For example, a BAC of .08, the US legal limit for driving for those over 21, means you have .08 grams of alcohol in every 100ml of blood.
Anyone who is driving in Germany is always subject to a blood test. In Germany, the blood-alcohol limit is 0.5 mg of alcohol per mm of blood. For an average sized man, this is only two small beers. Anyone who is looking to drive in Germany must understand the laws about drinking and driving in the country.
State law - This is often referred to as the "legal limit". ... greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).
Since 2002, it has been illegal in all 50 U.S. states for those over the age of 21 to drive with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) that is 0.08% or higher (before 2002, the legal limit was 0.10%). In addition, some states include a lesser charge, typically called "driving while impaired," with a target BAC of 0.05%.
But how do these limits compare with BAC limits in other countries – is the U.S. more or less lenient when in comes to driving under the influence of alcohol?
It turns out that most countries have far stricter BAC laws than the U.S., and there has been a downward trend in further decreasing the limits in an effort to curtail drinking and driving fatalities. In light of this, an intelligent consumer of alcohol would equip him or herself with a BACtrack Professional Grade Breathalyzer, which provides reliable and accurate BAC estimates in seconds.
For some countries, laws are not standardized at the national level, but instead they vary by state or province, and they may also vary by the class of driver. For instance, the BAC limit is lower for new drivers, and/or professional drivers such as those that drive taxis and buses, and/or for those on motorbikes.
It turns out that most countries have far stricter BAC laws than the U.S., and there has been a downward trend in further decreasing the limits in an effort to curtail drinking and driving fatalities. There are countries with a zero-tolerance policy and as such, it’s illegal to have any alcohol in the blood while driving in these countries. Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, and Romania, are just a few countries with this limit.
At the 0.02% BAC limit, you’ll find China, Estonia, Poland, Sweden and others, and countries with the 0.03% BAC limit include Serbia, Japan, and Uruguay. A .05% BAC legal limit is the most common and found in most Western European countries among others. Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Israel, Italy, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Taiwan, Turkey, and others all have this legal limit. Joining the U.S. with a 08% BAC legal limit are Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Puerto Rico, Singapore, and the United Kingdom, among others.
https://www.bactrack.com/blogs/expert-center/35043525-typical-bac-limits-around-the-world
The term Marathon can mean many things: it is a famous long distance run, a metaphor for the eternal struggle between the West and the East or the victory of democracy over despotism. All of these definitions eventually lead back to the battle that took place at the plain of Marathon in 490 BC. Where on the 12th of September, the heavily outnumbered Athenians won an unexpected victory over the mighty Persian empire and thereby saved their beloved city.
The first impression of the Marathon plain, after a 42 kilometre drive through the busy streets of Athens and the rough countryside of Attica, is certainly a fascinating one. Being very fertile, the plain appears as a sudden explosion of green with small colourful flowers growing here and there. Standing out is the tumulus built for the fallen Athenian soldiers. The 192 Athenians that were killed in the defence of their city were first cremated and then buried underneath a 10 meter high tumulus with the appropriate offerings commemorating their bravery.
The story of the Greek victory at Marathon is certainly an epic one. We should, however, always keep in mind that any political connotations inherent to this metaphorical name are deliberate constructs meant to emphasize difference and superiority over others.
Unknown to many, Marathon’s archaeological sites provide more narrative than battle alone. Not far from the Athenian tumulus seven other tumuli are located that are dated to the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 BC). These tumuli are filled with multiple tombs and are clearly demarcated from each other, emphasizing continuity and the importance of group identity.
Not only are these tumuli used for a long time, they also maintain in use when other groups start using different and more elaborate burial practices, well up into the Mycenaean Period (1600-1100 BC). This showcases that these people made a deliberate choice, in this case of fortitude; to preserve older traditions and to maintain a clear physical connection to their ancestors.
Even earlier, Marathon was home to a hybrid culture in the Early Bronze Age (3000-2000 BC). In a time when Greece was mostly divided between Cycladic, Minoan and Mainland societies, the inhabitants of Marathon showed that the only borders in this world are the ones we create ourselves. The contents in the tombs of the spectacular Tsepi cemetery displayed clear influences of different cultural spheres.
Other telling elements of this cemetery are its spatial organisation and tomb architecture: almost all tombs are located in neat rows, emphasizing the coherence of the entire community while at the same time all tombs are clearly individually demarcated by a row of stones emphasizing the distinctiveness of the different families.
In this way these burials tell us to look after the ones closest to us while at the same remind us that we are always part of a bigger whole. Marathon, therefore, is not only a place that commemorates struggle and difference but also affinity and cohesion.
https://niathens.wordpress.com/2018/03/28/the-multifaceted-story-of-marathon/
I stand on the deserted beach of Marathon, Greece, a long crescent of stones and sand. Surf spills over the pebbles, spray bursts like a shower of gold-dust reflecting the dazzling Greek sun. On this beach, with the surf hissing over pebbles red as blood and white as bone, I hear the wind moaning like the voices of the ancient dead, as though the spirits still linger in the shade of the pine groves. Here, in the stillness of the autumn afternoon, I remember the story of the young men of ancient Attica.
It is 490 BC. The Persian fleet is anchored offshore. Hopelessly outnumbered, the 9,000 Athenian and 1,000 Plataeans face the formidable army of 25,000 Persians. According to the legend, as the invasion begins, the shepherd god, Pan, miraculously intervenes. Black clouds obscure the sun as the Athenians launch their attack causing the Persians to “panic”, from which the term is derived.
Confused by the commotion and the swift retaliation of the Attic warriors, the Persians hastily retreat and are defeated. This is Greece’s first battle for democracy. The second was to follow in 480 BC when the Persian fleet was defeated at Salamis, one of the most significant battles in history.
A short walk from the beach, in a pastoral setting surrounded by a grove of trees, 190 young men of Attica are buried where they fell, heaped in a common grave mound, guarded by a marble relief of the Warrior of Marathon. The tumulus is located five kms from Marathon village.
The high mound is blanketed with a carpet of grass, surrounded by what was once the battlefield that covered the swampy ground between the beach and Mt. Pentilikon. Several miles inland there is an archaeological museum devoted to artifacts found in the area. Nearby is the grave mound of the eleven Plataeans who died in the battle, including that of a ten year old boy, the youngest fatality of that fateful day.
I first visited Marathon, Greece back in 1984. The tomb was covered with a blanket of red poppies. I climbed to the top of it. Now there is a winding path surrounding it where visitors can stroll under the shade of the trees. A sign says: ‘No climbing allowed!’
The name “Marathon” comes from the herb fennel. It is believed that the town was named this because of the abundance of fennel plants in the area. The name of the long-distance endurance race comes from the legend of Pheidippides, a young Greek soldier and runner who was sent from the battle-field to Athens to announce the Greek’s victory.
Shortly before the battle took place, the Athenians knowing they were vastly outnumbered, had sent Pheidippides, a soldier and experienced runner, to Sparta to ask for help. The 140 mile course from Athens to Sparta was rugged and mountainous.
Pheidippides ran the course in only 36 hours, but the Spartans agreed to help only once the moon was full, due to religious laws. So Pheidippides ran back to Athens to deliver the disappointing news and immediately afterwards join the small Athenian army to march to the plains of Marathon.
By the end of that day the Persians were defeated. Pheidippides was again summoned to run the 26 miles back to Athens to deliver news of the victory. In spite of fatigue after his recent run to Sparta and having fought all morning in heavy armour, the brave young soldier took the challenge.
Pushing himself beyond the limits of human endurance, he ran back to Athens to deliver the message. After shouting “Nike!” (“Victory!”) he collapsed and died of exhaustion. In his honour, to this day the Athenian “marathon” begins from the ancient battle site.
The starting point of the Athens marathon is up a long, tree-lined road, clearly marked. The new “Preservation of the Marathon” museum is located here and across the road is the Olympic stadium entrance with the starting gate for all marathons run in Greece.
The new museum is mainly a record in photos and writing of all the marathons since the first modern Olympics in 1896 when a Greek shepherd, Louis Spiridon, who was known for his powers of endurance, won his first marathon. In a show of indescribable enthusiasm, 60,000 spectators and the King of Greece welcomed him in the Panathenaic Stadium as if he was the new Pheidippides.
There is a gallery of women runners too. The first woman to run a marathon was from Syros. She was known as “Melpomene” and she ran 40 k. of the 1896 marathon the day after it was officially run. She had been denied permission to run in the official race so she decided to run alone.
She asked a priest to pray for her protection but he refused, saying he would only bless official athletes. Her finishing time was 5.30 hrs. Today hundreds of women participate in marathons which are held not only in Greece but world-wide.
The first modern Olympic Games in 1896 introduced the marathon race of 40,000 meters (24.85 miles) Later the distance was changed to 26.2 miles. To this day the Athens marathon follows the approximate route that Pheidippides ran from Marathon to Athens finishing at the Panathanaic Olympic Stadium. The first twelve kilometres are flat. The next nineteen kilometres are more demanding, some of it uphill. Then there is a final eleven kilometres downhill towards the finish line. The Athens Marathon is held every year in November.
Back at the grove, as I stand below the grave mound, I think of the young warriors of Attica and admire their bravery. I hear the voices of the dead, as though their spirits still linger in the shadows. The ghosts of Marathon are here, their victory paean rising from the sea and carried by the wind through the pine trees just as it did centuries ago.
