Credit: CC0 Public Domain
Posted on 03/30/2021 7:17:23 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
A team of researchers from Universidade de São Paulo, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, has found evidence of a genetic Australasian influence in more parts of South America than just the Amazon. In their paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the group describes their study of a genomic dataset from multiple South American populations across the continent.
Back in 2015, a team of researchers found what they described as an Australasian influence in native people living in the Amazon. They had found what they described as a Ypikuéra population signal—a genetic marker associated with early people living in Australasian—the region that is now South Asia, Australia and Melanesia. Since that time, researchers have developed theories to explain how such a signal could have been introduced into people living in South America, especially considering it has not been found in early people living in North America. Currently, most in the field believe that both North America and South America were populated by people migrating overland from Asia to Alaska and then traveling south. In this new effort, the researchers have found that the Y signal also appears in native people in South America in areas outside of the Amazon.
(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...
I'm too lazy to look up the older topic(s) about this.
The same way they got the sweet potato. the Pacific Islands.
Sweet potatos are from the New World.
More bad news about how COVID has spread to South America? I don’t read articles before commenting.
There was an earlier thread about this research. There seemed to be some confusion about what it said.
First Australasian doesn’t mean this DNA is from Australia. It means there’s a group of related people who lived during the Pleistocene in an area from China to Southeast Asia and Australia. They are a different group of people than Polynesians.
Also this paper argues against a cross Pacific migration event -
“The contribution of an unsampled population to the autochthonous gene pool is thought to have led to the origin of the Australasian shared ancestry (2). In this sense, the Y population would be part of the first colonizing groups of the American continent. However, data from ancient South American samples indicated a weak Y signal around 10,000 yBP (3). This evidence indicates that, rather than a second wave entering South America from southeast Asia, the Y ancestry might be traced back to common ancestors of Native Americans, who lived in northeast Asia. “
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/118/14/e2025739118.full.pdf
AND... They went from the new world to the Pacific.
What could have come the other way?
Thanks. Posts like that are appreciated.
Well I’ll take that back, it seems the sweet potato of the South Pacific diverged from their New World ancestors long before humans occupied either area. It’s dispersal to the Pacific had to have been natural.
from the PDF:
[snip] Our results showed that the Australasian genetic signal, previously described as exclusive to Amazonian groups, was also identified in the Pacific coastal population, pointing to a more widespread signal distribution within South America, and possibly implicating an ancient contact between Pacific and Amazonian dwellers... This genetic evidence for the presence of Y ancestry on the South American Pacific coast indicates that this ancestry likely reached this region through the Pacific coastal route, and therefore could explain absence of this genetic component in the populations of North and Central America studied so far. [/snip]
Earlier threads:
The new face of South American people [Luzia not African or Australasian]
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3761442/posts
LUZIA - Second Oldest Human Skeleton Ever Found In The Americas
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1283339/posts
LOL
I do like that Pacific coastal route theory. Humans have been traveling by boat since very ancient times.
If people could travel east and land on Easter Island, why couldn’t they travel east from EI and land in South America? Also has the genetics of Easter Islanders been compared with these South Americans?
It’s a good speculation but they can only really go on what the evidence says. The genetics of Easter Islanders has been studied. They are/were Polynesians not Australasians so this particular study doesn’t involve them.
There was an interesting discovery of contact estimated to have occurred 800 years ago between Polynesians and the New World. Some modern Polynesians carry Native American DNA from that contact.
https://www.livescience.com/polynesians-native-americans-dna.html
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.
