Como eram e quem eram os Portugueses nativos?

Tópico em 'Biosfera e Atmosfera' iniciado por belem 26 Jan 2013 às 20:40.

  1. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Em relação à tolerância ao álcool não tenho qualquer informação.

    Penso que depende de pessoa para pessoa, não conheço alguma associação a etnias ou a raças (mas se houver gostaria de ver).

    Mas o importante mesmo é ter saúde! :D
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
  2. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    [​IMG]
    Comparação interessante, e indicia alguma semelhança (maior do que entre indios iroqueses modernos e pré-históricos), mas há quem ache que deveriam ser usados outros exemplos como comparação, para se avaliar a influência das populações mesolíticas, na formação dos primeiros grupos agrícolas em Portugal.


    Alguns (muito poucos, mas era o que havia disponível) ossos de esqueletos foram também comparados (desde o período do Mesolítico (representado pela população de Muge) até ao Calcolítico (representado por 2 regiões: Alentejo e Estremadura).

    [​IMG]

    Interessante a coincidência encontrada entre o Mesolítico e amostras recentes.
    No Alentejo, pelo menos nesta amostragem, surge como evidente uma maior integração de caçadores-recoletores na população local, após a chegada da agricultura.
    Caçadores e agricultores, poderão então ter vivido quase lado a lado (Estremadura/Alentejo), por muito tempo, tolerando-se mutuamente. Eventualmente até poderiam ocasionalmente fazer trocas de produtos, mas aqui já sou eu a especular um pouco.



    [​IMG]
    Interessante, se as diferenças que estão presentes em alguns dos esqueletos, são atribuídas a uma adoção de estilo de vida diferente e não a uma substituição nuclear da população local por outra. Existem aspetos que são herdados geneticamente, como a forma do fémur esquerdo. A forte participação de caçadores-recoletores na formação de certos grupos agrícolas pioneiros, parece ter sido uma realidade em Portugal, pelo menos no Alentejo (detetada mesmo usando uma amostragem bastante reduzida).
    Claro que muitos modelos apontavam para o Norte da P. Ibérica como um dos refúgios principais e onde algumas populações mesolíticas locais poderão ter assimilado a agricultura (no Norte de Portugal onde começa a cordilheira cantábrica e/ou nos maiores blocos montanhosos/planaltos, por exemplo) e não o «contrário», mas ainda faltam estudos para estas e outras regiões.
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #152 belem, 23 Set 2014 às 01:27
    Última edição: 23 Set 2014 às 13:22
  3. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    « Although the evidence at present is ambiguous and the existence of a pre-Megalithic Neolithic is suggested by different lines of evidence, it seems that in Cantabria, as well as in Galicia and northwestern Portugal, the appearance of peasant-shepherd groups roughly coincides with the beginnings of megalith building during the second half of the fifth millennium b.c. It seems clear that this is a local process, with little demographic input from the outside and high levels of cultural continuity, representing the adoption by local hunter-gatherers of economic and technological innovations acquired through trade and exchange. »
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
  4. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
  5. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Interessante a opinião dada pelo autor deste blog (http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.pt/), em que é exposta mais uma concepção errada sobre a genética de alguns povos ibéricos:



    Haplogroup U* (U6):

    It is noticeable that U* (U6) was already important in southern Iberia in pre-Neolithic times, what may contradict Maca-Mayer's rather forced interpretation of the U6 variability and spread. She argues for Iberian U6 to be not older than 10,000 years ago but she fails to provide an archaeological mechanism for that migration[​IMG] (while disregarding as merely accidental the fact that the highest variability of U6 is in Iberia and Western Berbers, and not in her alleged urheimat of the Nile). All that reasoning is founded in two factors:

    1. That U6 is almost not found in Europe outside Iberia (though in fact it is occasionally found in France and Italy, with an unnamed distinct subclade unique to Sardinia)