Marathon is 42 kilometers north of Athens, an hour’s bus trip. Buses leave hourly from Station 29, Mavromateon St near the National Archaeological Museum in Athens. Check bus info for the locations such as Tymvos (the tomb) which is 5 kms from Marathon village and other sites in the Marathon area.
An alternate route goes north from Kifissia, through the Pentelikon Mountains, a scenic route, the air fresh with the aroma of pine forests. The coastal villages are popular in summer and provide accommodations of hotels and camping areas. There are several sea-food tavernas at Marathon beach.
...
Bus information: To see the entire marathon site, you really need a car or be prepared to walk some distance. Near the tumulus is a large map indicating the various locations around the battle-field area. The various points of interest are spread over an area of several kilometers.
In addition to the grave mounds, Archaeological Museum, the Marathon stadium and starting point there is also a sanctuary of the Egyptian gods located near the beach. The Schinias Olympic Rowing and Canoeing Centre which was built for the 2004 Olympics is at Schinias Beach, part of the Schinias National Park. Unfortunately, it is currently in disrepair.
https://europeupclose.com/article/marathon-greece-ghosts-ancient-warriors/
French climber Alain Robert, known as 'Spiderman', climbs Malaysia's 452m landmark Petronas Twin Towers in downtown Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Frenchman known as Spider-Man has been fined the equivalent of just $350 for climbing one of Earth's most iconic landmarks without safety equipment.
In the pre-dawn gloom Alain Robert dodged security guards to start his 88-storey ascent of Malaysia's famous Petronas Towers. As the city woke up Robert was well on his way up Tower 2 of the 1,482ft building - his third attempt, after being ordered down from the 60th floor two years ago.
Yesterday, however, there was no stopping him. After a tough vertical climb with no ropes the 47-year-old finally reached the tower's antenna, scaling a ladder for the final few metres to fearlessly stand at the top and raise his hands in jubilation.
Most visitors to the towers in Kuala Lumpar never make it past the 60th floor, where a connecting walkway joins the buildings giving tourists a dizzying view of the city below. After a short celebration the Spider-Man, who has scaled more than 80 skyscrapers worldwide, including the Empire State Building, the Sears Tower and Taipei 101, made the journey earthward in a very different way.
Flanked by security guards and under arrest, he was whisked back to earth in a lift and promptly escorted to the police station wearing handcuffs - and a big grin. Later in the day Robert appeared in court where he was fined 2,000 Ringit - about £350.
At 5ft 5in, he is short and light, which helps with his climbing. He also sometimes uses a bag of chalk powder to absorb sweat. He suffered two serious accidents in 1982 - including a head-first 15 metre fall which left him in a coma for five days and with multiple fractures.
The married father-of-three rarely has permission from the authorities to attempt his dangerous exploits, so he has been arrested many times at the end of his climb. Yesterday, Disney announced it had bought the rights to all Marvel Comic characters, for $4billion.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1210478/French-Spiderman-Alain-Robert-scales-Malaysia-tower.html
The Empire State Building is a 102-story Art Deco skyscraper in Midtown Manhattan, New York City. It was designed by Shreve, Lamb & Harmon and completed in 1931. The building has a roof height of 1,250 feet and stands a total of 1,454 feet tall, including its antenna.
The Miao Goddess Ou Sang (Yang Asha)
...
...
The tallest building in Kuala Lumpur is Petronas Twin Towers were the tallest buildings in the world from 1998 to 2004 and remain the tallest twin towers in the world; stands 88-story and 451.9 m (1,483 ft) in height.
Tourist climbs to the top of 4,500-year-old Great Pyramid of Giza - A German tourist has scaled to the top of the Great Pyramid of Giza, risking damage to the corroding monument in the name of a great photo. Andrej Ciesielski travelled from Munich to Cairo with the intention to scale one of the three giant pyramids.
He recorded the eight-minute climb to the top of the 4,500 year old pyramid on Monday, and the video has since gone viral. While climbing the pyramids is illegal, the video editor and keen photographer said the pictures were worth the risk of up to three years in jail. Writing in a blog, the 18-year-old described how he walked around the complex, waiting for the right moment to start the climb.
He said he went unnoticed for several minutes, until other tourists saw him half-way through the 146-metre ascent. “That’s how the police spotted me,” he wrote. “They shouted something in Arabic I think but I didn’t care and kept going while listening to music.”
When he reached the top, Andrej recorded the spectacular view and took photos documenting just how steep the pyramids are. Climbing down took me 20 minutes,” he wrote on his blog, adding that he put ‘safety first’. Since the video has gone viral, many have marvelled at his feat and complimented his stunning photographs. “I bet it was a good experience… I am Egyptian and I wish I can climb it,” a local woman wrote.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/tourist-climbs-to-the-top-of-4-500-year-old-great-pyramid-of-giza-30679455.html
Brennus (c. 390 BCE) was the Gallic war chief of the Senones who sacked and occupied Rome in 390 BCE. Nothing is known of him outside of the accounts given of this event which immortalized him as coining the phrase, “Woe to the Vanquished” when the conquered Romans complained he acted unjustly at their surrender.
The story of Brennus and his invasion is told by a number of Roman historians (Livy, Polybius, and Plutarch) writing centuries later who drew on earlier, original sources no longer extant.
According to these historians, the Senones were first engaged in a siege of the nearby city of Clusium, to the north of Rome by about 75 miles (c. 120 km), and the citizens appealed to Rome for help. A delegation of Romans arrived but insulted the honor of the Senones who then left Clusium to attack Rome. They encountered the Roman army at the River Allia and defeated them, forcing the Roman citizens to flee the city en masse.
Brennus took Rome without resistance, but a small band of defenders had fortified themselves on the Capitoline Hill and Brennus was forced to lay siege to dislodge them. He was finally defeated by Marcus Furius Camillus (d. 365 BCE) who arrived with a force gathered from nearby cities. Brennus is assumed to have been killed in the battle which followed his exit from Rome as there is no further record of him.
The Senones arrived in Italy at some point in the early 4th century BCE and settled on the east coast. Nothing is known concerning their motivation for crossing the Alps into Italy, but Plutarch claims they were driven by their love of Italian wine and came “in quest of the land which produced such fruit, considering the rest of the world barren and wild” (Life of Camillus, 15.2).
Plutarch also records the story of an Italian man whose wife was unfaithful to him who sought out and led the Senones into Italy in revenge as well as the theory that they left Gaul simply because it was overpopulated.
Once arrived, the Senones founded the city of Sena Gallica on the coast (modern-day Senigallia) after driving the Umbrians from the region. They engaged in trade with settlements such as Massilia and Etruria and founded further settlements, with Sena Gallica as their capital. Their obvious success in battle against the Umbrians gained them a reputation among the cities and towns of Italy as fierce fighters, and they were frequently hired as mercenaries in different armies.
As they moved up and down the country, fighting for one settlement against another and returning to Sena Gallica, they brought back reports of rich and fertile lands further down the coast and this encouraged some groups to migrate south and some raiding parties to seize the lands of others.
In time, one such group of Senones, led by the war-chief Brennus, came to the city of Clusium. There seems some discrepancy in the original sources Livy and the others drew from regarding their motivation. It is possible they were originally invited to come as mercenaries to fight for one political party in Clusium against a rival or were asked to fight for Clusium against another city and then turned on Clusium itself, but this is unclear.
Plutarch claims that they were seeking land and, seeing there was plenty around the city which seemed unclaimed, asked the Clusians if they could obtain rights to farm and live there. The Clusians were not inclined to share and asked the Senones to move on. The Senones then lay siege to the city, and the Clusians appealed to Rome for help.
Rome was not an ally of Clusium and had no interest in becoming one. The Romans had only recently won a long, drawn-out, ten-year war with the neighboring city of Veii, which had been conquered by the general Camillus, and they were tired of conflict. Camillus had also put down a number of other threats in the region and, although he had won every engagement, had naturally incurred losses, and Rome was not interested in risking more men for a city of strangers.
Further, there was no military leader in Rome at the time who would take on the command of such an expedition. Camillus, after winning the war with Veii and bringing the spoils back to Rome, as well as defeating other cities and tribes in the region, was banished by the Senate for alleged misconduct after the war.
Camillus had proven himself a brilliant strategist and charismatic leader, and there seemed no others who could take his place after he left the city for exile in the town of Ardea.
Rome, therefore, had neither the interest nor anyone they could send who could relieve the siege of Clusium but, feeling they should do something, they sent three brothers of the patrician Fabii family as ambassadors to negotiate a peace.
The Fabii spoke with the Senone leadership, asking them to lift the siege and move on and cautioned them that, if they did not, Rome might become involved. They asked the Senones what wrong the Clusians had done them to warrant this attack on the city and, according to Plutarch, Brennus answered:
The Clusians wrong us in that, being able to till only a small parcel of earth, they yet are bent on holding a large one, and will not share it with us, who are strangers, many in number and poor. This is the wrong which ye too suffered, O Romans, formerly at the hands of the Albans, Fidenates, and Ardeates, and now lately at the hands of the Veientines, Capenates, and many of the Faliscans and Volscians.
Ye march against these peoples, and if they will not share their goods with you, ye enslave them, despoil them, and raze their cities to the ground; not that in so doing ye are in any wise cruel or unjust, nay, ye are but obeying that most ancient of laws which gives to the stronger the goods of his weaker neighbours, the world over, beginning with God himself and ending with the beasts that perish.
