Two distinct groups from Asia settled in the New World and not one single migration as suggested by previous genetic studies, experts said Monday after comparing the skulls of early Americans.
Paleoanthropologists from Brazil, Chile and Germany compared the skulls of several dozen Paleoamericans, dating back to the early days of migration 11,000 years ago, with the more recent remains of more than 300 Amerindians.
"We found that the differences between Early and Late Native American groups match the predictions of a two-migration scenario far better than they do those of any other hypothesis," they said.
"In other words, these differences are so large that it is highly improbable that the earliest inhabitants of the New World were the direct ancestors of recent Native American populations."
Their landmark research found differences in the cranial morphology that could only be explained by the fact that the last common ancestor of the Early and Late Native American groups came from outside the continent.
The experts agreed the differences were best explained by a scenario in which a first wave of settlers came across the Bering Strait from Northeast Asia followed by a second group from East Asia much later via the same route.
"We conclude that the morphological diversity documented through time in the New World is best accounted for by a model postulating two waves of human expansion into the continent originating in East Asia and entering through Beringia," they said.
"This disparity between our results and those of most genetic studies points to a large gap in our understanding of the peopling of the New World."
Explore further:
Scientists find genetic evidence for southern origin of modern humans in East Asia
More information:
PloS ONE paper: www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0011105
Caliban
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 14, 2010Unfortunately, the collapse of native populations in the new world with the arrival of modern europeans due to(principally) the ravages of disease, has left very little available to us by way of intact DNA in amounts statistically significant to properly map distribution of haplotypes, et c in those populations.
Since there are very few people-especially in N. America- of pure Amerind stock we will never have more than at best a very limited and incomplete picture of the genetic composition of the New World's population, and therefor its ultimate origins.
deatopmg
2 / 5 (2) Jun 14, 2010SumGuy
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 15, 2010SumGuy
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 15, 2010It doesn't help that so-called "native" amerindians thwart all attempts for science to study their old bones and DNA to help establish their true historical past, because it erodes their popular mythology that some mystical creator brought them into existance directly onto the north american continent.
LuckyBrandon
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 15, 2010in other words, native beliefs are, for the most part, no different than the many many other religions in the world.
But, these are ancient beliefs...don't apply ancient beliefs to today's day and age.
also, it is NOT a matter of keeping some ancient belief...its a matter of respect. There was a day (not long ago) where all bodies were burned 6 feet above the ground on a platform so the spirit had less distance to travel, so to speak, so the bodies you are talking about were burned long long ago
fmfbrestel
3 / 5 (2) Jun 15, 2010LRW
not rated yet Jun 15, 2010We are talking more than 40,000 years ago---the 15000 year old Clovis migration was a bunch of Johny-Come-Latelys.
LRW
not rated yet Jun 15, 2010The evidence is in caves in South America.
Shootist
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 20, 2010Louis Leakey, the old man, not the son Richard, believe humans arrived in the New World much earlier than commonly supposed.
I don't think Clovis was a migration, just a common point technology.
croghan27
not rated yet Jun 21, 2010Good point fmf - I have often wonder how the Egyptians feel about the messing about with the bones of their pharaohs.
Does the fact that they are seen by some as artifacts negate the fact that they were people too?
Certainly arrogance on the part of investigators must play a part in the Amerindian reluctance to allow mucking about with their ancestors.
Occasionally you see a story of how some European great light, saint or otherwise, is reverentially moved to another burial site - is the same respect accorded to 'the lesser races'?