    2. That Oranian (Iberomaurusian culture) expanded from East to West (against the C-14 actual datations).

    I suspect (and this suspicion grows stronger the more I read on the matter) that Oranian does actually honor its original name of Iberomaurusian and is derived from the Gravetto-Solutrean of southern Iberia, expanding from West to East in North Africa, bringing with it European haplogroups like U6, H and V (and maybe also Y-DNA R1b, rather common in Sudan and Upper Egypt) as well as technlogical and artitistic manifestations. U6 would then be the product of an early UP founder effect in southern Iberia, much like U8a among Basques. The counter-tide would belong to Capsian culture, which would have brought Y-DNA E1b1b (maybe together withmtDNA L, too common in North Africa to be just product of the rather minor trans-Saharan slave trade) as well as Afroasiatic languages.







    MtDNA H lineages from Tunisia are less diverse and within the variability found in Iberia. Therefore they are most probably a derivate. This fits terribly well with what I have been pondering in the last months or even years about the early origins of North Africans and specifically of Oranian culture (also known as Iberomaurusian) , so I'm quite excited about it.
    Let's reconsider all elements:

    Genetics:

    · North African mtDNA H derived from Iberian H (also notice the relatively high concentration haplogroup V in Tunisia and nearby areas, that must be of European origin as well)

    · North African mtDNA U6 less diverse than Iberian one. The lack of U6 elswhere in Europe and the greater diversity of its derived subclade U6a in NE Africa, has led some scholars to think it arrived from West Asia. But overall Iberia has by large the highest diversity of this clade, followed by Morocco, including haplogroups U6b and U6c, that are not found in NE Africa. See my earlier post on U6 and the Maca-Meyer paper on the matter.

    · Odd rather common R1b ill-studied clades in NE Africa (Sudan, Upper Egypt) and also in Northern Cameroon, where it's dominant among some groups. While in this case the diversity argument is not so clear (most Iberian and European R1b belongs to a single subclade - but not all), we can't forget that Y-DNA is potentially much more susceptible to drift and that, in Western Europe, was affected by the LGM bottleneck and the Epipaleolithic demographic movements after it may have spread into Africa. R1b is not dominant but it's still a somewhat important haplogroup in NW Africa (I understand that the Capsian/Afroasiatic countertide replaced it largely by E1b1). Most North African R1b haplotypes connect much better with European than with West Asian clades in fact (there is one exception though).

    Archaeology:

    · The curious synchretic SE Iberian Gravetto-Solutrean culture dates from c. 22,000 BP (late 20th century calibrations, today it'd be probably somewhat older, like 25,000 BP maybe). The Solutrean of Mallaetes and Parpalló is among the oldest ones (only surpassed by that of Dordogne) but, unlike what happened in the Franco-Cantabrian region, where it became dominant soon after, in SE Iberia, it suffered a Gravettizing reaction that created a unique techno-cultural complex. Some of their artifacts fit extremely well with the back-tipped style found in North Africa, that also follow the all-covering Solutrean style of retouch.

    · The Oranian culture of North Africa, concentrated along the coasts, was early on called Iberomaurusian because the affinities with Iberian techno-complex appeared evident. Later, as doubts about its origin mounted up, it was renamed Oranian. In the last times it has been common to claim that Oranian arrived from Sudan or Egypt but that is not the least clear in fact. What does appear to have migrated from that area is the Epipaleolithic, maybe even Mesolithic (grain-gathering) Capsian culture, that has a more interior distributon and that was probably the one spreading Afroasiatic (Berber) language in the area. Oranian earliest dates are of c. 20,000 BP and its human remains are considered Crô-Magnon type, a type that was most common in Europe with the Gravettian culture (though in Mediterranean Iberia also within the "Solutrean").

    · The Qurta rock art of Upper Egypt (right in the crossroads where later Capsian may have originated) is incredibly similar to European rock art, specially to that of Côa valley in Portugal (see previous post on this matter). This artwork is dated to c. 16,000 BP.