For these too are so endowed by nature that the stronger seeks to have more than the weaker. Cease ye, therefore, to pity the Clusians when we besiege them, that ye may not teach the Gauls to be kind and full of pity towards those who are wronged by the Romans. (Life of Camillus, 17.2-4)
The Fabii brothers recognized that further talks were useless and so left the Senones and went into Clusium where they encouraged the Clusians to take up arms and drive the Senones off by force. The Clusians launched an attack, and the Fabii brothers joined them.
One of the brothers, Quintus, killed a Gallic chief, and when he stopped to strip off the man’s armor, he was recognized by Brennus who accused him, rightly, of breaking the laws of nations at war because he had come as an ambassador of peace but had taken up arms instead. Brennus called a halt to the siege and sent a delegation to Rome demanding that the brothers be arrested and turned over to them.
There were many Romans, according to multiple sources, who were sympathetic to the Senone claim and wanted Quintus handed over; but there were others, with greater power, who could not support this decision. Not only was Quintus not arrested but he and one of his brothers were appointed as military tribunes. The Senone ambassadors were outraged and declared that their battle was no longer with Clusium but only with Rome.
The Senones marched the distance from Clusium through a number of highly populated areas but never touched a single town or city. Brennus assured the people that his fight was not with them and his men would not harm them in any way; he was only intent on Rome.
The Romans were warned by the Clusians that the Senones were on their way to Rome but had so little regard for their opponents that, according to Livy, they did not bother to make the proper offerings to the gods for victory nor consult the oracles; they were confident they would make short work of the marauding barbarian tribe.
The army was mobilized and marched out to meet the enemy at the Allia River. They did not bother to position their camp with any security, erected no defenses, dug no trenches, and, as Livy writes, “had shown as much disregard of the gods as of the enemy, for they formed their order of battle without having obtained favorable auspices” (5.38).
They extended their line fully on either wing, leaving the center thin, and placed their reserves – who were new recruits with no experience – in back of the line on the right. Their forces numbered around 15,000 facing a Senone force of over 30,000.
When Brennus gave his war cry, the Senones advanced, and the Romans closed in a phalanx position, but Brennus was concerned that the Roman reserves might move to outflank him and so directed his cavalry charge not at the center but to the right targeting the reserves. The new recruits broke formation under the onslaught and fled, and the line crumbled.
Panic swept through the Roman army as the Senones charged through their lines, and as Livy observes, “none were slain while actually fighting; they were cut down from behind whilst hindering one another's flight in a confused, struggling mass” (5.38).
Survivors fled to Veii or any other place of safety from which they could make their way back to Rome, but only a third or less of the Roman army survived the Battle of Allia.
Brennus must have been surprised by his incredible good fortune and gave his men free rein to strip the corpses for weapons and celebrate their victory. Had he given the order to instantly pursue survivors and march on Rome the final outcome of his war would probably have gone differently, but, as it was, he allowed those who had escaped to bring word of the defeat to the city.
Many of the citizens fled but a group of soldiers took up position on the Capitoline Hill, and the treasures of the city, especially the eternal flame, was hurriedly carried out by the Vestal Virgins along with a number of sacred artifacts. The senators, refusing to leave or take refuge on the hill, dressed in their finest robes and awaited the Senones in the forum.
When Brennus and his army arrived, the gates of Rome were hanging open and there was no defense in sight. Fearing a trap, he entered cautiously but found no one but the senators who were quickly killed. He ordered a sack of the city and set his warriors loose before he discovered the defenders on the hill. Although he tried to dislodge them, he failed and so settled in for a siege.
The Roman defenders were well entrenched and so the siege dragged on and food became scarce for the Senones. While a force remained in Rome to keep the siege, raiding parties were sent out to sack the nearby towns and cities for supplies, and one of these came to Ardea where Camillus was living in exile. He appealed to the town elders to allow him to lead a defense of the city and, this granted, armed the men and led them toward the nearby Senone camp by night.
His surprise attack was a success and few Senones survived; those who did were found wandering the fields the next morning and were killed. News of Camillus’ victory reached the Roman survivors of Allia at Veii and they asked Camillus to lead them in battle against the force besieging Rome.
Camillus, however, refused, as he did not have the consent of the men of Rome and it would be illegal for him to lead an armed force into the city without their authorization. There seemed no way to get this, however, since the city was occupied.
A young man named Pontius Cominius volunteered to sneak into Rome, deliver their plea to the Romans on the hill, and return. He snuck through the enemy lines by night, scaled the outer part of the Capitoline Hill and, after identifying himself to the sentries, was pulled over the wall. He received approval for the plan and departed the same way he had come, returning safely to give Camillus the news.
On his climb up and down the hill, however, Cominius had dislodged some rocks and torn up some bits of turf which the Senones noticed and reported to Brennus. He recognized that his enemies had just shown him a way to end the siege and so ordered a night raid whereby his men would scale the cliff just as Cominius had and come upon the defenders from behind.
The Senone warriors climbed the hill quietly while the defenders, and even the watchdogs, were sleeping and their plan would have succeeded but the sacred geese of Juno, kept on the hill, were awake and began crying out as the Senones reached the top.
Their cries alerted the defenders and one of them, Manlius, quickly took up his arms and attacked. The Senones were driven back, many of them falling from the cliff as they were struck by those dropping from above, and so Brennus’ plan was foiled.
Although the Romans celebrated their victory, they realized they were still in a dire position as they were running out of food. The Senones were also becoming desperate because, ever since Camillus’ victory over the raiders at Ardea, they were afraid to send out more parties to forage for food.
The Roman tribune Sulpicius, therefore, asked for a parley with Brennus to end the siege and it was agreed that the Romans would pay the Senones 1,000 pounds of gold to leave the city.
When the money was to be paid, however, the Senones brought their own weights which the Romans claimed were unfairly balanced, meaning the Romans would be paying more than what was agreed to. When they complained, Brennus is said to have thrown his sword and belt onto the scales and, when Sulpicius asked him what that meant, he replied, “Woe to the vanquished.”
According to Plutarch’s account, it was at this point that Camillus entered the city with his army (other historians vary on this) and made his way to the negotiations. He took the gold off the scales and gave it to his attendants, telling Brennus that Rome would be delivered by iron and not by gold.
Brennus was enraged, complaining that he had already concluded a deal with the Romans, but Camillus told him that the deal was not binding because he was the only legal authority who could have authorized it and, clearly, had not.
Fighting broke out between the Senones and the Romans in the streets but, realizing he could not form his soldiers efficiently for battle, Brennus led his men out of the city for better ground. Camillus followed him with his forces, and the Senones were defeated. Brennus is assumed to have been killed in this battle, and the survivors were scattered.
...
Camillus was hailed as the “second founder of Rome” and a “second Romulus” for his victory and would continue to serve Rome as statesman and soldier, chosen as dictator five times in his life until he died of the plague in 365 BCE. He is the first great general in Roman history who is historically attested, but even so, it is commonly understood that the Roman writers embellished on his story as found in the original sources to make them more interesting.
Even so, no modern historian doubts that Brennus sacked Rome in c. 390 BCE and that Camillus was instrumental in driving him from the city; scholars do, however, disagree on the accuracy of some details of the accounts.
Some scholars, such as Stephen A. Stertz, contend that Camillus never engaged in battle with Brennus and actually paid the 1,000 pounds in gold for him to leave Rome, but this opinion is in the minority. The devastation of the city as described has been challenged by modern-day archaeology which has found no evidence of the kind of destruction these writers detail dating to c. 390 BCE.
Even though the actual event may not have been as devastating as described, however, there is no doubt it was remembered that way. The sack of Rome in 390 BCE, as well as the Battle of the Allia River, marked the anniversary dates as unlucky days in the Roman calendar (sometime in mid-July, possibly the 18th).
To the Romans, the event was an unthinkable tragedy of extraordinary proportions: the first time in their history that the city was taken and occupied by an enemy army.
Whether the actual event corresponds closely to the later accounts ceased to matter centuries ago. Whatever Brennus’ final fate actually was, and whether Camillus defeated him or paid him to leave, the story as told by Livy and Plutarch records what the people of Rome claimed to have happened, and such claims, repeated through time, became history.
https://www.ancient.eu/brennus/
Yayoi linked to Yangtze area: DNA tests reveal similarities to early wet-rice farmers
This was suggested by DNA tests conducted by the researchers that showed genetic similarities between human remains from the Yayoi Period found in southwestern Japan and the early Han Dynasty found in China’s central Jiangsu Province, Satoshi Yamaguchi told reporters.
People who introduced irrigation techniques to the Japanese archipelago in the Yayoi Period (250 B.C.-300) were believed to have come to Japan either from the Korean Peninsula across the Tsushima Strait, or from northern China across the Yellow Sea.
...
The latest findings, however, bolster another theory suggesting the origin of the Yayoi people was an area south of the Yangtze, which is believed to be the birthplace of irrigated rice cultivation. Yamaguchi, a researcher at Japan’s National Science Museum, said the researchers compared Yayoi remains found in Yamaguchi and Fukuoka prefectures with those from early Han (202 B.C.-8) in Jiangsu in a three-year project begun in 1996.
The researchers found many similarities between the skulls and limbs of Yayoi people and the Jiangsu remains. Two Jiangsu skulls showed spots where the front teeth had been pulled, a practice common in Japan in the Yayoi and preceding Jomon Period.
