Update: you can listen to a local NPR interview with Mark Brodie about this work here: http://kjzz.org/content/116152/does-evolution-favor-rich-and-powerful
In a nutshell:
Graphic designed by Sabine Deviche. |
To help explain the paper, check out this ASUnews article by Sandra Leander: https://asunews.asu.edu/20150316-y-chromosome-bottleneck
And, for a longer, visual, explanation, check out this *awesome* infographic made for us by Sabine Deviche.
|
A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- and
- Corresponding authors: tk331@cam.ac.uk, monika.karmin@gmail.com
- * These authors contributed equally to this work.
Abstract
It is commonly thought that human genetic diversity in non-African populations was shaped primarily by an out-of-Africa dispersal 50–100 thousand yr ago (kya). Here, we present a study of 456 geographically diverse high-coverage Y chromosome sequences, including 299 newly reported samples. Applying ancient DNA calibration, we date the Y-chromosomal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) in Africa at 254 (95% CI 192–307) kya and detect a cluster of major non-African founder haplogroups in a narrow time interval at 47–52 kya, consistent with a rapid initial colonization model of Eurasia and Oceania after the out-of-Africa bottleneck. In contrast to demographic reconstructions based on mtDNA, we infer a second strong bottleneck in Y-chromosome lineages dating to the last 10 ky. We hypothesize that this bottleneck is caused by cultural changes affecting variance of reproductive success among males.
-------------------------------------
Update: Popular Science articles about this research:
Francie Diep, science journalist, Pacific Stand
http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/17-to-1-reproductive-success
Danielle Paquette, Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/18/how-wealth-trumped-natural-selection-and-changed-our-ancestors-sex-lives/?hpid=z4
Mark Brodie, KJZZ, NPR radio
http://kjzz.org/content/116152/does-evolution-favor-rich-and-powerful
Estonian paper
http://pluss.postimees.ee/3131333/geenid-naitavad-urgmeeste-voimu
Amanda Marcotte, Slate:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/03/20/the_brutality_of_the_stone_age_only_1_man_had_children_for_every_17_women.html?wpsrc=fol_fb
Janet Feng, IFLS
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/women-were-out-reproducing-men-4000-years-ago
reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/2zcudp/wealth_and_power_may_have_played_a_stronger_role/
Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News
http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/male-genes-preserve-survival-of-the-wealthiest-legacy/81251045/
Sarah Kaplan, Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/18/how-survival-of-the-fittest-became-survival-of-the-richest/
IANS, The Economic Times
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/wealth-behind-decline-in-number-of-reproducing-males-study/articleshow/46609782.cms
Will Parker, Science GoGo
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20150216195902.shtml
ANI, ZeeNewsIndia
http://zeenews.india.com/news/sci-tech/male-genetic-diversity-declined-due-to-wealth-power-rather-than-survival-of-fittest_1563084.html
News Staff, Science2.0
http://www.science20.com/news_articles/social_fitness_did_a_genetic_bottleneck_occur_because_of_wealth_and_power-154047
Anthony Rivas, Medical Daily
http://www.medicaldaily.com/did-cultural-shift-influence-human-evolution-how-farming-might-have-changed-genetic-326094
Update: Popular Science articles about this research:
Francie Diep, science journalist, Pacific Stand
http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/17-to-1-reproductive-success
Danielle Paquette, Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/18/how-wealth-trumped-natural-selection-and-changed-our-ancestors-sex-lives/?hpid=z4
Mark Brodie, KJZZ, NPR radio
http://kjzz.org/content/116152/does-evolution-favor-rich-and-powerful
Estonian paper
http://pluss.postimees.ee/3131333/geenid-naitavad-urgmeeste-voimu
Amanda Marcotte, Slate:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/03/20/the_brutality_of_the_stone_age_only_1_man_had_children_for_every_17_women.html?wpsrc=fol_fb
Janet Feng, IFLS
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/women-were-out-reproducing-men-4000-years-ago
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/2zcudp/wealth_and_power_may_have_played_a_stronger_role/
Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News
http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/male-genes-preserve-survival-of-the-wealthiest-legacy/81251045/
Sarah Kaplan, Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/18/how-survival-of-the-fittest-became-survival-of-the-richest/
IANS, The Economic Times
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/wealth-behind-decline-in-number-of-reproducing-males-study/articleshow/46609782.cms
Will Parker, Science GoGo
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20150216195902.shtml
ANI, ZeeNewsIndia
http://zeenews.india.com/news/sci-tech/male-genetic-diversity-declined-due-to-wealth-power-rather-than-survival-of-fittest_1563084.html
News Staff, Science2.0
http://www.science20.com/news_articles/social_fitness_did_a_genetic_bottleneck_occur_because_of_wealth_and_power-154047
Anthony Rivas, Medical Daily
http://www.medicaldaily.com/did-cultural-shift-influence-human-evolution-how-farming-might-have-changed-genetic-326094
14 comments:
It's interesting that your leading hypothesis for the inability of 16/17 of the males to reproduce was poverty. Is it not more likely that they were organized into armies to protect the newly amassed stores of grain and animals that agriculture brought? Thus engaged, they were likely to be killed at an early age, and also to be far afield and out of contact with their wives if they even had one. Those men fathering all the children might not have been the strongest or the wealthiest, but just the ones who could produce some excuse to stay behind with the women and out of the battles. So, survival of the weaseliest. :-)
I'm actually about to talk to more anthropologists soon, to ask more about this very topic. Thanks for sharing your ideas! I'm really curious to learn what other disciplines have to say about our findings.