    All these archaeological elements fit in a chronological sequence Iberia-NW Africa-NE Africa that would be partly reversed later on with the Capsian (which did not arrive to Iberia though). The rather good match with genetic identifiers also seems to support this scheme. Maybe some corners need to be polished but I am every day much more persuaded that the ultimate origin of North Africans is in Europe, specifically in Iberia, rather that West Asia - even if later waves from the Nile and West Asia itself may have obscured this correlation.»

    Extraordinário o nível de imparcialidade, complexidade e detalhe que é exposto pelo autor (que é Basco).
    Um exemplo a seguir, para muitos investigadores.
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #155 belem, 8 Out 2014 às 13:12
    Última edição: 9 Out 2014 às 00:24
  6. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Já tinha respondido de forma elucidativa a esta questão, mas volto a falar no tema, pois após deparar-me com estas notícias, era inevitável (quem não percebe inglês, pode usar o tradutor do google):

    «Even if until recently I thought that the only difference between white and black, African-American people relates to the different melanin pigment in their skin which makes some individuals' epidermis darker than others, I guess I was wrong. More and more scientific studies conducted recently strive to show that there are big differences between fairer and darker individuals, making the former healthier than the latter. Why is this? Because reports show that African- American people are more likely to suffer from prostate cancer, black women are at higher risk to experience miscarriage etc.



    A scientific research lasting from the end of July shows that, contrary to the common belief that only fair skinned people can be affected by skin cancer, dark skinned people are not at all free of the same type of cancer. Moreover, it was proved that even if black people get skin cancer rather seldom, they are more likely to die or develop complications from it than their fairer counterparts.


    Scholars from the Cincinnati University warn that the fact that black people cannot develop skin cancer has driven many specialists to wrongfully diagnose them. Due to the same misconception, black people do not usually use sunscreens when taking sunbaths as they think they are immune to UV radiation.


    "There's a perception that people with darker skin don't have to worry about skin cancer, but that's not true. Minorities do get skin cancer, and because of this false perception most cases aren't diagnosed until they are more advanced and difficult to treat. Unfortunately, that translates into higher mortality rates," lead researcher Dr Hugh Gloster stated.


    The melanin is the skin pigment and is responsible for the color of our epidermis. When taking sunbaths, the melanin in our inner skin layer gives the tan of the skin - because the melanin changes its color. Therefore, people that have a darker skin have more melanin.

    It is true that the extra-melanin offers them higher protection from UV radiation, but this does not mean that they are totally free of risk. Even darker skinned men can get skin cancer, because UVA rays are highly harmful and can penetrate to the deepest layers of the epidermis.


    The melanin consists in the melanocyte cells. The melanocyte cells are responsible for the melanoma that causes cancer in people that take frequent and prolonged sunbaths. The cancerous mutations within the skin come from the uncontrollably growing number of melanocyte.



    "Melanomas in people of color almost always arise on the sole of the foot. Other unusual areas would be under the nails and on the palms. And also in the mouth," Dr. Gluster informs. "We need to maintain a high index of suspicion for skin cancer in skin of color. That is why black people should "seek regular full skin exams and also examine themselves, paying particular attention to those areas that we commonly don't consider skin cancers would occur, such as palms, soles, fingers, toes, under the nails and mucosal surfaces like in the mouth and genitalia."



    In a research completed this week, scientists at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston investigated the statistics which showed that black men are 50% more likely to develop prostate cancer than their white counterparts. Also, black men get to suffer from this particular type of cancer earlier in life and die more often from it. This led scientists to investigate the reasons which influence prostate cancer to be more frequent and also more aggressive in African-American men.

    Consequently, analyzing the DNA, scientists at Dana Farber Cancer Institute found that dark - skinned men present a flawed segment in their DNA which relates to a group of genes arrayed along chromosome 8. The specific region of the chromosome 8 considered to be the problem which makes black people more likely to develop prostate cancer is the region called 8q24.

    "It appears that we found a genetic risk that predisposes to prostate cancer in the general population, but particularly in African-American men. This is the first time that a genetic risk factor for prostate cancer has been found and confirmed in the general population," lead researcher of the study Dr. Matthew Freedman stated.


