HENRY

The always wonderful Fiona has let me know that the Montenegro et al paper simulating the arrival of sweet potato (kumara) in Polynesia has come out. We first mentioned this in may last year.

Abstract:

The sweet potato is a plant native to the Americas, and its pre-historic presence in Polynesia is a long-standing anthropological problem. Here we use computer-driven drift simulations to model the trajectories of vessels and seed pods departing from a segment of coast between Mexico and Chile.

The experiments demonstrate that accidental drift voyages could have been the mechanism responsible for the pre-historic introduction of the sweet potato from the Americas to Polynesia.

While present results do not relate to the feasibility of a transfer by purposeful navigation, they do indicate that this type of voyaging is not required in order to explain the introduction of the crop into Polynesia. The relatively high probability of occurrence and relatively short crossing times of trips from Northern Chile and Peru into the Marquesas, Tuamotu and Society groups are in agreement with the general consensus that this region encompasses the area of original arrival and subsequent dispersal of the sweet potato in Polynesia.

Interesting stuff, but I think the evidence is getting stronger that the Polynesians did make it over to the Americas.

The latest issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics has a new paper on Polynesian ancestry by Manfred Kayser and Mark Stoneking’s lab(s):

Abstract: Genome-wide Analysis Indicates More Asian than Melanesian Ancestry of Polynesians (doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2007.09.010)

The journal Nature has digitised their entire publication archive - dating all the way back to November 4th, 1869. Nature has been one of the most influential journals in science (the wikipedia has a good history), so this is a good chance to poke around their archives. Unfortunately, all the good stuff is still behind a pay-to-view firewall, but the history page has some interesting information.

It’s fascinating to see the differences in science writing that 140 years can bring. This paper, in the second issue, discusses the “Dulness of Science” (sic), and sounds like a mix between a Dickens novel and an allegory:

But, alas ! the blind in this sense are numbered by myriads ; and as they, for a time, almost threaten to carry their point, a few remarks upon  the dulness of science, or rather, perhaps, the dulness of men, may not be out of place.

We have in out mind’s eye at the present moment several notable specimens of blind men. One of these lives not very far from where we write - a most hopeless individual; we had better not inquire too narrowly concerning his occupation; he will be found somewhere in the purlieus of this great city. His one sense is the sense of gain. We remember once seeing through a microscope the animalcules of a drop of water, and we noticed that one of the largest of these had one end fixed to the side of the vessel, while its arms and mouth were busy gathering up and swallowing its smaller neighbours. Now, the man of whom we speak is only this animalcule magnified without the microscope. Ignorant of all laws, civil, religious, physical, moral, social, sanatory, he rots in his place until Dame Nature, in one of her clearing-out days, fetches at him with her besom the plague; and he is swept aside and seen no more.

“F.R.S.”, Page 43, Nature,  vol 1, iss.2, 1869

Ruth Barton also cherry-picks a few gems (doi):

The most bitter exchange was between the physicists P. G. Tait, a regular controversialist from Edinburgh, and John Tyndall of London, whom Tait accused of scientific error in his Lectures on Light. Tyndall had won distinction as a popularizer but, according to Tait, at the cost of “martyring” his scientific authority. Tyndall retaliated, accusing Tait of lacking “manhood” (11 and 18 September 1873). The following year, Tait accused the renowned evolutionary philosopher Herbert Spencer of being confused about newtonian mechanics (26 March 1874). The ensuing debate ran in Nature for five months, with contributors from three continents.

Why are you searching for “Email Addresses of Neolithic Austronesians” and what do you hope to find?

Some friends and associates of mine have just had their paper (finally!) come out in Molecular Biology and Evolution: mtDNA Variation Predicts Population Size in Humans and Reveals a Major Southern Asian Chapter in Human Prehistory.

In this paper, they estimate ancestral human population sizes from 357 human mtDNA sequences. They use a method developed by Alexei Drummond (one of the co-authors), Bayesian Skyline Plots, which takes a bayesian approach to coalescent theory to infer the effective population sizes by simultaneously estimating and accounting for the ancestral genealogy, branch lengths, substitution model of DNA evolution, and population parameters.

This method allows them to make a number of exciting inferences about human prehistory:

• 143,000-193,000 years ago - a slow, exponential population growth in sub-Saharan Africa.
• 50,000-70,000 years ago - a rapid period of population expansion in Eurasia.
• ~52,000 years ago - South Asia shows a five-fold increase in population size. This strongly supports the “Southern Route” hypothesis where humans are thought to have migrated along the coast from Africa into Southern Asia. Their results suggest that for the period between 45,000-20,000 years ago, over half the global human population lived in this region, peaking at over 60% around 38,000 years ago.
• This is followed by slower population growth in the following regions:
  • ~49,000 years ago - North/Central Asia
  • ~42,000 years ago - Europe
  • ~40,000years ago - Middle East & North Africa.
• ~48,000 years ago - population in Australia expands
• ~39,000 years ago - population in New Guinea expands
• Finally, at around 18,000 years ago, they show evidence for a rapid population expansion in the Americas. This is consistent theories arguing that the Americas were colonized after the last glacial maximum (~20,000 years ago) dropped the sea levels making a land-bridge across the Bering straits.

To double-check their results, they compared the population sizes that their algorithm proposed for current human populations (i.e. time=now) to independent anthropological/historical estimates. This showed that their estimates were strikingly accurate in most cases, which suggests that these results are quite realistic.

Alexei has more information about this paper on his blog, and we’ll hopefully see some news stories about it soon!

languages:

 The year 2008 has been proclaimed International Year of Languages by the United Nations General Assembly. UNESCO, which has been entrusted with the task of coordinating activities for the Year, is determined to fulfil its role as lead agency. (source).

potatoes:

The celebration of the International Year of the Potato (IYP) will raise awareness of the importance of the potato - and of agriculture in general - in addressing issues of global concern, including hunger, poverty and threats to the environment (source).

Tough choice, eh? Unfortunately, it looks like the potato-team have the cooler website (”hey kids, why not grow a potato at home!”), so I think they may have this one in the bag.

What is the face of London, New York, Paris? What does a Londoner, a New Yorker, a Parisian look like?

Aside: Strangely enough, they’re all beautiful. Oh wait - yeah, composite faces are more attractive anyway.