...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
S.O.Y. Keita on POLYTOPICITY
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: [qb] Volume 285, 8 February 2013, Pages 44–56 Genetic evidence for the colonization of Australia Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), Y-chromosome and, more recently, genome studies from living people have produced powerful evidence for the dispersal of modern human populations. The prevailing model of global dispersion assumes an African origin in which Australia and the American continents represent some of the extreme regions of human migration, though the relative timing of dispersal events remains debatable. Here, a focus on Australia and New Guinea discusses currently available genetic evidence from the two regions, compared with that from Asia. Mt haplotypes indicate ancient ancestry for both Australia and New Guinea peoples, with evidence of some shared genetic connection and other unshared haplogroups apparently specific to both places. Migration into Sahul from south-east Asia may have been by more complex routes than only along a ‘southern coastal route’, raising the question of possible common ancestry in central or northern Asia for some Australian and American peoples for which current genetic evidence is tenuous. Although current dating methods for genetic diversity rely heavily on several assumptions, best estimates provide support for archaeological dates, indicating that, relative to the colonization of America, Australia was inhabited very early. Genetic diversity of living descendants of Australia’s founding populations is informative for dispersal within Australia and for understanding complex population histories of Asia. [IMG]http://origin-ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1040618211002278-gr1.jpg[/IMG] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618211002278 [/qb][/QUOTE]This is a good paper but it leads to more questions than conclusions. I was surprised that they can not really determine the y-chromosome of the ancient Australians because of the European "rape" (my interpretation) of Australian women. The major problem with these papers is they attempt to imply that the Melanesians and Australians probably settled the Pacific around the same time--but the data clearly shows that the Melanesians are related to the expansion of the Lapita culture. Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith. (2015). Ancient DNA and the human settlement of the Pacific: A review. Journal of Human Evolution, 79 : 93–104, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248414002632 is a good article about the Melanesians and the Lapita culture. It amazes me that the archaeology indicates a recent expansion of the Melanesians, yet these researchers want to make the Melanesians a prehistoric population. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3