Skip to comments.Study uses genetic evidence to trace ancient African migration
Posted on 08/05/2008 10:33:58 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
Using a genetic technique pioneered at Stanford, the team found that animal-herding methods arrived in southern Africa 2,000 years ago on a wave of human migration, rather than by movement of ideas between neighbors. The findings shed light on how early cultures interacted with each other and how societies learned to adopt advances.
"There's a tradition in archaeology of saying people don't move very much; they just transfer ideas through space," said Joanna Mountain, PhD, consulting assistant professor of anthropology. Mountain and Peter Underhill, PhD, senior research scientist in genetics at Stanford's School of Medicine, were the study's senior authors. Their findings will appear in the Aug. 5 advance online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Science...
The researchers tracked genetic variation on the Y chromosome, the sex chromosome passed from father to son that encodes maleness, using a technique now widely used that was developed in the early 1990s by Underhill and colleagues in the lab of Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, professor emeritus of genetics...
Previous research suggested that prehistoric people in eastern and southern Africa had little contact, with only two known migrations between the regions about 30,000 and 1,500 years ago. After Bantu-language speakers migrated from eastern to southern Africa 1,500 years ago, agriculture took off in southern Africa...
"Africa has the most genetic diversity in the world, but it is one of the least-studied places," said Brenna Henn, a doctoral student in anthropology who was the study's lead author. "I've always felt like there were a lot of stories there that nobody's had the time or interest to look into."
(Excerpt) Read more at physorg.com ...
regarding language distro in Africa:
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo ·
· History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
One almost begins to think that the quest for research grants is the driving force behind much of modern "science".
Oh, you cynic!
It makes sense if you believe in evolution. As a population diversifies and spreads out of its center of origin, the populations doing the moving are smaller than the parent group and so have a smaller genetic pool within which to work. The parent group retains the larger genetic pool and with it the greater diversity. As man was supposed to have originated in Africa, it makes sense that Africa would have the greatest genetic diversity and genetic testing would seem to indicate it.
There is a correlation with linguistic diversity. There are more language families in Africa than anywhere else.
Superficially to Europeans like us, it appears that Black Africans look more alike than we do, but that is probably a distortion created by our own perspective. We probably look more alike to them than they appear to resemble each other. But morphological differences or similarities do not have to reflect genetic realities.
A very good point. in addition to your point, we are all intensely tribal as it was very necessary for us to recognize people who are the same and people who are different. Before living in Southeast Asia, all east and Southeast Asians look pretty much the same to me. Now, with a high degree of accuracy, I can distinguish not only between Han Chinese and Thai (it is easy), I can tell a Maeo from an Akha or Karen. From facial distinctions, I can tell the region a person comes from and very clearly distinguish a Burmese from a Lao from a Khmer.
It is fascinating to me and I imagine people in America could, at one time at least, distinguish ethnic background just by look (Irish from Swede, from German) with equal precision.
If you are the only humans on the planet, how could you possibly get ideas from your neighbors? DOH!
When I got off the plane in TSN in 1968 all those Orientals looked alike.When I got off the plane in SF in 1970, all those roundeyes looked remarkably alike. The first, I expected. The second was kind of a shock.
One of my high school classmates proved that the human race started in Africa, thusly: The Bible says Adam named all the animals, so he must have named the lion. Lions are found in Africa. Therefore, the Garden of Eden was in Africa.
It's hard to argue against that kind of logic.
Adam named all of the animals. Polar bears are found in the Arctic Circle. Therefore, the Garden of Eden was in the Arctic Circle.
Polar bears are also found at the San Diego zoo. I’d take San Diego over the North Pole as a desirable location for the Garden of Eden.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.