    Another study also finalized this week shows how and why African American women are more likely to experience problems when carrying a baby and when delivering it to the world. Scientists at the Virginia Commonwealth University found that black women present a variation of the SERPINH1 gene which makes them more likely to miscarriage or give birth to premature babies.

    "We were interested in finding genetic contributors to preterm birth in African-Americans, because they have a substantially higher risk of delivering a preterm baby than non-black individuals. There are genetic factors that might predispose the 'bag of waters' to break early and result in a preterm birth," said lead researcher Dr. Jerome F. Strauss III, dean of Virginia Commonwealth University's School of Medicine.

    The variation of the gene is called the minor "T" allele polymorphism. This variation was found to be typical for African women. It causes levels of a certain protein in the body which stabilizes collagen to decrease. Collagen strengthens the membrane that contains the fluids which surround the fetus.

    An investigation of eleven previous studies on white and black people suffering from diabetes showed that dark skinned fellows are more likely to develop diabetes because they have poorer control of blood sugar than their fairer skinned counterparts. The research was conducted by a team of medical experts from the Wake Forest University School of Medicine and published in the yesterday Diabetes Care journal.

    Julienne Kirk, PharmD and lead author of the study states that this discovery may account for higher rates of diabetes and mortality from the particular disease among black people: "This lower level of control may partly explain why blacks have disproportionately higher rates of death and complications from diabetes," she noted in the report.

    Most of the information in the 11 studies analyzed by the team and conducted between 1993 and 2005 pointed out the fact that white people present lower levels of A1C than their darker skinned counterparts. A1C, also known as hemoglobin A1C, designates a component of the red blood cells which transports oxygen to the body's cells and carries at the same time sugar through the bloodstream. The higher the reduction in one's A1C hemoglobin levels, the lower his chances of becoming a diabetes patient and also of having diabetes complications.

    The research showed that black people presented an average of 0.65% more A1C in their red blood cells than white people. Taking into account the fact that 1% less A1C accounts for a 21% lower risk of diabetes, black people were found to have a 15% higher risk of developing diabetes throughout their lives than whites.

    However, the team pointed out the fact that the A1C levels are only one of the many reasons which cause African- American population to have poorer control of their blood sugar: "Although A1C control among blacks likely contributes to their elevated risk of complications, it accounts for only a portion. We need to understand more fully why this disparity exists and to eliminate factors that may be changeable, such as improving access to care."

    After consulting these several studies which show that there are biological, anatomical and genetic differences between whites and blacks, should we think that races are really different or not? Or are we all equal? Or are we simply socially equal and anatomically different?»


    http://news.softpedia.com/news/White-People-Healthier-than-Black-Ones-33941.shtml

