ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2017
Different kinds of genetic markers permit inference of Paleolithic and Neolithic expansions in humans.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in genotyping microsatellite markers through sequencing and consequences of scoring methods forApplications in plant sciences · 2018Article
- Global demographic history of human populations inferred from whole mitochondrial genomes.Royal Society open science · 2018Article
- An earlier revolution: genetic and genomic analyses reveal pre-existing cultural differences leading to Neolithization.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent population genetic studies have provided valuable insights on the demographic history of our species. However, some issues such as the dating of the first demographic expansions in human populations remain puzzling. Indeed, although a few genetic studies argued that the first human expansions were concomitant with the Neolithic transition, many others found signals of expansion events starting during the Palaeolithic. Here we performed a simulation study to show that these contradictory findings may result from the differences in the genetic markers used, especially if two successive expansion events occurred. For a large majority of replicates for each scenario tested, microsatellite data allow only detecting the recent expansion event in that case, whereas sequence data allow only detecting the ancient expansion. Combined with previous real data analyses, our results bring support to the ideas that (i) a first human expansions started during the Palaeolithic period, (ii) a second expansion event occurred later, concomitantly with the Neolithic transition.
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.