROTOCOL_TO_EVALUATE_POPULATION_GENETICS_PAPERS .
Deep history of coconuts decoded: Origins of cultivation, ancient trade routes, and colonization of the Americas
DNA analysis of more than 1,300 coconuts from around the world reveals that the coconut was brought under cultivation in two separate locations, one in the Pacific basin and the other in the Indian Ocean basin. What's more, coconut genetics also preserve a record of prehistoric trade routes and of the colonization of the Americas.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
Basically Austronesians were a branch of indigenous aborignal South Asians who migrated into the Pacific. Obviously those folks have been there since the beginning.
posted 