    Para ter mais saúde, não é importante ter mais misturas, mas sim origem em linhagens mais saudáveis.
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
  7. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Na minha opinião, os sobreviventes do Paleolítico em Portugal são originários sobretudo a partir de um grupo de humanos anatomicamente modernos que colonizaram a Europa: os Proto-Australoides. Antes de saírem de África, os antepassados dos Europeus e dos Asiáticos, já tinham características dos dois grupos, algo a meio caminho entre Caucasóides e Mongolóides, mas mais perto dos Caucasóides de tipo primitivo. A «Eva e Adão» (euroasiáticos), transportavam haplogrupos L, E, entre outros.
    Tudo indica que a Raça Mongoloide é a mais recente.
    A raça Caucasóide propriamente dita, tem pelo menos 29.000 anos. Ambas as raças, foram forjadas em condições distintas e são o resultado de pressões seletivas diferentes. Na Austrália já foram encontrados aborigenes, dos quais os seus antepassados, terão saído de África há 70.000 anos, representando assim, o primeiro grande movimento migratório para fora de África do Homo sapiens. Este grupo terá encontrado um grupo ainda mais arcaico de humanos, algures na Ásia tropical (designados por Denisovan) com os quais se reproduziram (muito provavelmente os Denisovan tinham também uma linguagem complexa). Os proto-australoides que ainda existem, não se terão cruzado com este grupo e eram pouco diferenciados e rústicos (ainda existem nos nossos dias, mas estão quase extintos). Curiosamente, também ainda existem na Austrália, num grupo étnico chamado de Murrayan (apenas conheço a fotografia de um individuo, que depois irei colocar aqui). Na Ásia, os descendentes dos proto-australoides (com traços pseudo-europeus), ainda existem nos últimos aborigenes de Taiwan e nos últimos verdadeiros Ainus (dos quais também irei colocar fotografias), mas são bastante raros, nos dias de hoje, (também devido a uma campanha promovida pelo governo japonês em juntar japoneses modernos e de cultura distinta, com esta tribo indigena do Japão). Por pouco isto provocou a extinção de uma cultura vibrante, rica e que promovia sustentabilidade e uma harmonia entre o homem e a natureza. Ou eventualmente vai provocar a sua extinção. Algo cada vez mais raro, nos dias que correm. Como este grupo de proto-australoides, ao sair de África também se deslocou para Oeste, formou os primeiros Europeus (Basic White, Proto-Europid, Coarse Mediterranean, South Cromagnon etc...), ainda antes que os primeitos Mongolóides. Os indigenas das Américas, também são originários a partir dos proto-australoides, mas são maioritariamente mais recentes que os Ainus e os Proto-Europeus, mas mais primitivos que os Mongoloides de tipo mais comum que vemos (como os Japoneses, coreanos, chineses, etc...). Basicamente estão a meio caminho, entre o grupo mais primitivo que lhes deram origem e o mais moderno do mesmo grupo.
    Os Berid e os Paleoatlantid (Proto-europeus), ainda existem, mas são raros e vivem de forma dispersa (ainda de que forma mais concentrada, em zonas remotas e marginais), sobretudo na fachada ocidental da Europa, desde a Escandinávia aos Atlas, e a meu ver, são descendentes diretos deste grupo de proto-australoides. É certo que adaptação a um modo de vida diferente assim como a um clima diferente, levou a alterações do aspeto, mas há aspetos chave que se mantém. Há quem diga, que são também resultado da combinação entre os proto-australoides e os Neanderthais que ainda viviam na Eurásia quando cá chegaram os primeiros humanos modernos (tal como os seus «primos» asiáticos (Ainu)). O que parece também certo, é que tanto o proto-australoid/cromagnon (homem moderno mas de tipo primitivo), como Neanderthal, tiveram origem em África, num antepassado comum (Homo heidelbergensis). Contudo, o Neanderthal chegou à Europa, centenas de milhares de anos antes e era certamente mais arcaico. O Homo heidelbergensis, já tinha a capacidade de uma linguagem complexa, evoluiu num ambiente cheio de competição e certamente era dotado de uma grande capacidade de planeamento. Isto também pode explicar o sucesso reprodutivo entre o homem moderno e o homem de Neanderthal, ainda que pouco antes do último desaparecer, a compatibilidade entre os 2 grupos, já se via claramente reduzida (quiçá devido aos milhares de anos, que viveram e evoluiram separadamente).
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #157 belem, 31 Out 2014 às 13:18
    Última edição: 31 Out 2014 às 20:50
  8. camrov8

    camrov8
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    14 Set 2008
    Mensagens:
    2,130
    Local:
    Oliveira de Azeméis(278m)
    O estudo do neandertal esta minado pelo complexo do grunho burro, li que eles tinham todas as ferramentas para a fala e pensamento complexo e não esquecer que foram em sepulturas neandertais que se encontraram flores pela primeira vez, a sua extinção dever-se há mais pela alimentação pois a dose de carne era mais significativa do que dos humanos actuais pelo que o fim da era glacial e a extinção da megafauna levaram ao seu declínio
     
