For BIODIVERSITY , edited by M. Kato and N. Takahata, Springer–Verlag, Tokyo, in press.
Human Diversity and its History
HENRY C. HARPENDING
ELISE ELLER
Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
henry.harpending@anthro.utah.edu
elise.eller@anthro.utah.edu
(801) 581 3776 – office
(801) 581 6252 – fax
ABSTRACT
In the last decade a large amount of new genetic data from human populations has appeared.
The most informative of the new loci are STR (short tandem repeat) polymorphisms, because
they are not subject to the ascertainment biases that affect classical markers and SNPs (single
nucleotide polymorphisms). These loci show a marked diversity cline away from Africa, as they
should if a version of the SOM (single origin model) is correct for our species. But the new data
have not given us many insights into ancient population history and movements: they generally
show that neighboring populations are similar to each other and that similarity declines with
geographic distance. Much interesting human history has been blurred and erased by recurrent
local gene flow. Other genetic and non-genetic markers, like language and physical appearance,
may have better “memories” and tell us more about ancient populations movements and
relationships.
Introduction
New technology for ascertaining and typing genetic markers has given anthropologists a flood of
data in the last decade. Today single publication can present more and better data than the sum of
everything available in the literature before 1985 or so. The new data have essentially confirmed
the SOM model of human history, in which we are descended from a small founding population
that was probably in Africa.
Many of us did not foresee that we would infer demographic history from genetic data. On the
other hand we did foresee that more and better genetic data would let us read this history of
population relationships, migrations, and the genesis of human genetic diversity. In this paper we
suggest that the new data from neutral markers paint a rather dull picture of high levels of local
gene flow everywhere and unremarkable correlations between genetic distances and geographic
distances between populations. In a sense the new wealth in data has been a disappointment..........
теориите дека Славскиот јазик е баш наш..
не држат..
сите оние кои се чудат зошто јазиците ни биле слични..
и демек ете ја врската со Славсите..
не е тоа..
