Skip to comments.Genetic Study Uncovers New Path to Polynesia
Posted on 02/05/2011 4:22:23 AM PST by SunkenCiv
The islands of Polynesia were first inhabited around 3,000 years ago, but where these people came from has long been a hot topic of debate amongst scientists. The most commonly accepted view, based on archaeological and linguistic evidence as well as genetic studies, is that Pacific islanders were the latter part of a migration south and eastwards from Taiwan which began around 4,000 years ago.
But the Leeds research -- published February 3 in The American Journal of Human Genetics -- has found that the link to Taiwan does not stand up to scrutiny. In fact, the DNA of current Polynesians can be traced back to migrants from the Asian mainland who had already settled in islands close to New Guinea some 6-8,000 years ago.
The type of DNA extracted and analysed in this kind of study is that stored in the cell's mitochondria.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
The islands of Polynesia were first inhabited around 3,000 years ago, but where these people came from has long been a hot topic of debate amongst scientists. The most commonly accepted view, based on archaeological and linguistic evidence as well as genetic studies, is that Pacific islanders were the latter part of a migration south and eastwards from Taiwan which began around 4,000 years ago. But the Leeds research has found that the link to Taiwan does not stand up to scrutiny. (Credit: iStockphoto)
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·
Bronze Age Forum
Excerpt, or Link only?
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword ·
the 1998 study was based on scientists who wished to study the "Human Race" and it's migratory pattern. They called for the collection of umblical cords, (cleanest purest source of this DNA) from all over the world. Using a genetic technique to measure the current DNA and follow the DNa backward from mother to grandmother etc they were able to look back at the DNA migration and eventually find the source of present day human populations.
Inuits in Greenland, Peruvian Indians, Alaskan Eskimos, Indians in Oklahoma, Aztecs, Germanic tribes, English Celtics, Eytalians all of humanity shared a common Great Great Grandmother 100,000 years ago.
The scientist called her EVE
The reverse migratory trek of the mitochondrial DNA led the scientist to postulate that EVE lived in the Horn of Africa!
Ergo the whole of Humanity are Arican whatever. Therefore George Washington was our First African American President and soforth and so on!
He was also the first Neanderthal president according to some DNA studies.
..and a cousin of Fred!
I think this too will eventually be revealed to be too recent a timeline. I believe that polynesia was the primary route for Ice Age peoples (11k to 17k ya) to reach South America. The “Bering Land Bridge” theory has far too many huge holes in it; and I consider it ridiculous on its face.
I can support both ideas. The kelp highway goes all the way from Japan to the tip of South America, easy pickings.
THE TRAIL OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS
Males get their mitochondria from their mothers just as females do. Since the mitochondria are not in the nucleus but only in the cytoplasm, the very large egg gives its mitochondria to the embryo upon fertilization. The sperm has very little cytoplasm (and thus relatively few mitochondria) to give to the fertilized egg (it’s really just a nucleus with a tail). You can trace the maternal line through the male as well as the female.
Let me preface by noting that I have a thorough understanding of DNA and it's use in genetic studies. That said, the above statement is pure nonsense.
Promiscuity verses monogamy has exactly zero to do with the passing down of mitochondrial and/or yDNA. The mother could be a complete and total slut who had a child with every man in the villages, or she could be totally monogamous, in either case however her mtDNA is still going to be "pure" as passed on to any and all of her children. Likewise the father could be a sexual ally-cat and have kids with dozens of wives or just one. His paternal or yDNA will be handed down to any and all of his sons, intact and traceable.
The rates of mutation in the two may vary, with the mtDNA doing so at a slower rate, but that's not what was articulated in the gibberish quoted above.
As evidenced by my DNA. My mitochondrial (maternal) line goes back 40-60 millenia, my yDNA only 24 when the protoCelts came out of the Iberian refugium as the glaciers melted and within a few generations populated Britain.
The people found in Terra del Fuego, it has just been recently determined, are genetically related to Australian aborigines.
There are archaeological sites being discovered in the Western Hemisphere that predate the Bering Land Bridge migrants, and the evidence indicates that the newcomers from Siberia slaughtered the already existing residents, with only the people in Terra del Fuego surviving into the 19th century.
bump from a guy that entered the world on a Polynesian island.
I’ll be back to check on this thread.
Love my parents, but I questioned their relocation to Oklahoma after
being in a Polynesian paradise.
(In retropect, my parents did the right thing given their economic situaion/options.)
The Bering land bridge hypothesis is junk science. Indian anthropologist, Vine Deloria, in his “Red Earth, White Lies” pretty much demolishes the Bering Straight hypothesis as well as North American megafauna extinction being due to human predation/hunting.
I want to know how Thor Heyerdahl’s ideas about Pacific island migrations hold up to this DNA work.
Wherever the Polynesians came from they have to be the champion navigators of the ancient world.
Top two, anyway. :’)