National Geographic's Human Family Tree is a 90 minute special (2 hours with commercials) on the current results of the ongoing Genographic Project, airing on the National Geographic Channel this Sunday, August 30, 2009. The program is a fascinating presentation of what the studies of modern people's DNA has told us about the ancient migration patterns of our ancestors.
National Geographic's Human Family Tree. Photo by National Geographic (c) 2009
The Genographic Project is a five-year-long (2005-2010) study funded by National Geographic and IBM to collect human DNA from people all over the world, and analyze those data to determine the various general pathways humans took out of Africa.
Human beings evolved in Africa about 160,000 years ago, and lived only in Africa until around 60,000 years ago when we started to emigrate, in little groups, in different directions. There is evidence of a couple of false starts before that—Skhul Cave in Israel and Jwalapuram in India—but they don't seem to have left DNA evidence among us.
The traces of the migration patterns are found in modern DNA, passed down from mother to sons and daughters (called mitochondrial DNA) and from father to son (Y Chromosome DNA)—remember, women don't have Y chromosomes. The oldest DNA evidence from mitochondrial DNA is Scientific Eve (a.k.a. Mitochondrial Eve), some 160,000 years ago in Africa, and the oldest DNA evidence from Y Chromosome DNA is Scientific Adam, some 60,000 years ago also in Africa. Our two patterns of DNA contain traces of tiny changes in the DNA experienced by our ancient mothers and ancient fathers, and that is what project director Spencer Wells uses to identify our deep ancestors.
The Human Family Tree - Generalized Migration Patterns. Photo by National Geographic (c) 2009
The program features project director Wells, as he looks at the DNA of a group of people from a neighborhood in New York City's Queens borough, and maps their (I would assume) mitochondrial DNA. To date, the project has collected over 200,000 DNA samples from people all over the world, and Wells and his associates have used that data to construct ancient migration patterns of those groups of people. What The Human Family Tree does is illustrate the modern human end results of that study. The project confuses the heck out of several people in New York, who discovered that their mitochrondrial data says that one of their founding ancestors came from Africa along a specific path that may have nothing to do with their current ethnic category.
A handful of archaeological sites and scholars are featured in the program, including Michael Petraglia at Jwalapuram (India), Clive Finlayson at Gorham's Cave (Gibraltar) and Dennis Jenkins at Paisley Cave (US).
An accompanying website contains tons of information as well as an opportunity to buy a kit to find out your own ancient family tree ($US 99 for one, $198 for both).
Bottom Line
I enjoyed this program, but I was left with several questions. Not being a geneticist (cough), I don't really understand how DNA traces migration pathways—I have a fuzzy idea about how it might be done, but the program doesn't go into that. At the end of the day, I'd have liked to understand that a bit better, but that's probably asking a lot.
But if you're willing to accept Wells' theories at face value—and actually, I do, I'm just curious about the nuts and bolts—the program is a fascinating look at ancient migration patterns and how they are not, by and large, reflected in the perceived ethnic differences of today. Well worth the time.
Sources and More Information
- The Genographic Project, Official Website of the Project
- The Human Family Tree - Generalized Migration Patterns, a somewhat larger image of the map above
- Human Migrations from Africa
- Jwalapuram
- Gorham's Cave
- Paisley Cave
Comments
Interesting questions. In Belgium, another DNA research project is ongoing, to find out once and for all if the ‘Flemish’ and ‘Wallon’ are related or not. Hopefully all those research projects share will share their data eventually. They they mention anything about that? Any ‘universal’ databases for this kind of research?
NAT GEO Human Genome Project
It has been online for a while but for some reason they have added a rather dubious map of Human History at the opening page. The overall project has been anticipated for a long time and is a fantastic piece of work and will give many clues to historians where and how to look into history.Especially it will, if published in the correct manner show people that we are all related and should get over petty racial conflicts and get on with the important things.