But the most persuasive findings resulted from tests revealing that genetic samples from three of 36 Jiangsu skeletons also matched part of the DNA base arrangements of samples from the Yayoi remains, the scientists said. ”
This suggests the relationship between the Japanese and Chinese based on an argument of their ancestral tribes. This blood type unlike what we are accustomed to is called GM blood type was a method used by the Japanese Doctor Matsumoto to answer his own question of “Where are the Japanese from?”. According to him, everyone must originate from somewhere and this natural curiosity instigated him into making the map above.
ag – presented in Japanese by around 50% concentration. Over 60% in Ainu and 40% in Northern Han. ab3st – Presented in Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Ainu, and Eskimos. afb1b3 – Constitute most of the Thailand population and even more in Borneo. axg – Presented in all Asians, most people, little or none in black and white.
fb1b3 – White
fb1c – n/a
ab1c – Black
ab1b3 – Central Africa and black.
ab3s – n/a
1) You cannot ignore geographical location. Korean Peninsula is closer to Japan rather then Yangzte river to Japan.
2) Jomon and Yayoi Tribe came from Korean Peninsula.
3) Chinese never had direct contact with Japanese Islanders. All contacts were done
by Koreans.
4) Majority of 80 percent of Japanese nobles traces to Korean origin ( Korguryo, Paekje, Shilla Kingdoms).
5) Kansai area you will find more ” Kudara” Paekje signs then any Chinese Kingdoms.
You are perfectly right, professor, and I also think Korea is underestimated in the map. Korea and Japan are and nowhere in the world so similar nations situated so near. Only YDNA haplogroup D is prevalent in Japan and C is a bit more in Korea. Korean actors, sportsmen, dishes rae so popular in Japan.
Queen Himiko, when asked by Chinese ambassadors, said that her royal house descended from princes in East China. Do you think this could refer to a Dongyi migration from Shandong to southernmost Korea (Kaya) where they blended with Tungusics and thereafter invaded Jomon Japan as the Yayoi?
Korean (like Japanese) has a substrate which sets it apart from the Altaic languages. Dongyi is supposed to have been related to Hmong, and was not Sinitic. Do you think a Dongyi influx into Korea might account for the non-Altaic part of Korean?
“descended from princes in East China” which translation is that? Do you have a reference? As far as I know, she is known to have been referred to as Ruler of Heaven in the land where the sun rises in the east – or something akin to that – which upset the Chinese emperor since the title was reserved only for Chinese rulers, and which meant Queen Himiko was elevating her status to a similar level.
Queen Himiko ethnic origins (or that of her lineage) are definitely debateable – depending on whether you place Yamatai-koku or her resting place in Kyushu or Kansai. The shamanic practices (are Central Asian/pan-Siberian) but the earliest of the keyhole tomb architecture that Queen Himiko was contemporaneous with would place her as being possibly related to Gaya/Kaya kingdoms or other arguments have been made for Silla or proto-Paekche/Mahan lineages.
This is what is traditional believed because of proximity but f there is evidence especially of an origin prior to more recent migration of Koreans we cannot ignore it just because people want the Yoyoi/Japanese people to be from Korea. It’s all a matter of when not if.
At a small part of ideas the korean professor may be is correct. But why the today koreans are taller than the today Japanese? Why the Jomon and Yayoi Tribes came from Korean Peninsula and did not happen the opposite? If the Jomon live for 14.000 years in Japan how many years live the koreans in their country? When started finishing the last ice age?
Were human movements be possible for thousands of miles with tempretures below zero? Who much food did they have with them for so long distance trips? Was it possible found food at those deggrees?
This is very poor scientific reasoning based solely on appearance. Diet is a major factor in physical differences like height specifically protein content. May be barbecue eating makes you taller than fish eating.
These people sure had the best way to live, I love Your blog and the information you have on it, life was so simple looking in these times. It seems like a wonderful way of living with no worries or bills. It’s like the our father prayer, give us this day our daily bread, what a wonderful way in living.
Does anyone think that the Yayoi people might have been Dongyi refugees from Shandong mixed with Tungusics? I hear that the Dongyi might have been related to the Hmong, and this may be why Japanese is different from Altaic.
I have also heard that the Yezo (Jomon) were somewhat different from the Ainu, though both spoke Austroasiatic, and that the Ainu originally spoke a Uralic -related language close to Yukaghir. I have also heard that the Jomon had Melanesian blood, and that the Kumaso and Hayato of Kyushu were Austronesian from Taiwan. Thoughts, anyone?
Dongyi is a vague term used to refer to groups that occupied Eastern China and so it is probably not helpful or would be impossible to establish if Dongyi peoples formed the Gaya/Kaya populations. It is however possible to try to investigate which genetic lineages out of East China are the most likely ones that made it into Korean peninsula and ending terminally in Japan while comparing the archaeological evidence.
For the Gaya period, I am assuming we shan’t be looking at the deeper layer and earlier peopling of Korea and Paleolithic-to-Jomon Japan by the C1.
Given the high northern gene markers, we can surmise there may also have been South Siberian lineages coming to Japan from the late Yayoi period through the Kofun periods although the high Northern Mongoloid marker showing can be most probably attributed to Baikal-Buryat migrations.
Iranian and Uralian populations may have contributed some of the northern Caucasoid genes. Studies show the Mongoloid F1b gene is more frequent in Central Asians and Mongols, Koreans, and Japanese.
Gaya/Kofun period horse/weapon tomb artefacts have similarities to those of the Ordos Culture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordos_culture (which is possibly related to the Xiongnu culture) – who are thought to have genetic descendants in the Daurs http://www.ethnic-china.com/Daur/daurintro.htm of Inner Mongoli a (carriers of O2b Y-DNA) http://www.ethnic-china.com/Daur/daurintro.htm. (who also possibly synomymous with or have affinities to the Manchurians who were also 02b carriers-and the Qidan ancestors of Daurs.
You are reasoning from a point of view of language similarities/differences? this is nonsense. Japanese people are an island nation so the isolation could produce any variation of language but of course written language is almost exclusively a result of exposure to Chinese literature.
Re your question about the Ezo (Emishi) and the Jomon, the Emishi website has a number of persuasive theories: Who were the Emishi http://emishi-ezo.net/WhoEmishi.htm / see also Emishi, Kofun Culture and the Expansion of Yamato http://emishi-ezo.net/emishi_kofun.html / Jomon Culture and the Emishi http://emishi-ezo.net/jomon.html
So…this would mean that the modern day Japanese are descendents from the Han Chinese. Also, there is a legend popular in China and Japan about Xu Fu, who came to Japan searching for the elixir of life. He brought with him 500 boys and 500 girls, and the legend concluded that he settled in Japan & became the first emperor of Japan. (Coincidentally, those 500 boys and 500 girls would be the ancestors of the modern day Japanese)
I’m sorry but that is a legend. And again, if there were actually 500 girls and boys going to Japan, the Chinese people must have noticed about the settlement. The two countries’ must have had a real close bond with each other since the Japanese people (from the legend) must have originally come XU FU people.
Ironically, both did not have a great relationship and funny thing is that the Japanese people actually ADOPTED things from China and Korea back then. If your legend is true, why would they adopt the techniques? They have the culture and the technology already.
Your reasoning is flawed. They would adopt new technologies that developed after they had moved into Japan. but anyway it is a myth. Glacial maximum happened at 23kyp and yayoi is around 20kyp. At that time, taiwan was connected to mainland and lots of east china sea was land.
So from hong kong/taiwan/japan/korea/land at east china sea was jomon. Sea level began rising and I think that was part of reason why these people migrated to americas as well as back toward se asia and eventually became polynesian.
Korea peninsula was a part of China at the Han dynasty period, that was the same time of Yayoi civilization in Japan. At the time there’s only China in the regions that can build a huge ship that carry thousands of people to the Japan Island, Koreans were a small tribes in the emerging civilization that had no capacity to do a huge project like that.
No offense but i think you are getting the mathematics a little wrong. Yayoi culture did not emerge out of nowhere. Yayoi culture existed because the immigrants came, and the beggining of the yayoi culture was before the Han expansion to Korea.
This would mean that to start the Yayoi, rather than a continual expansion of Han china which is hard to happen (because they would have had to settle the Korean penninsula before a succeding expansion), a pre-existing Korean civilization sending people to Japan would be more reliable.
The current hypothesis that the joint research team of korea and japan suggested was that the Wiman Joseon dynasty of korea fell under the Han empire and its refugees sailed all the way to japan creating the yayoi culture.
Tyr was the God of War, like the Roman war god Mars, and Greek god Ares. In Latin, Tuesday is called Martis dies which means "Mars's Day".
You see, though there are very few records left about Wiman Joseon, the records suggest that Wiman became a well established nation developed enough to match its powers with some of the strongest chinese warring states era kingdoms, thanks to the Chinese immigrants.
This resembles a lot of the beggining of the Yayoi, too. Furthurmore, if Han chinese were first to immigrate to Japan then they would have had information on the land at the beggining, which they didn’t. Not much direct Chinese effect on Japanese grounds before 5th century A.D are found while there are bunchfull of Korean-styled tombs, bronze swords, jewerlies found in Japan, too.
Han chinese declined the entire penninsula only after two or more centuries, and they had lost the control of the southern part even earlier. Considering that Yayoi culture thrived even when Han chinese withdraw korea, it would be more likely that Korean refugees consistantly immigrated to kushu and eventually started the yayoi, which became the Yamato civilization along with the Korean kingdoms like Baekjae, Goguryeo, Silla, Gaya, etc.
Your reasoning is flawed. There was a land bridge from Korea. Why would you need a huge ship to cross the Yellow sea? and why would thousands need to come at once? You make many assumptions. Why couldn’t the Yayoi people be a combo of both Koreans and Chinese and anyone else who paddled there? Most believe the Chines during the Qin Dynasty had something to do with the Yayoi because of the technologies found (Bronze artifacts etc.)
