Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Well, I guess he doesn't go for the reproductive advantage of elites over centuries, or never inhabited areas, population crashes, plague, etc. occurring prior to or at the same time as migrations to explain the bottleneck in y lineages, and hearkens back to the old, they just exterminated each other, even within "ethnic" groups, until only a few lines were left.
You could get whiplash from the swings in interpretation.
See:
https://www.archaeology.org/news/6672-180607-male-gene-bottleneck
"[FONT=arial-black_b]Did Most Men Die Off 7,000 Years Ago?[/FONT]
[COLOR=#707070 !important]Thursday, June 07, 2018[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#707070 !important]STANFORD, CALIFORNIA—Live Science reports that population geneticist Marcus Feldman of Stanford University has proposed a new explanation for the population bottleneck between 5,000 to 7,000 years ago detected in the genes of modern men, which suggest that during this stretch, there was just one male for every 17 females. Feldman and his team conducted 18 simulations that took into account factors such as Y chromosome mutations, competition between groups, and death. The study suggests that warfare among people living in clans made up of males from the same line of descent could have wiped out entire male lineages and decreased the diversity of the Y chromosome. In this scenario, there are not dramatically fewer males, but there was significantly less diversity in their genes. “In that same group, the women could have come from anywhere,” Feldman said. The study found no bottleneck in mitochondrial DNA, which is passed from mother to child. “[The women] would’ve been brought into the group from either the victories that they had over other groups, or they could’ve been females who were residing in that area before,” he said, since the victorious male warriors may have killed all the men they conquered, but kept the women alive and assimilated them. "
Absolutely horrifying if true, of course. Boy, women's studies professors are going to have a field day with this one.
See also:
[/COLOR]
https://www.livescience.com/62754-warring-clans-caused-population-bottleneck.html
You could get whiplash from the swings in interpretation.
See:
https://www.archaeology.org/news/6672-180607-male-gene-bottleneck
"[FONT=arial-black_b]Did Most Men Die Off 7,000 Years Ago?[/FONT]
[COLOR=#707070 !important]Thursday, June 07, 2018[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#707070 !important]STANFORD, CALIFORNIA—Live Science reports that population geneticist Marcus Feldman of Stanford University has proposed a new explanation for the population bottleneck between 5,000 to 7,000 years ago detected in the genes of modern men, which suggest that during this stretch, there was just one male for every 17 females. Feldman and his team conducted 18 simulations that took into account factors such as Y chromosome mutations, competition between groups, and death. The study suggests that warfare among people living in clans made up of males from the same line of descent could have wiped out entire male lineages and decreased the diversity of the Y chromosome. In this scenario, there are not dramatically fewer males, but there was significantly less diversity in their genes. “In that same group, the women could have come from anywhere,” Feldman said. The study found no bottleneck in mitochondrial DNA, which is passed from mother to child. “[The women] would’ve been brought into the group from either the victories that they had over other groups, or they could’ve been females who were residing in that area before,” he said, since the victorious male warriors may have killed all the men they conquered, but kept the women alive and assimilated them. "
Absolutely horrifying if true, of course. Boy, women's studies professors are going to have a field day with this one.
See also:
[/COLOR]
https://www.livescience.com/62754-warring-clans-caused-population-bottleneck.html