The texts in this History map however discredit the project quite substantially, using false, outdated and I dare say politically and religiously motivated misinformation. E.g. Israel: it is neither 3500 years old, nor has there been many of the events quoted.Indeed it is one of the oldest human settlement areas but as Finkelstein, Silberman and many others have meanwhile proven archeologically there has been neither an Israel (there has been but that has nothing to do with Judaism) , no Moses and the Exodus from Egypt, in fact no Jews in the sense at all until appr. 500 BCE, no bible and he proves when and who wrote the various pieces.
Equally Marco Polo , himself being a historical person no doubt, his travel descriptions by no means are historically founded and accepted as based on fact. I have yet to go over all texts.
In a project this size and monumentous importance it must be expected to contain nothing but scientific fact, independant on what religious or political facet any editor or author belongs to, that is the basic idea of science or it discredits itself. Please !!! put a scientifically oriented historian on these texts and if there is only information of this type then it is better not to put any at all. Don’t ruin a magical piece of work .
Some of our ancestors’ ancient migrations — and conquests — are in fact reflected in our DNA. They were reflected in the DNA tests I began doing as early as 1999, but the geneticists informed me that it’s serendipity, sheer luck, that they found the results they did in my family’s DNA.
On the surface, culturally and ethnically, we humans look diverse, but genetically, we’re similar. But it will continue to take time to embrace not only all our shared human genetic heritage but our shared human history. I write about this subject, and I’m always amazed at the comments some readers try to engage in. I welcome the debates, because that’s the only way we’ll see the shared history and shared DNA. Let’s keep talking and sharing DNA information.
http://hnn.us/articles/114915.html
Thank you for giving us notice of this interesting program. Let me argue against the major premises cited here, for a moment.
The so-called public scientists nowadays range from brilliant realists to construction bosses of fantasies. What they really do I assert is monopolize machineries; they then use these to discover new data, and subsequently and separately (one must hope) attempt to interpret the attested facts they have now found.
Their undisclosed agenda is however to defend former hypotheses, preconceptions and majority indefensible former positions, because this is what they have done for two enturies now.
They do not define categories correctly, because the normative basis of every science has not been defined.
In this case let’s consider several ideas not considered, so far as we know, by this interesting program’s makers.
1. Mankind evolved in a now-sunken continent?
2. Humanoids are far older than has previously been admitted?
3. Infalling radiation, affecting dating methods and available evidence, was not always uniform (as has been claimed).
4. If landmasses were far different in their freedom from ice, positioning etc. in the past, then global warming, melting of boreal tundra and future discoveries may add new pathways, developmental site, etc. to our present scanty knowledge.
i raise these questions as the mind who has defined how to define a category, in the hopes that some of these queries will someday be addressed by those assuming, yet again, within the “academic community” a claim to be doing ’science’ to which at the moment they are unfortunately not entitled.
This data may bring us one step closer to a science of human origins and diaspora. That is what, I suggest, we all can only hope will happen.
The original program that Spencer Wells produced, “Journey of Man” showed in much more detail how the DNA markers of the different families worked. The recent program about his experiences in the Bronx didn’t explain the DNA markers as well as the original program
Very interesting as far as it went. I would have liked more information on how they came to some of the conclusions. I am still wondering about the history of the neanderthalls. Do we have no kinship? We are all made of the same “star material”. It does not in anyway surprise me that we are so close genetically.
I found the answer to my question: Recent mitochondrial DNA studies at the site of Feldhofer Cave suggest that Neanderthals and Humans had a common ancestor about 550,000 years ago, but are not otherwise related; nuclear DNA on a bone from Vindija Cave supports this supposition although the time depth is still in question.
Yep, you’re right–I think that’s the mainstream opinion, Glenda. There are probably a few scholars around who are still poking around in the issue, but as far as I can tell, most of them have agreed that we are not closely related to Neanderthals.
http://archaeology.about.com/od/hominidancestors/a/neander.htm
Kris