The evidence, both archaeological and genetic, points to multiple origins and sources, depending on location in Japan, And even on any particular one island, there are different communities of different origins, co-existing, consolidating or in a state of flux.
There are three different genetic strains of Yayoi rice isolated (found fairly evenly distributed throughout Japan up to the northeastern boundaries), one is Korean, another is a strain not found in Korea, and the third is a hybrid.
The material culture of the Yayoi is also mixed, of Korean, Chinese, and not discounting others of undetermined (but quickly clarifying) Eurasian origins. The main pottery and rice implements, that spread through Yayoi Japan, nevertheless, resemble Korean ones most.
News articles like this one, we need to remember only present a snapshot of a place in a specific time. The Japanese island populations whether during Jomon, Yayoi and Kofun eras, were always heterogenous … despite the ostensible overarching similarities.
I would also be careful to assume that because any excavated evidence is associated with tribes or relic sites from certain locations in Qin-China or Korea, that they are necessarily Chinese or Korean … Depending on the era, the evidence could equally point to a foreign tribe entering or invading or settling China or Korea at the time.
There are recent scholarly articles indicating non-Han Chinese tribes, genetic and material culture) during Qin, Xia, Shang and Zhou, particularly in the Southwest, but also all along the Yangtze and/ Yellow River to the East.
Keeping an open mind and thinking in terms of migrant lineages, and also allowing for the possibility of parallel downstream (cousin) lineages as opposed to derived populations, would allow for better success in the work of piecing together the complex prehistoric-protohistoric peopling scenes.
You make NO SENSE when it comes to the origins of the Japanese. Yayoi is clearly Korean and the fact there is Yayoi in Jiangsu merely testifies that the Yayoi was ALSO located down there. Japanese language is SOV JUST LIKE KOREAN unlike the Chinese Mandarin language.
O2b is MOSTLY found in Korea and Japan as well. Korean and Japanese have nearly the same GM blood type! There has been Japanese scholars who claim that Japanese are Korean and not Chinese.
The Emperor of Japan states he has Korean lineage – Baekje Kingdom – and Baekje had 22 colonial sites from Japan all the way down to Vietnam/Indonesia! Many of Japanese coveted national treasures are KOREAN! Chinese and the Japanese have been trying to downplay Korea’s heritage when in fact Korea is THE FAR EAST nation.
Manchurians who are even more related to the Koreans had RULED China for hundreds of years and in Manchurian HISTORY BOOKS they claim they were Koreans! Manchu leader Nurhachi offered Korea help against the Japanese Invasion. This explains why Manchurians NEVER absorbed Korea in their Empire because they considered it there mother country.
There is NO CHINA. Northern Chinese are not the same people of Southern China! “Han” Chinese is a myth perpetuated by the PRC in order to brainwash their people to hold the country together. “China” has always been controlled by the Northern Asiatics.
Hongshan neolithic culture is one of the oldest neolithic culture and it is up there by inner Mongolia. Hongshan is Korean NOT Chinese! Sima Qian who wrote Chinese history was mostly lies! They STOLE “Han” from the Koreans and applied it to these Sichuan Asiatics.
This is why the PRC is so secretive in their archaeological excavations on Hongshan and other archaeological excavations. If Korea was so backward then why wasn’t it taken over by the “Chinese?” The only reason Korea was so close to the Ming Empire was because the Yongle Emperor, Zhu Di, was HALF-KOREAN!
His mother was taken from the Mongols (Mongols forced Korean royalty to marry Mongol Royalty but Zhu Di’s mother was just a concubine). Zhu DI moved the capital which was safer down south up to BEIJING closer to the Mongols and Jurchens! Why?
Because HE FELT KINSHIP to them despite the dangers of invasion. He ask Korea to send women (concubines), cooks, and other men (to become eunuchs which Zhu DI’s father hated and distrusted). Working with Korea they helped curb the Jurchen invasion and the Jurchens were in a good economic position created by the half Korean Ming Emperor.
There is NO CHINA! Japanese are Koreans through and through which is why Korea and Japan dominate the automobile, electronic, and other industries. Japanese imperialism in WW2 was just a continuation of Baekje’s colonialism! One last thing, Gutenberg didn’t change the world it was Korea – Look up Jikji on youtube!
I believe the Yayoi main bloodline was originally from Northern Korea and Southern Siberia due to the genetic linkages and the founding of a man in Yamaguchi Prefecture that had the same profile as another skeleton found in Siberia. The Yayoi culture could have been a mixture of several tribes including Koreans, Tungusics and maybe the odd Han or ethnic minority south of the Yangtze.
If the tribe was open to miscegenation and absorbing other people’s, this may explain the origination in Jiangsu, China. The tribe wandered north long before China was unified under Qin Shi Huang, settling in modern day North Korea, China and Russia.
It absorbed other tribes and gave birth to an admixture in modern Koreans and then an offshoot of Koreans came the Yayoi, then they moved to Japan bringing their genes and mixing with the Emishi and Ebisu types, well known Jomon descendants.
An originally Jomon language was then mixed with a dialect of Korean which brang about a total mixed population in terms of language, culture and ethnicity. Then these descendants called themselves ?? or Yamato. The Yamato brang Chinese culture back to mix with the local practices giving birth to modern Japan.
Despite the seemed unity of appearance Jomon tribes, however they ranged fairly different from North to South hence the fairly diverse appearances of Japanese people mixed with Yayoi.
So my theory is that the Yayoi may have originated from Southern China very early, however Siberians and Tungusics provided the majority of bloodline, hence their appearance, language and cultural similarities.
However Koreans and Japanese having admixture with Southeast Asians may have come via the earliest admixture in Jiangsu, or the southern route absorbing Indian, Southeast Asian immigrants through Okinawa and Taiwan.
Yukimura…Your comment seems to be the most comprehensive and I am Korean, by the way. The Jin State in early Korean history with the stone dagger culture is the most similar to the daggers found in Yayoi period artifacts. Wiman Joseon (Gojoseon) prevented Jin from communicating with Han China and that’s why there was war.
Perhaps, there was a great migration to the Japanese archipelago during this time. These migrations may have set the precedent to later migrations (2nd century to 660 AD until Paekche fell) between Paekche/Kaya and Yamato/Asuka Japan.
This could explain the cultural and linguistic affinities between ancient Korea and Japan. Korean and Japanese language don’t share native words but I think this can be explained.
Maybe Japanese language inherited native vocabulary from Jomon tribes and Polynesian lines. The later Yayoi language could be related to proto-Buyeo languages which in turn also developed into Goguryeo and Paekche languages. But I’d still be open to Jin State influence which covered all of southern Korea before they separated into Mahan and Jinhan etc. This is really fascinating.
https://heritageofjapan.wordpress.com/yayoi-era-yields-up-rice/who-were-the-yayoi-people/
...
Takanori Utsunomiya, Physician. Reviewer of Historical books(one book per a day)
Answered May 11, 2017 · Author has 161 answers and 117.8k answer views
Yayoi people are people who lived in the Japanese archipelago during the Yayoi era and are not words pointing to unique tribes. In the past, there were times when it was judged whether it was Jomon Yayoi who lived in Japan or another Yayoi group who came to Japan from the Korean Peninsula, comparing human bones and burials, pottery etc.
Today, further excavation progresses, complex DNA manipulation movement is reproduced with DNA examination. (For the Y chromosome, research has proceeded and large scale changes are seen, see https: //isogg.org/tree/)
Following the start of rice cultivation in the northern part of Kyushu in the 10th century BC, people in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula will arrive slightly and the formation of a class society will begin. People who came in this area can seek roots in the downstream area of ??the Yangtze 6000 years ago when referring to DNA.
In the 7th century BC, rice cultivation starts in Osaka's large delta. In the Tohoku area, rice cultivation will be started in the 4th century BC, but there are abandoned and settled hunter gatherers since then. In the eastern part of Hokkaido, life like Inuit and Aleut continued, targeting marine animal.
In the direction of Okinawa fishery in a shallow sea in a coral reef was done. Life is not different from genes and ethnic groups, people have changed their livelihoods according to the environment.
https://www.quora.com/What-ethnic-groups-would-or-is-similar-related-to-the-Yayoi-people
...
That is today hard to say. As we know are the yayoi from an area near the yangze-river in china. They was maybe the people of the ancient kingdom of wu. (old japanese was called people from wa). The yayoi than moved into korea and japan and mixed with the native population. So there are no “pure” yayoi left. we can assume that yayoi are somewhat similar with today chinese/korean and some japanese. (most japanese have big jomon admixture (~60%/~40%).
There are many distinctive swords throughout history, but few are as renowned as the Sword of Goujian. This ancient Chinese dagger is more than 2,500 years old. Because of its still-impeccable condition, however, it’s considered one of those swords that mythically defies the tests of time.
In 1965, an excavation team discovered the Sword of Goujian in a tomb in Hubei, China. Encased in a nearly air-tight wooden box next to a skeleton, archaeologists believe that it’s an artifact from 771 to 403 BC.
They were stunned that its blade was perfectly untarnished—despite being buried in damp conditions for over two millennia. This unusual resistance to deterioration is rare in artifacts that date back this far. It’s still sharp, too. A test affirmed that the blade could easily cut a stack of twenty pieces of paper.