    belem gostou disto.
  9. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    Já tínhamos falado das diferenças esqueléticas que se devem a uma mudança de estilo de vida, ao longo de milhares de anos e não a uma substituição nuclear da população. Não se referiram os traços faciais, mas também parece-me óbvio que devem ser tidos em conta. O corpo humano, tenta ajustar-se às condições e a usar o mínimo necessário para se manter. A redução de massa óssea é uma forma eficaz de economizar energia. Os traços faciais, em Antropologia física, são sobejamente conhecidos e igualmente utilizados para determinar as origens de uma pessoa. Penso que devem ser um importante complemento de investigação. Um exemplo, de uma «gracilização» óssea dos sobreviventes europeus do Paleolítico Superior, é a transição que existe entre um tipo de Cro-magnon e o Mediterrânico Clássico ou «Gracile Mediterranean», (mas é essencialmente uma gracilização do primeiro subtipo).
    Em Portugal, é uma variedade ainda relativamente comum (depois irei colocar aqui exemplos).
    O subtipo a que me refiro, é aqui descrito (a negrito) por Ernest Hooton em «Up from the Ape» de 1946:

    3. Classic Mediterranean
    Two subtypes:
    (Reduced derivatives of the Upper Paleolithic and Iranian Plateau subraces)
    Characters:
    (a) Skeleton: gracile, skull smooth with small brow-ridges and mastoids
    (b) Beard and body hair: sparse
    (c) Face narrow, oval; chin pointed
    (d) Nose form: in the Upper Paleolithic derivative, straight with medium thick tip, elevated or horizontal; in the Iran Plateau derivative, very thin, high-bridged, often aquiline nose, always convex, with thin, depressed tip and recurved alae
    (e) Stature: usually under 166 cm
    (f) Body build: usually slender

    Gracile-Mediterranean (variedade do Sudoeste Europeu):

    [​IMG]

    Alguns Atlanto-mediterrânicos (os quais já abordei neste tópico) são também uma derivação de sobreviventes do Paleolítico. Uma das maiores diferenças operadas pela evolução, para este caso, foi o estreitamento lateral do crâneo e dos ossos faciais.
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #159 belem, 6 Nov 2014 às 12:49
    Última edição: 6 Nov 2014 às 19:48
  10. camrov8

    camrov8
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    14 Set 2008
    Mensagens:
    2,130
    Local:
    Oliveira de Azeméis(278m)
    alguém sabe alguma coisa sobre a taxa de sucesso nos fetos interraciais, pois vi uma reportagem dos USA muito de fugida e ao que parece as gravidezes entre negros e caucasianos são consideras de risco por apresentarem uma taxa de abortos superior doque entre pessoas da mesma etnia
     
  11. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    O último estudo que li sobre o tema (alguns posts acima), assim o indica.
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #161 belem, 6 Nov 2014 às 19:23
    Última edição: 6 Nov 2014 às 19:37
  12. camrov8

    camrov8
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    14 Set 2008
    Mensagens:
    2,130
    Local:
    Oliveira de Azeméis(278m)
    não sendo racista, lembro-me de estudar que a partir de um dado valor pode-se dizer que essas duas populações estão a divergir para duas espécies diferentes
     
  13. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    O esqueleto mais antigo atribuído à Raça Negroide, deverá ser o e um esqueleto encontrado em Iwo Eleru (com cerca de 12.000 anos): http://racialreality.blogspot.pt/2010/09/oldest-negroid-skull.html
    Aliada à possibilidade de serem recentes, descobriu-se que vários africanos, receberam influências de um grupo de Caucasóides que se aventurou em África, talvez com a expansão agrícola. No Corno de África, deverão ser somadas também, as influências de caçadores-recoletores de raça Caucasóide, que se aventuraram até à aquela região, vindos de Norte e se misturaram com as tribos locais. Ainda hoje, se notam estes traços físicos nos Somalis, por exemplo.