So what ended the bottleneck 4000 years ago?
The idea that agriculture was responsible seems far too pat. Agriculture began 2000 years earlier than the bottleneck and continues to the present day.
The rise of agrarian civilization was staggered, with separate developments in the fertile crescent, China, and the Americas. So why aren't there three staggered bottlenecks?
Very good points.
1. We don't know exactly what allowed the recovery. Still need more work on this.
2. We don't think it was agriculture itself, but accumulation of wealth after agriculture.
3. Absolutely, agriculture was staggered and in figure 2 in our manuscript, we actually show that there were different dips in different parts of the world, where the timing of the dips ranges between 4000 to 8000 years ago.
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/early/2015/03/13/gr.186684.114.abstract
I can't view Figure 2 as it's paywalled. Figure S4B breaks down by region but doesn't seem to show the ratio, S5 shows the Nf/Nm ratio but only in aggregate.
Dr. Sayres -- Did you really say this?
“Instead of ‘survival of the fittest’ in a biological sense, the accumulation of wealth and power may have increased the reproductive success of a limited number of ‘socially fit’ males and their sons,” said Melissa Wilson Sayres"
Or is this an egregious mis-quote by an unprincipled would-be journalist?
...because it is completely wrong.
Just curious...
Really interesting reading, thank you very much!
That bottleneck of Y-DNA lineages seems to coincide quite well in time with the invasion of Europe by Proto-Indo-Europeans (ca. 5000 years ago), who apparently brought with them R1a and R1b haplogroups of Y-DNA. Some recent papers about this:
"Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe":
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf
www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2809%2901694-7?cc=y
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/full/ncomms3486.html
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/03/13/016477.full.pdf
"Peopling of Europe – Identifying the Ghost Population":
http://dna-explained.com/2014/10/21/peopling-of-europe-2014-identifying-the-ghost-population/
"Michael Hammer – Origins of R1b Haplogroup Diversity in Europe":
http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/12/2013-family-tree-dna-conference-day-2/
"Mike Hammer goes for post-Neolithic entry of R lineages into Europe":
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1577-Mike-Hammer-goes-for-post-Neolithic-entry-of-R-into-Europe
And this documentary explains, that those could well be Indo-European newcomers who caused that change in culture, and that all those innovations they brough with them (metal weapons, smelting technology, wheleed vehicles, horses, domesticated animals, less reliance on agriculture and more on dairy / milk; precious trade goods and rare skills) perhaps conferred reproductive advantage to them (as well as helped them to get wealthy - which further conferred even more reproductive advantage to those Indo-European males of R1b and R1a haplogroups):
"Indo-Europeans in Northern Europe" documentary:
Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmHXBXG7Loo
Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNNePv5Hu5Y
PIE cultures and societies were extremely patriarchal, as explained in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErXa5PyHj4I
In contrast to matriarchal societies of Neolithic farmers, such as Trypillian culture:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6IgYxfTYTg
Agriculture is physically very arduous, requiring more persistent use of strength (as opposed to agility and endurance) in order to achieve results. Also a relentlessness of labor that would tax any animal or hunter-gatherer.
This suggests either (1) a great advantage to those who could do this... or (2) a great advantage to those who could control the males who could do this... or both.
There are aspects that go unmentioned. Among mammals, there is a relationship between male-female size differential and the species' average mating ratio across lifespan. Almost-monogamous species show little size difference. Elephant seals and elk are very dimorphic, reflecting very large (though temporary) harem size.
(Note alpha bulls wear themselves out and seldom last long. This is not a cushy way of life.)
The ratio for humans has long been known to fit this curve at a 1.3 scale, meaning that about one-third of human males would be expected to have an extra wife. (in parallel or serially). This just happens to fit the pattern seen in a majority of human tribes and nations of the past. (Note that this polygamy was sometimes run by the women for THEIR benefit, as in the Cherokee and Iroquoisan peoples.)
Hence the question... were there variations in the male-female SIZE ratio dimorphism, during this bottleneck? It would seem to be a natural thing to look for, in correlation with this study.
David Brin
Author of EARTH and The Transparent Society
PS I will be speaking near ASU April 16-18.
http://cofes.com/Events/COFES-2015/Agenda.aspx
Thanks for all the discussion, everyone. I hope this is one post, where readers will take time to read through the comments.
The article is paywalled for six months, but if you email me, I can send you the proof.
How doth one email thou? From your Mathbionerd page, I cannot even discover your NAME!
Please do send a reprint to davidbrin@sbcglobal.net
Post a Comment