The Sword of Goujian was discovered among 50 ancient tombs and more than 2,000 other artifacts. It measures 22 inches in length and has beautiful repeating dark rhombi patterns on both sides of the blade.
...
In addition, there are delicate embellishments of blue crystals and turquoise, as well as concentric circles designed around the handle. Exquisitely forged from copper and tin, the markings on the sword also remain in excellent condition.
The decorative patterns are accompanied by text. Two columns containing eight characters are engraved on one side of the blade in an ancient writing called bird-worm seal script. After months of debate as to the historical owner of the sword, experts have attributed it to the King of Yue, who’s famous for his perseverance in time of hardship.
...
The script reads, “King of Yue” and “made this sword for [his] personal use.” To see all the artifacts excavated from the Jinan site, visit the Hubei Provincial Museum, where the sword is on display.
https://mymodernmet.com/sword-of-goujian/
Rice is grown in marshy tropical climate in full sun light whereas wheat is grown in hot dry climates mostly on plains and low mountains. Wheat needs 50cm to 100cm of water to make a good crop.
Mustaches used to be the epitome of a tasteless image. Men with mustaches were considered cheap, vulgar, and sometimes lewd. But with the renaissance of interest in facial hair, mustaches are once again coming to be seen a mark of the refined, sophisticated, and polished man.
But be careful, because simply allowing a tuft of hair to grow somewhere on the upper lip will not do the trick. A good looking mustache that will be a hit with women requires dedication and commitment to grooming, styling, and maintenance. You will also want to do your homework on which style of mustache goes well with your facial type and your overall demeanor.
In this article, we will look at some biological and evolutionary reasons that women might find the mustache to be desirable, why the mustache is once again flourishing in modern day society, and the eight (8) mustache styles that can best help you score.
Fifty to sixty years ago, this question might have been easy to answer. Pretty much all of the Hollywood stars of the black and white movie days were well mustached. The mustache was a sign of manliness and good style that characterized the times of our grandparents.
Though fewer Hollywood stars in today’s world sport the mustache, it is still a symbol of popular culture, and many women continue to find a well-stached man to be aggressively good looking. But why might women be attracted to the mustache? What in the genetic makeup of womankind makes the mustache advantageous over the clean shaven upper lip?
Charles Darwin, the father of evolution, studied plants, iguanas, and other wonders of the biological world. After travelling to the Galapagos Islands off of the coast of Ecuador, he slowly came to realize that different species evolve according to desirable traits that help them survive in their unique and sometimes hostile environment.
Darwin was also a well-bearded man, his portraits faithfully making him look every bit like the mad scientist he was, with a full face of wild and unkempt hair. Though Darwin may not have been the ideal mentor on how to properly groom facial hair, he did, however, transmit his idea of evolution to men’s facial hair.
According to Darwin, beards offered an evolutionary advantage to men seeking to conquer the female. Our ancestors did not simply allow their facial hair to grow out because they could not find a cheap, disposable razor at Wal-Mart. Rather, beards evolved with our male ancestors due to female selection.
Since the Stone Age, women seem to have preferred bearded men over the clean shaven face, so we guys have slowly learned that there is an evolutionary advantage in letting the beard grow out.
Whereas Darwin considered beards to have evolved simply because they were an attractive feature of the male face that women preferred, there may also be other evolutionary reasons for the survival of beard.
One study posits that women may have been attracted to bearded and mustached men because they were a sign of a superior immune system and resilience. Our cavemen ancestors didn’t have access to quality shavers, mustache wax, or beard creams, let alone soap and shampoo.
According to this theory, beards were often focal points of infection and prospective places for parasites to breed. Left over pieces of uncooked meat that propagate brain eating and gut wrenching parasites might not seem like an attractive quality to the modern day woman, but for our ancient ancestors who considered the ability to survive to be the epitome of attractiveness, that was what women saw in a bearded and mustached man.
rice and wheat
If he could withstand the onslaught of parasites, then he was probably better fit to survive the rest of the million other things that could kill a man during prehistoric times. By having an attribute that could potentially compromise his immune system, the bearded and mustached men were showing potential mating partners that they were hardcore survivors who would last long enough in the hostile world to help the human species continue to reproduce and endure.
Another less grotesque evolutionary theory states that men with mustaches represented a superior genetic fitness quality. Mustached men were seen to be more muscular, more robust and athletic – characteristics that were highly desirable in a world where your food had to be hunted or grown by hand.
The beard and mustache were thus seen as a sign of the competitive ability of men. Following from Darwin and his “survival of the fittest” evolutionary theory, women preferred a man who was outwardly displaying an attribute of fitness and toughness that would help him provide for her, their family, and their clan.
Another study similarly found a correlation between the thickness of mustaches and the genetic signs pointing to higher levels of fitness and athleticism. Our women ancestors didn’t just prefer any old mustache, but wanted a full walrus stache on their men.
Evolution can teach us a lot, but most women in modern day society would probably not be attracted to a parasite infected, unkempt, or unruly mustache. Times change, and so do the qualities of attractiveness (probably for the best). So why do women find a mustached man attractive in today’s world?
Facial hair of any type is a sign of aggressiveness, assertiveness, and style. While we may not exactly be hunting wooly mammoths or defending our families from sabre-toothed tigers, being seen as assertive and aggressive can give a man a competitive edge in our fast-paced and cutthroat modern world.
A man with a mustache is a man with a plan, a vision, and the firm resolve to achieve what he has set out to do. A mustache tells a woman that you are determined to succeed and accomplish your life goals no matter what obstacles you may confront along the path.
A number of studies have found that facial hair augments the perception of aggressiveness in a man. Men with beards making a determined look on their face are seen as much more resolute and aggressive than their clean-shaven counterparts, and many women find that assertive look to be pleasing.
But women today have a higher standard than our prehistoric great-great-great grandmothers. Women in modern society want the aggressive look combined with a sense of refinement and style. They don’t simply want a man to provide for them, but also a man who is caring, gentle, and understanding.
So how can you combine these seemingly opposite and conflicting qualities into one look? The most important thing is to keep your mustache well groomed and sanitary (no pieces of uncooked and bloody meat left over), and also choose a style that fits with your image. Let’s look now at what type of mustache will help you get the girl of your dreams, even if you are not a fantastic hunter of wooly mammoths.
Be careful when it comes to growing a mustache, because when done poorly, you could still be looked at as the libidinous creep or womanizer whom every woman will scorn.
If you want your mustache to attract women, you´ll need to take care of it, which means that simply letting a bunch of unkempt hair grow riotously on your upper lip won’t do.
A stylish mustache is one that is usually grown in tandem with other types of facial hair. The clean-shaven jaw line and chin combined with a full mustache is a little too 1980s for many women, and not the most attractive look that a mustache can give you.
However, that same 1980s mustache with a thick stubble beard is suddenly transformed into a sexy and cool look. What follows is a brief glimpse at different types of mustaches various women find attractive:
Mustache Style #1: Handlebar Mustache - The handlebar mustache may seem a bit over the top for many men, but the reality is that many women find it a sign of daring sophistication. As its name implies, the handlebar mustache is a bushy mustache that thins as it grows towards the outer lips. Once the ends have grown long enough, a little bit of mustache wax is applied to curl the ends upward.
This mustache combines very well with a full beard, and adds a look of classiness and elegance reminiscent of the 19th century. Who wouldn’t want to look like some 19th century businessman trotting around town on their black stallion? But be careful with this mustache because, if you try to overdo the upward curls of the handlebars, you could be left looking more like a clown than a refined businessman.
Mustache Style #2: Fu Manchu - The Fu Manchu is a great look for Asian men and guys whose facial hair doesn’t grow in very thick. The Fu Manchu mustache consists of long and thin hair that you let grow down the sides of your lip.
If you are lucky, those hairs will hang long and straight and can be grown in tandem with a matching goatee. Be forewarned, however, that it will take a number of months to grow out, and the interim process may leave your face looking kind of disheveled.
If you are able to master the Fu Manchu look, however, you will be unique. Very few men in today’s world are able to conquer the Fu Manchu mustache, and many women find the unique look to be sensual and stimulating. At the very least it will set you apart from the crowd and give you a style that all women will remember you by.
Mustache Style #3: Horseshoe - The horseshoe stache is a great look for men who are involved in “macho” professions. The “legs” of your mustache are allowed to grow down the sides of your mouth to the jaw line while the chin is left clean shaven. This is the mustache most often associated with bikers and other tough guys who roll up their sleeves to show their muscles.
Women associate this look with toughness and strength. It is a great look for mechanics, farmers, and others who work with their hands. If you are going into an office setting every day, however, you might want to find a different look.
Mustache Style #4: Pencil - The pencil mustache requires a daily commitment to detailed grooming as you will be forced to keep your mustache well trimmed. This mustache is ultra thin and is usually trimmed below the nose and above the upper lip so that just a thin line of hair is curled in between your nose and lip.
The ultimate sign of sophistication and classiness, women find this type of mustache to be attractive on men who are clean cut and tactful. By wearing the pencil mustache, you effectively tell women you care about your image and dedicate the necessary time to keep it up.
This look is adequate for professional men who work in an office setting and have a sensitive side they want to accentuate.
Mustache Style #5: Toothbrush - Adolf Hitler pretty much ruined the toothbrush mustache for the second half of the twentieth century. Not a whole lot of men wanted to be associated with one of the most brutal dictators to ever walk the face of the earth. But time moves on, and more and more men are beginning to find the toothbrush mustache a viable alternative for their facial hair look.