    Quanto aos pigmeus africanos/Pigmoides, que os outros africanos, infelizmente tantas vezes tratam como um ser inferior e não humano, são caçadores-recoletores que vivem na África Central, já desde há (pelo menos) dezenas de milhares de anos. Já se descobriu que efetivamente receberam influências de um hominídeo arcaico, ainda desconhecido, mas distinto do homem de Neanderthal e do homem de Denisova.

    Entretanto, isto saiu ontem nas notícias:

    «Andrew Curry

    National Geographic
    PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 6, 2014

    Modern Europeans have genetic ties that bind them together much further back in time than once thought, scientists report after analyzing a prehistoric Russian man's DNA.

    Scraps of DNA harvested from a tiny fragment of the man's 37,000-year-old leg bone show that, genetically speaking, he was remarkably similar to people living in Europe today.The man's genes include signature traces of DNA long thought to have been part of separate movements into Europe, says Eske Willerslev, a geneticist at the University of Copenhagen and co-author of a study published Thursday in the journal Science.The findings suggests that Europe's past wasn't marked by waves of migration when people met, clashed, and mingled; rather, people arrived in a single event or as a continuous flow over millennia.The leg bone belongs to a hunter-gatherer found at a Russian site called Kostenki, not far from the city of Voronezh. Excavated in 1954, the Kostenki bone is one of the oldest specimens of a modern human found in Europe."One of the surprising things is that if you go 37,000 years back in time, you find all the major genetic components that are present in modern Europeans," Willerslev says. (Related: "Modern Europe's Genetic History Starts in Stone Age.")The Kostenki fossils were excavated in 1954 by a Russian team led by A. N. Rogachev.

    Tale of MigrationsArchaeologists and geneticists have long debated who the ancestors of modern Europeans are—and how, and when, they arrived. It's typically been a tale of migration and invasion, of people moving into Europe in waves that left distinct genetic signatures behind.First, the thinking goes, there were groups of hunter-gatherers, moving from Africa into Europe beginning about 40,000 years ago. Much later, a separate group of farmers and herders from the Middle East made their way north, eventually out-competing the hunter-gatherer locals and forming the basis for the European genome we see today.The introduction of agriculture by this second wave of people—the so-called Neolithic Revolution—was such a pivotal moment in prehistory that it can be seen in both artifacts and genes.The new results add a surprising wrinkle.What other geneticists have identified as separate hunter-gatherer and farmer genes are all present in the Kostenki find. "You wouldn't predict if you go back to one of our earliest individuals, all the components of modern Europeans were already there," Willerslev says. (Related: "Discovery of Oldest DNA Scrambles Human Origins Picture.")Genes once thought to have arrived with the first farmers, for instance, now seem to have been around much earlier. "Until now, it seemed clear this was something that came into Europe during the Neolithic," says Pontus Skoglund, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School. "It's an extremely interesting suggestion that they have."The complex mixture of DNA in such an old specimen, Willerslev says, suggests that Stone Age Europe was a lively place. Instead of separate groups colliding and occasionally mingling, Willerslev argues there was a single, genetically similar population sprawling across the continent, from Russia to the Middle East to northern Europe. (Related: "Blue-Eyed Hunter-Gatherers Roamed Prehistoric Europe, Gene Map Reveals.")"Rather than separate populations moving into each others' areas and having sex with each other," he says, "there was a single 'meta-population' having sex—or exchanging genes—in a complex and heterogeneous way." (Related: "45,000-Year-Old Bone Pinpoints Era of Human-Neanderthal Sex.")Out of AfricaWhile the results challenge our understanding of Europe's past, they seem to confirm what geneticists have said more broadly about human migration out of Africa.Looking at the genes of modern people around the world, researchers see three major movements out of Africa: first a group that wound up in what is now Australia and the Pacific Islands, then a population that settled in East Asia, and finally western Eurasians, or Europeans.And indeed, the Kostenki man's DNA shows that he was unrelated to East Asians or Australo-Melanesians, suggesting that the populations diverged more than 37,000 years ago.The new find complicates a picture of Europe's deep past that geneticists thought was becoming clearer. "We all thought you could sequence these bones and come up with a simple story. This paper really shows things are not as simple as people thought they were," Willerslev says. "Europe has always been a melting pot.»


