Founding Fathers & Mothers: How Many Crossed The Land Bridge?

Knight-Dragon

Unhidden Dragon
Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Messages
19,961
Location
Singapore
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/050523235455.htm

NEW BRUNSWICK/PISCATAWAY, N.J. -- Programs on the Discovery Channel and PBS have sparked fresh interest in the prehistoric peopling of the New World. Now, for the first time, we have a realistic estimate of how many ancients made that ice age trek across the long-lost land bridge from Asia to become the first Native Americans.

Jody Hey, a professor of genetics at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, has developed a computational method that uses genetic information to create models of population divergence -- where a group has split off from its ancestral population to pursue its own destiny.

In a paper appearing in the June 2005 issue of PLoS (Public Library of Science) Biology, Hey disclosed his findings. "The estimated effective size of the founding population for the New World is about 70 individuals," Hey said. "Calculations also showed that this represents approximately 1 percent of the effective size of the estimated ancestral Asian population."

"Effective size" in population genetics is often thought of as the number of adults of reproductive age. One rule of thumb is the effective size might be about one third of the 'census population size' which, in this case, comes out to about 200 people.

In addition to population size, Hey's rigorous and complex methodology also generated historical estimates of when the divergence occurred. His dates are consistent with much of the archaeological record -- in the range of 12,000-14,000 years ago.

He was also able to discern changes in population size and the extent of gene flow between populations, potentially representing renewed contact. Hey used nine genes in which sequences and frequencies were well documented in the scientific literature.

"The beauty of the new methodology is that it uses actual DNA sequences collected from Asian peoples and Native Americans, an approach that can provide a detailed portrait of historical populations," Hey said. The method doesn't use summary statistics or averages as some approaches do, but gleans as much information as possible directly from the genetic data.

Hey focused on the genetics of Amerind-speaking populations, one of three major language groups in the New World representing the earliest migrants who extended deep into the Americas. The other groups, the more recent Athabascan speakers and the even more recent Eskimos and Aleuts, had less comprehensive genetic information available and were not included in Hey's study.
 
"Effective size" in population genetics is often thought of as the number of adults of reproductive age. One rule of thumb is the effective size might be about one third of the 'census population size' which, in this case, comes out to about 200 people.

It amazes me how close to Dunbar's number this is...

(not familiar with Dunbar's work? He postulates that 150 is the practical social limit for an individual in a functioning group. )
excerpt from http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/03/the_dunbar_numb.html
Dunbar is an anthropologist at the University College of London, who wrote a paper on Co-Evolution Of Neocortex Size, Group Size And Language In Humans where he hypothesizes:

... there is a cognitive limit to the number of individuals with whom any one person can maintain stable relationships, that this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size ... the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained.
And even more amazing that such a small group eventually mastered two continents. Of coarse, by the time they got to Tiera Del Feugo, it was their great-great-great-great-great -great- descendents. ;)
 
Jared Diamond, in his book Guns, Germs and Steel, cites a study that shows that a group of 100 crossing the Bering Strait Landbridge, and moving at a rate of 5 miles per year (8 km/year), would have descendents in Patagonia (southern Argentina) within 1500 years.
 
YNCS said:
Jared Diamond, in his book Guns, Germs and Steel, cites a study that shows that a group of 100 crossing the Bering Strait Landbridge, and moving at a rate of 5 miles per year (8 km/year), would have descendents in Patagonia (southern Argentina) within 1500 years.
That sounds about right. As the tribe outgrew their food supply, some would move on...and the number of new tribes would grow exponentially.

Not really a historical work per se, but a novel based on historical data and speculation, and covers the later migrations in it's earlier chapters, James A. Michener's "Alaska" is an entertianing read.
 
oldStatesman said:
That sounds about right. As the tribe outgrew their food supply, some would move on...and the number of new tribes would grow exponentially.

Not really a historical work per se, but a novel based on historical data and speculation, and covers the later migrations in it's earlier chapters, James A. Michener's "Alaska" is an entertianing read.
It is worth mentioning here that the motivating factor in their migration was the migration of the bisson (sp?) across the same Baring Straits ice bridge. Once the bridge closed the ecosystem of the Americas was once again cut off from the rest of the world. My readings place this happening loosely about 20,000 years ago but I defer to better evidence.

An instance of this ecological cutting off is The Horse; a beast quite alien to the American continent. Some do argue quite romantically that it originated there, fled across the bridge and then died out in the face of the bisson population. Anyway, the absence of the horse for whatever reason is seen in the fact that the Dog was the beast of burden across the Americas until the Spanish brought their horses (and re-introduced it to its 'motherland' so the romantics say).

I have read in many worthy places about the DNA similarities of the Mongoloid people's of Central Asia with those of Peruvian Indians and this article further confirms it all.

I like your guys' sources, I'll check up those. Sorry I don't have any to hand but I've read much on this.
 
Top Bottom