The toothbrush is a thick but narrow swath of hair on the upper lip, usually just below the nose. To women, this look can be considered vintage, and may be desirable for women who are looking for a classy and fashionable man who is willing to go out on a limb to try a new and rare look.
Mustache Style #6: Walrus - If you like the bushy look, then the walrus mustache is a great choice for you. The walrus is a full stache that is also low maintenance, as you pretty much let the hair above your lip grow as it pleases. This look is fantastic for men who have a mountaineering spirit or who are true outdoorsmen. Women dig the alfresco image the walrus portrays.
Mustache Style #7: Natural - The natural mustache is the most common of mustaches and is a great choice for men who don’t want to be exotic with their facial hair style. Women who want stability and permanence in a man may often be drawn to this style.
When combined with a stubble beard, however, the natural mustache takes on more of an aggressive and rough look, which may call out to a woman’s more daring side.
Mustache Style #8: Imperial - And lastly, we have the imperial. A mustache that grows into a full growth of cheek hair combined with sideburns. If you are having a hard time picturing that combination, think of a Civil War general.
This historical mustache is not exactly popular in today’s world, but is a daring look that is worth a try for men who want women to notice their uniqueness and exceptionality. An imperial will set you apart from the crowd.
The Right Mustache Style Does Wonders for Your Image - Mustaches are no longer simply a sign of an outdated look. Rather, a well-kept mustache sets you apart from other guys. Women will notice the unique flavor to your image and style and, who knows, the mustache may even spark some sort of evolutionary memory in women.
By finding the right style of mustache for your image and committing the necessary time to keep it well groomed, mustaches are another way to up your fundamentals and score more with women.
https://www.girlschase.com/content/8-mustache-styles-girls-go-nuts
Guatemala is a multiethnic and multilingual country located in Central America. The main population groups separate ‘Ladinos’ (mixed Native American-African-Spanish), and Native indigenous people of Maya descent. Among the present-day Guatemalan Maya, there are more than 20 different ethnic groups separated by different languages and cultures.
Genetic variation of these communities still remains largely unexplored. The principal aim of this study is to explore the genetic variability of the Maya and ‘Ladinos’ from Guatemala by means of uniparental and ancestry informative markers (AIMs).
Analyses of uniparental genetic markers indicate that Maya have a dominant Native American ancestry (mitochondrial DNA [mtDNA]: 100%; Y-chromosome: 94%). ‘Ladino’, however, show a clear gender-bias as indicated by the large European ancestry observed in the Y-chromosome (75%) compared to the mtDNA (0%).
Autosomal polymorphisms (AIMs) also mirror this marked gender-bias: (i) Native American ancestry: 92% for the Maya vs. 55% for the ‘Ladino’, and (ii) European ancestry: 8% for the Maya vs. 41% for the ‘Ladino’.
In addition, the impact of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade on the present-day Guatemalan population is very low (and only occurs in the ‘Ladino’; mtDNA: 9%; AIMs: 4%), in part mirroring the fact that Guatemala has a predominant orientation to the Pacific Ocean instead of a Caribbean one.
Sequencing of entire Guatemalan mitogenomes has led to improved Native American phylogeny via the addition of new haplogroups that are mainly observed in Mesoamerica and/or the North of South America.
The data reveal the existence of a fluid gene flow in the Mesoamerican area and a predominant unidirectional flow towards South America, most likely occurring during the Pre-Classic (1800 BC-200 AD) and the Classic (200–1000 AD) Eras of the Mesoamerican chronology, coinciding with development of the most distinctive and advanced Mesoamerican civilization, the Maya.
Phylogenetic features of mtDNA data also suggest a demographic scenario that is compatible with moderate local endogamy and isolation in the Maya combined with episodes of gene exchange between ethnic groups, suggesting an ethno-genesis in the Guatemalan Maya that is recent and supported on a cultural rather than a biological basis.
The Republic of Guatemala is located in Central America, bordering the Pacific Ocean, between El Salvador and Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea between Honduras and Belize (Figure 1). Guatemala is a multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual country with an estimated population of about 14.7 million people in 2011 (according to the Instituto Nacional de Estadística of Guatemala; INE; http://www.ine.gob.gt).
The main populations are the ‘Ladinos’ (~60%), a term used in Central America (deriving from ‘latino’), and especially in Guatemala, to refer to a mix of Native American and Spanish (and eventually of Africans), and the Maya or ‘Indígena’ (~40%), that constitutes the second most important group in the country.
The ‘Ladino’ population of Guatemala is officially recognized by the Ministerio de Educación (MINEDUC; http://www.mineduc.gob.gt/) as a heterogeneous population, which expresses itself in Spanish as a maternal language and possesses specific cultural traits of ‘Hispanic’ origin mixed with indigenous cultural elements. Already in 1690, the chronicler Francisco Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán described the ‘Ladinos’ as ‘mestizos, mulatos and negros’.
There is extensive historical documentation indicating trend in Guatemala to marriages between different ethnic groups [1]. Although the demographic impact of Europeans in Guatemala is difficult to quantify, it is estimated that in the beginning of the XVII century, the indigenous population surviving in Guatemala (and other Central American countries such as El Salvador) constituted only 10% of the total population living in the region before the arrival of Europeans [1].
The impact of the slave trade in Guatemala is also difficult to estimate. Some documentation indicate that in 1773, the population of Santiago de Los Caballeros de la Antigua Guatemala (‘the capital of Centro America’) had 30.000 people, and about 36% of them were ‘mulatos’ (admixed between Africans and Europeans or Natives), and in 1782, the ‘mulatos’ constituted 32% of a total of 13.000 inhabitants in the city of Nueva Guatemala de la Asunción [1] (the present Capital city of Guatemala).
These figures could indirectly indicate the existence of an important amount of slaves in the regions. In contrast, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database (http://www.slavevoyages.org/) shows that only a few hundred slaves disembarked directly in Guatemala. However, the arrival of important amounts of slaves from other neighboring countries that were more connected to the slave trade (such as Honduras and Belize) cannot be disregarded.
Among the present-day Maya from Guatemala, there are more than 20 different ethnic groups including the K’iche’ (9.1%), Kaqchikel (8.4%), Mam (7.9%), Q’eqchi’ (6.3%), and minority groups such as Achi, Akatek, Chuj, Ixil, Jakaltek, Poqomam, Poqomchi’, Q’anjob’al, Tz’utujil, Uspantek, etc. (altogether 8.6%; according to the 2001 census).
Ethnicity names usually refer to the indigenous language spoken by the group members. Although Spanish is the official language in Guatemala today, there are 23 officially recognized Native American languages.
It is not uncommon that people from one region of Guatemala do not understand the language of a neighboring region. For most Mayan inhabitants, Spanish is a second language, and many Maya do not speak Spanish at all in some areas of the country.
Today, the largest proportion of the Guatemalan Maya population lives in the highlands (where the majority of the studied samples of the present study have been taken), but there are also inhabitants in other rural areas, such as El Quiché department. Other minority Native American groups in Guatemala are the Garifuna and Xinka (0.1%).
The Maya constituted vast kingships during a long period over the Mesoamerican landscape (a term describing Mexico and Central America within which a number of pre-Columbian societies flourished before the Spanish colonization in the XVI century [2]), a reign that lasted for about three thousand years (kya) and was one of the most advanced civilizations within the New World.
...
The first concrete traces of the Mayan civilization (dating back to the Pre-Classic period around 1,800 BCE) were found in the Mirador Basin of the northern department of Petén (Guatemala), though some settlements are thought to be over 6 kya old [3]. The Mirador Basin is part of a larger region (known as the Guatemala’s Maya Biosphere Reserve) that overall is considered to be the cradle of ancient Maya civilization (>175 archaeological sites).
...
According to current knowledge, a single language existed among the earliest Maya. This Proto-Mayan is thought to have been spoken at least ~4 kya ago and may be the common ancestor of all modern Mayan languages today, as well as the Classic Maya languages documented in the hieroglyphic inscriptions.
Reconstructive and descriptive linguistic studies of ancient Proto-Mayan target the Guatemalan highlands as the birthplace of this ancestral language [5]. Because of the isolation of Maya posted by vast distances and the ecological diversity of their territories, regional conflicts, sporadic migrations, and ever-changing political systems, their language has had acquired many pronunciations, and over time, those dialects have spawned new languages.
During the Pre-Classic Period (2000 BCE–250 CE), a great linguistic diversity developed, comprising 16 language families. Unlike other scattered populations of Mesoamerica, the Maya were centered in one geographical area covering the entire Yucatan Peninsula and modern-day Guatemala; Belize and parts of East Mexico; and the western region of El Salvador and Honduras.
It was during the Classic period (AD 250–900) that the Maya civilization reached the peak of its power and influence and it was one of the most dominant indigenous societies of Mesoamerica. During this period, the Mayan civilization had become a complex and dynamic entity of independent city-states undergoing a series of population expansions and contractions [5,7,8].
These fluctuations may reflect episodes of migration at various times during the Classic period. By the Late Classic period (AD 600–900), much of the Maya region was organized into two competing “super-states,” headed by the hegemonic powers of Tikal and Calakmul [2,9]. By the terminal Classic period, massive declines in population size led to the abandonment of many Maya territories.
The reason for this subsidence remains largely unknown, although theories invoke environmental over-exploitation with all of its consequences as well as constant warfare in a landscape divided among numerous competing city-states as the main reasons.
