Slashdot Mirror


Studies Find Genetic Signature of Native Australians In the Americas

Applehu Akbar writes: Two new research papers claim to have found an Australo-Melanesian DNA signal in the genetic makeup of Native Americans, dating to about the time of the last glacial maximum. This may move the speculation around the Clovis people and Kennewick man to an entirely new level. Let's hope that it at least shakes loose some more funding for North American archaeology. Ars reports: "The exact process by which humanity introduced itself to the Americas has always been controversial. While there's general agreement on the most important migration—across the Bering land bridge at the end of the last ice age—there's a lot of arguing over the details. Now, two new papers clarify some of the bigger picture but also introduce a new wrinkle: there's DNA from the distant Pacific floating around in the genomes of Native Americans. And the two groups disagree about how it got there."

26 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. Intercourse. by tysonedwards · · Score: 4, Funny

    May I venture a guess that some intercourse was involved in the DNA getting there?

    --
    Thirty four characters live here.
    1. Re:Intercourse. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My understanding is not that an Austro-Melanesian population contributed to American Indian DNA, but rather that some progenitor population in Asia bequeathed their DNA to both groups. This puts a somewhat different hide on the cat, underlining that the Paleo-Indians were not a homogeneous Siberian population, but rather themselves were descended from a patchwork of groups in Asia who entered and likely interbred for centuries in Beringia.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Intercourse. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      May I venture a guess that some intercourse was involved in the DNA getting there?

      Well I'm sure they will have it all figured out in the future, but..."We were unable to find any DNA trace of the race of Nerd in any descendant groups."

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:Intercourse. by cusco · · Score: 2

      The last that I read there were at least three major influxes of immigration prior to the arrival of the European barbarians, and almost certainly multiple minor ones. That the Spaniards found people with red hair in South America and black skin in Central America when they arrived would seem to confirm the latter. Some minor influxes from Europe seem inevitable, particularly prior to the Viking domination of the North Atlantic, and Thor Heyerdahl showed that one-way trips from Africa were possible and in fact likely for any raft caught in the North Atlantic Gyre.

      Considering that the Aborigines have been in Australia for as much as 60,000 years the antiquity of the progenitor population suggests a very early migration to North America as well. The extremely low population density and the fact that the coastline of the time (the most likely populated area) is now submerged make recovery of any artifacts unlikely, unfortunately.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  2. Someone in America probably opened a pub... by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...and needed some people to work there.

    1. Re:Someone in America probably opened a pub... by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      The first H1B

      The ad: "Wanted: fisherman, brewer, chicken farmer, corn farmer, weaver, arrow-point maker, haruspicist, spail chekker, and juggler. C++ a plus (no pun intended). Must not have a family to distract you, can work long hours without complaining, and at 20% below prevailing wages. And won't rat-fink on us to the local labor board."

  3. Re:DNA Is for cows. by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's a low commwnt.

  4. Drifters by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It must have been fairly common that fishermen/fisherwomen in small boats occasionally got lost or caught in a storm, and eventually ended up in the Americas. They could keep themselves alive for such a long journey by fishing and capturing rain, with a little luck.

    Those who settled in Australia were probably relatively skilled at boating already, or else they wouldn't have ended up in Australia. Thus, it could be the same group & niche at work in both continents.

    1. Re:Drifters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not likely a source of a native population though. There was a study a few years ago and they came up with a number that was (from memory) around 80+ people required to start a colony and successfully grow. Also keep in mind that women tend not to be in fishing boats, especially not in equal number to men. A colony was more likely started after an accidental discovery later followed by a deliberate journey to colonize.

      Related information:
      http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask113

    2. Re:Drifters by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 2

      Those who settled in Australia were probably relatively skilled at boating already, or else they wouldn't have ended up in Australia. Thus, it could be the same group & niche at work in both continents.

      Or, they walked across the land bridge that existed at the time they (and dingo) first appeared in Gondwanna.

      Perhaps some went towards Gondwanna and some toward Laurasia?

    3. Re:Drifters by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More likely, there was a lot more going on during the last ice age period than is currently known because the evidence was buried by rising sea waters as well as inland glacial melt flooding.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Drifters by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      around 80+ people required to start a colony...

      The existing evidence is only of DNA signatures; it says nothing about settlements or being first. A lone person who arrives into an existing population can spread their DNA that way.

    5. Re:Drifters by cusco · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There has never been a land connection to Australia since the continent broke off from Africa shortly after the KT Event, which is why all the mammals were marsupials. The closest islands in the South Asian Archipelago (which themselves have never been reachable by land) could barely see mountain peaks in Australia on a clear day. The only way the Aborigines could have arrived was by boat or raft.

      BTW, dingos arrived only about 4000-6000 years ago, the original immigrants appear to have arrived well before dogs and humans began living together.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    6. Re:Drifters by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 2

      There has never been a land connection to Australia since the continent broke off from Africa shortly after the KT Event,

      Oh? A land connection from where? My understanding, which is far from complete, is that there was at least two waves on settlers prior to the first Portugese. The first wave did not bring the dingo with them (~40000ya), and arrived at a time when there was still mega fauna. They either walked and/or were washed there (Mount Toba). That migration made it to Tasmania and was later isolated there from the second wave of immigration.

      The second wave which displaced the first inhabitants came from India, and brought the dingo with them (~4000ya). The dingo did'nt come from India (possibly Java, but it's closed likely ancestors have only been found in India). 4000 ya it was likely possible to wade, walk and take short raft trips from one island to another visible island between Australian and the Indonesian islands, and from there to the land to the north. Continental drift theory doesn't allow for that, but volcanic actions on the level of the sea bed might. It's possible that both immigrations lost the knowledge of boats capable of making long sea trips.

