ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2007
Revealing the prehistoric settlement of Australia by Y chromosome and mtDNA analysis.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
68 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Genomic evidence supports the "long chronology" for the peopling of Sahul.Science advances · 2025Article
- Pathogenic variants in human DNA damage repair genes mostly arose after the latest human out-of-Africa migration.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Ancient genomes from the last three millennia support multiple human dispersals into Wallacea.Nature ecology & evolution · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Australian Aboriginal techniques for memorization: Translation into a medical and allied health education setting.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- Papuan mitochondrial genomes and the settlement of Sahul.Journal of human genetics · 2020Article
- Genomic Landscape of the Mitochondrial Genome in the United Arab Emirates Native Population.Genes · 2020Article
- Craniometrics Reveal "Two Layers" of Prehistoric Human Dispersal in Eastern Eurasia.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Ancient nuclear genomes enable repatriation of Indigenous human remains.Science advances · 2018Article
- Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago.BMC evolutionary biology · 2018Article
- Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup R colonized Eurasia and Australasia from a southeast Asia core area.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
- Article
- Aboriginal Australian mitochondrial genome variation - an increased understanding of population antiquity and diversity.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Mitochondrial DNA diversity of present-day Aboriginal Australians and implications for human evolution in Oceania.Journal of human genetics · 2017Article
- A genomic history of Aboriginal Australia.Nature · 2016Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Published and new samples of Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians were analyzed for mtDNA (n=172) and Y variation (n=522), and the resulting profiles were compared with the branches known so far within the global mtDNA and the Y chromosome tree. (i) All Australian lineages are confirmed to fall within the mitochondrial founder branches M and N and the Y chromosomal founders C and F, which are associated with the exodus of modern humans from Africa approximately 50-70,000 years ago. The analysis reveals no evidence for any archaic maternal or paternal lineages in Australians, despite some suggestively robust features in the Australian fossil record, thus weakening the argument for continuity with any earlier Homo erectus populations in Southeast Asia. (ii) The tree of complete mtDNA sequences shows that Aboriginal Australians are most closely related to the autochthonous populations of New Guinea/Melanesia, indicating that prehistoric Australia and New Guinea were occupied initially by one and the same Palaeolithic colonization event approximately 50,000 years ago, in agreement with current archaeological evidence. (iii) The deep mtDNA and Y chromosomal branching patterns between Australia and most other populations around the Indian Ocean point to a considerable isolation after the initial arrival. (iv) We detect only minor secondary gene flow into Australia, and this could have taken place before the land bridge between Australia and New Guinea was submerged approximately 8,000 years ago, thus calling into question that certain significant developments in later Australian prehistory (the emergence of a backed-blade lithic industry, and the linguistic dichotomy) were externally motivated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.