    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...ws-dnafossil&utm_campaign=Content&sf5641625=1

    Trata-se do achado de um humano de raça Caucasóide (mais antigo que se conhece), que foi encontrado em Markina Gora. E demonstra, como as diferenças genéticas entre os caçadores europeus do Paleolítico e os primeiros agricultores europeus, ainda não estão bem definidas, e o que era considerado ainda há poucos dias, a influência genética de um agricultor oriundo da Ásia, afinal pode ser também de um caçador europeu.

    Este achado prova que os europeus modernos são mais antigos do que se pensava.
    O Sudoeste Europeu ainda é rico nestes componentes (Basal Eurasian).
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
    #163 belem, 7 Nov 2014 às 15:48
    Última edição: 6 Fev 2017 às 15:03
  14. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    «As to origins of the long-headed types in Europe, most of the Upper Palaeolithic skulls are dolichocephalic, and in that early period there were streams of people, with long heads, from north Africa, as well as, probably at a later stage, from the south Russian steppe. Here and there, as in Tras os Montes (Portugal), Sardinia, La Dordogne (France), Plinlymon (Wales), inland Norway and mid-north-Sweden, there are groups of people with the very long, very high and narrow heads, strong brows, big cheek bones and rather broad noses of certain Upper Palaeolithic skulls. It is, therefore, likely that survivals from the Upper Pa laeolithic age are one element in the composition of the European peoples. Ripley was inclined to think, and many agree, that in the cool, cloudy north-west, the type became taller through post ponement of maturity, and fairer ; the warmth of the south, on the other hand, encouraging the maintenance of pigment and of relatively early maturity. The localized distribution of survivals of ancient types suggests that they are not merely the extreme cases in a large group of variants, their likeness to early skulls (especially Combe Capelle and Predmost skulls) supports the view that they are survivals. It has also been claimed, with less strength, that there are survivals of other Upper Palaeolithic types such as that of Grimaldi (lower layers) and that of Cromagnon. »

    http://gluedideas.com/Encyclopedia-Britannica-Volume-8-Part-2-Edward-Extract/Central-Europe.html
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature
  15. belem

    belem
    Expand Collapse
    Cumulonimbus

    Registo:
    10 Out 2007
    Mensagens:
    3,354
    Local:
    Sintra
    «Abstract
    The Iberians developed a surprisingly sophisticated culture in the Mediterranean coast of the Iberian Peninsula from the 6th century BC until their conquest by the Romans in the 2nd century BC. They spoke and wrote a non-Indo-European language that still cannot be understood; their origins and relationships with other non-Indo-European peoples, like the Etruscans, are unclear, since their funerary practices were based on the cremation of bodies, and therefore anthropology has been unable to approach the study of this people. We have retrieved mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from a few of the scarce skeletal remains that have been preserved, some of them belonging to ritualistically executed individuals. The most stringent authentication criteria proposed for ancient DNA, such as independent replication, amino-acid analysis, quantitation of template molecules, multiple extractions and cloning of PCR products, have been followed to obtain reliable sequences from the mtDNA hypervariable region 1 (HVR1), as well as some haplogroup diagnostic SNPs. Phylogeographic analyses show that the haplogroup composition of the ancient Iberians was very similar to that found in modern Iberian Peninsula populations, suggesting a long-term genetic continuity since pre-Roman times. Nonetheless, there is less genetic diversity in the ancient Iberians than is found among modern populations, a fact that could reflect the small population size at the origin of the population sampled, and the heterogenic tribal structure of the Iberian society. Moreover, the Iberians were not especially closely related to the Etruscans, which points to considerable genetic heterogeneity in Pre-Roman Western Europe.»

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16138912
     
    Collapse Signature Expand Signature

Partilhar esta Página