      The closest islands in the South Asian Archipelago (which themselves have never been reachable by land) could barely see mountain peaks in Australia on a clear day.

      I won't argue about how the first wave arrived - too much is theoretical. But you should reassess your belief about the route to Malaysia , and possibly to China via Taiwan - similar distances between islands and shallow reefs that could easily have subsided due to volcanic activity since. Most of the theories that support your belief are based only on sudden flooding of that area, it has a long history of volcanic activity and sudden water level changes. Even now you could get to Malaysia from Cape York without having to cross more than 50km of open water at a time (less it I judged the tides right and didn't mind tearing myself up on reefs - that's definitely swimmable if you're game). That's a journey that does not require a boat of a raft. It's not difficult to check what I'm saying.

      BTW, dingos arrived only about 4000-6000 years ago, the original immigrants appear to have arrived well before dogs and humans began living together.

      Agreed.

      Do you know much about the genetics of the descendants of the indigenous Tasmanians? (the land bridge they crossed from what's now the mainland has been deep, open water for a long time).
      Do you know if any genetic testing been done of material left by the last of the full bloods?

  5. Re:Why should this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Scientific progress thrives in a diverse climate of research projects. Also, direct utility is in genetic disposition to disease showing patterns in existing populations.

  6. Re:Why should this be funded? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That you're imagination is so limited should not reflect on science's need for basic research. Unless you have a crystal ball that accurately reports what basic research taking place now is going to blossom into value further down the road, all you have is a pretty goddamned mindless anti-intellectual rant.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  7. Polynesians on Easter Island by riverat1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We know there were Polynesians on Easter Island which is closer to South America than it is to Australia. Maybe some of them made it to South America long ago.

    1. Re:Polynesians on Easter Island by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      You're sort of right; you just have it backwards: there are South American genes (via Easter Island) among some of the Polynesians (the migration was westerly, away from South America).

  8. No. by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Informative

    The study actually shows that the Americas and Australia each have inhabitants with DNA in common ... because both places were wandered to from elsewhere in Asia. It's not Aussie DNA in the Americans, it's the same Asian DNA in Australia and the Americas.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:No. by myowntrueself · · Score: 2

      The study actually shows that the Americas and Australia each have inhabitants with DNA in common ... because both places were wandered to from elsewhere in Asia. It's not Aussie DNA in the Americans, it's the same Asian DNA in Australia and the Americas.

      I'm wondering if what they've found is actually Denisovan DNA. The Australian aborigines and Papuans have very high proportions of Denisovan genes.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  9. Re:Sample is not large enough by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    More samples is good, but I question your statement that the sample size in question isn't large enough. The fact is that the DNA is present, it shows a link to a previously unknown Asian progenitor population, a population that also bequeathed their DNA to some south Asian populations and to indigenous Australians. Better sampling may identify other areas of the Americas where these genes ended up, which would help understand migration patterns not only from Asia to the Americas, but also within the Americas themselves.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  10. Re:Why should this be funded? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because archaeology is not a high-cost science, we could do a lot of basic research for not much money. It just takes a focusing of interest, raised by questions like this one. My local area (rural northern Arizona) contains several hundred ruin sites, both cliff dwellings and pit houses, representing a rich culture that in approximately 1200 simply vanished. No one really knows why. It established relations sufficiently distant that red macaw feathers have been found among their trade goods. We need to do more digging.

  11. Re:Why should this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also, direct utility is in genetic disposition to disease showing patterns in existing populations.

    Yes, but massive understatement.

    It's now possible to get your entire genome sequenced for only $1,000 - by sending (e.g. FedEx) a small tube of saliva to a sequencing facility (e.g. Macrogen in Korea). In another few years, millions of people are going to have had their genomes sequenced. And people are going to be using their genome sequences to understand everything from rare genetic disorders (i.e. inherited birth defects) to the most effective treatment for their cancer.

    In most cases, you're going to want to compare your own genome to a reference genome. And this comparison will be more informative if you can choose a reference that matches your whatever ancestral population(s) you are descended from.

    And you're also going to want to know about pathogenic variants that may cause disease for you or your descendants. So, let's say your have an A at position 12,143,021 on chromosome 15 where most people have a T. In fact, let's say that 10 million genomes have been sequenced at that point and only 100 people share that variant. Well, maybe all those people are a little bit sick with the same symptoms that you have. But suppose you know more about the populations. Suppose you know that all those 100 people are members of a larger population of 10 million people - and that this variant is likely to occur in most of the 10 million people in that population. In that case, you can be pretty sure that the variant is benign - that it's not the cause of your symptoms.

    Clinical genome sequencing is going to be one of the biggest revolutions in the history of medicine - right up there with aseptic surgery and antibiotics. And understanding how human genetic variation is distributed across populations is going to be key to interpreting these genomes.

  12. Re:Of course by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Someone had to show you guys how to surf ocean waves

    And how to box with kangaroos as shown in this documentary:

    https://youtu.be/unyTcIx2760

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. Ashley Madison DNA by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 2

    So those frisky Australo-Melanesians weren't "just browsing" their Ashley Madison accounts after all! Caught!

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  14. Re:Why should this be funded? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

    Clinical genome sequencing is going to be one of the biggest revolutions in the history of medicine - right up there with aseptic surgery and antibiotics.

    Even though I sort of knew this, it wasn't until you wrote it down that it hit me. As much as it sounds like a bad time travel movie script, I think our ancestors will look back on this as a golden age. Man on the moon, the PC/Internet, Genome/DNA, AI etc. Epoch defining firsts for technology that will be remembered for Millenia