In the Post-Classic (AD 900–1,500) period, the fragmentation process led to a fusion of Maya settlements from the southern Yucatán highlands into the regionally dominating K’iche’ and later Kaqchikel states [5]. Constant strains within the Maya region and with non-Mayan groups (Aztecs and Toltec of Mexico) led to the final collapse of the civilization prior to the arrival of the Spanish [5].
Nowadays, Maya descendants occupy the territories of Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, and Honduras. Maya people mostly follow their traditional way of life, including costumes, indigenous languages, and religious ceremonies. One of their most remarkable cultural traits is the faithful count of days according to the Maya calendar.
Historic evidence based on patterns of material culture (ceramics), as well as geographic variability in agricultural practices and socio-political structures suggest a degree of regional isolation which leads to an explanation of the Classic Maya population structure as a model of isolation by distance (IBD). This model describes the tendency of populations that are geographically closer to be more similar than populations that are further apart [10].
Such a model would consider ancient Maya as relatively non-mobile population groups and inter-population gene flow restricted to neighboring sites. Over their millenary history and given the great distances between their communities, strengthened by separation through geographical barriers, warfare, and their political system of independent city-states, it may be expected that the Maya would have diverged into several distinct populations.
Contradictory evidence (mostly inscription based) shows however long-distance trade, elite visits and marriage and intercity conflicts with captive-taking, as well as the mobility of general populations. On the other hand, Mayan art, architecture and rituals suggest a high degree of cohesiveness throughout their domain. Overall, there is enough evidence indicating that certain gene flow occurred across the entire Maya area during the Classic period.
While both a rich archaeological record and hieroglyphic dataset led to a better understanding of the Classic Maya population history compared to most other ancient Native American cultures [2], biological investigations of ancient Guatemala population history are mainly limited to osteology [11] and dental studies [12,13]. These studies arrived however to contradictory findings.
Thus, dental morphology examinations found evidence for biological discontinuity at Seibal (Petén) between the Late and Terminal Classic periods [14]. Using the same approach, it could be shown that skeletons of Jaina (Yucatán, Mexico) demonstrated a stronger affiliation to the Petén site than they did to nearby Chichen Itza in Mexico [15].
In addition, distinct regional clustering could not be found by odontometric comparison of individuals from five Maya sites in the Yucatán Peninsula [16]; these studies suggested that extensive gene flow dominated Classic Maya population structure with genetic exchange not only between intrazonal neighbors, but at least partially between long distances.
Analyses of odontometric variation, as carried out by Sherer et al. [13], suggested the existence of important gene flow during the Classic period; these authors found an overall FST value of 0.018, indicating little among-group variability for the Classic Maya sites tested.
Furthermore, chemical evidence by isotope analyses points in the same direction, suggesting that migration of both elites and general populations was greatest during the Early Classic period [17,18].
Analysis of uniparental DNA markers (especially mitochondrial DNA [mtDNA] variation) and autosomal DNA markers has been widely used to explore demographic patterns throughout the Americas [19-36]. However, genetic analyses on present-day populations from Guatemala are limited to only a few studies.
The study by Ibarra-Rivera et al. [37] on autosomal STRs (typically used in forensic genetics) revealed that Maya showed fewer alleles and decreased levels of heterozygosity compared to Asians, Europeans, North And South Americans, and even non-Mayan Mesoamericans.
This study also supplied evidence that the Guatemalan Mayan groups appeared less genetically variable than their Yucatan counterparts, which supports the thesis that the Guatemalan Maya have experienced less gene flow than the Maya from the Mexican Peninsula [38]. Note that increased allelic diversity is expected in the Yucatan’s plateau because of the greater accessibility afforded by a lack of major geographical barriers.
The limited genetic diversity of the Maya was indicative of isolation, founder effects, bottlenecks, limited gene flow from neighboring non-Mayan peoples, and/or possible inbreeding.
Overall, the results of this study suggested that though some genetic variability exists between Mayan groups, there is a higher degree of homogeneity between them than when compared with other Mesoamerican populations. This led to the presumption that distinct Mayan settlements did not evolve in isolation from one another.
In fact, the data indicate that the cultural similarities shared by the Maya are reflected in their genetic profiles and are not merely a result of geographic and/or cultural interactions [37]. Furthermore, data on HLA genes [40], and polymorphic Alu insertion (PAI) loci [38] in the actual Guatemalan population were also generated.
When comparing HLA allelic frequencies in the Maya from Guatemala with other worldwide populations, the Maya were found to differ genetically from the Mixe and Oaxacan-Mexican Native Americans and to show a close relationship to the Arhuacs, Kogi, and Arsario tribes of the Caribbean.
Based on the Alu insertion polymorphisms, two geographically adjacent Mayan populations from the Guatemalan highlands (K’iche’ and Kaqchikel) were found to be more similar to each other than to populations from Yucatán. Other studies reported autosomal data on the distribution of standard autosomal STRs in the actual ‘Ladino’ as in the Maya population of Guatemala and Mexico.
Genetic data on uniparental markers of Guatemalans are also very limited. Nonetheless, forensic genetics played a key role in the investigation of the Maya homicide during Guatemala’s 30-year-long Civil War by the Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG; http://www.fafg.org/).
Almost 20 years ago, DNA extraction from bones and sequencing of the mtDNA HVS-I was carried out after the exhumation of a 10-year-old clandestine mass grave.
The study involved samples collected in a Quiché Indian village located close to the provincial capital of Santa Cruz de Quiché [44], and lead to the determination of 16 different mtDNA haplotypes. Recently, a study on 17 Y-STR loci in a set of 115 ‘Mestizo’ and 110 Maya males allowed further insight into the actual level of genetic variability and population structure of the populations of the country.
The authors clearly identified Guatemalans as predominantly Native Americans and detected a population sub-structure differentiating ‘Mestizos’ from Mayans to certain extent.
Finally, studies on Mayan ancient DNA were not successful due to the poor preservation of Maya skeletons. The aim of the present study is to shed light on the demographic and the ethno-history of the Guatemalan indigenous populations and characterize the admixture proportions of Mayas and ‘Ladinos’ of Guatemala by means of uniparental (Y-chromosome and mtDNA) and Ancestry Informative Markers (AIMs).
All Guatemalan Native American profiles were resolved into a maximum parsimony network (Figure 3). The 16 K’iche’ HVS-I haplotypes reported by Boles et al. [44] were also included in these networks (see also Additional file 1).
The phylogeny of haplogroup A2, the most common haplogroup in the Maya and ‘Ladino’ (Figure 3A), is mainly star-like, but it also shows some derived branches containing haplotypes that appear overrepresented, and as is the case for branches A2?+?@T16362C, A2?+?T16092C, A2q, A2p3a, etc.
The most common control region haplotype corresponds to the root of haplogroup A2. One interesting feature of the network of haplogroup A2 is the large proportion of haplotypes that are shared between the different ethnic groups. This is particularly notable for those better represented our sample, that is, Q’eqchi’, Poqomchi’ and K’iche’. In other words, there is no particular clade that is overrepresented in one of the Maya groups.
Although the sample size is lower than for A2, haplogroups B2 and C1 show similar phylogenetic patterns (Figure 3B and C, respectively). As expected, the admixed population of ‘Ladino’ follows the same pattern as the Maya; their haplotypes are scattered through the different branches of the A2, B2, and C1 phylogeny.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100008470757951
...
...
A phylogeographic connection between Guatemala and North and South America is evident not only for the most common haplotypes but also when examining singular haplotypes. For instance, A2 haplotypes #GT06 and #LaTinta_20 (Additional file 1), characterized by a reversion at T16362C and T16140C on top of the basal haplotype, is uncommon in North America, but appears in Mexico [31] and in the North of South America, such as Bolivia [47], Peru [48], etc.
veggie burger
...
...
A similar distribution has the haplotype root of A2?+?C16266T. The lineage B2o, observed in four Guatemalans, is also found all over the American continent, from Native North Americans [49] to the Southern Cone.
...
However, a large number of other haplotypes have a clear predominant or even exclusive distribution in Mesoamerica. Some examples are: (i) A2u members appear mainly in Panama [29], El Salvador [26], and Mexico [31,50], (ii) root of A2?+?A16299G is also very frequent in El Salvador [26], Costa Rica [51], Nicaragua [52], and Panama [29], and (iii) root of A2?+?A16274G (haplogroup A2d1a) appearing in Panama [29,53], and Mexico.
Additional searches of all of the profiles included in Figure 3 were carried out in other databases. For instance, in haplotype queries performed in EMPOP, and excluding the so-called “admixed” individuals from the USA (composed in part by individuals coming from different American countries, e.g. Mexico), indicated that the great majority of haplotypes were found almost exclusively in Mesoamerica (~61% in Mexico and ~33% in Guatemala).
In the Guatemalan samples, there was only one haplotype (#GT24) of recent Sub-Saharan ancestry belonging to L3b1a. This haplotype could have arrived in Guatemala at the times of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade [55,56], although this haplogroup is more common in East Africa than in West or West-Central Africa [57,58].
It is important to note that this donor does not show any notable African autosomal ancestry (AFR: 0.3%, EUR: 64.6%, AME: 35.1%; see below) and describes itself as ‘Ladino’. This suggests that the carrier of this African lineage is not a very recent arrival into Guatemala.
Phylogeography of Maya mitogenomes and Time of the Most Recent Common Ancestor (TMRCA) - Ten out of the twelve mitogenomes analyzed belong to haplogroup A2, while two belong to haplogroup B2 (Additional file 2).
The mitogenomes obtained allowed improved resolution of the mtDNA phylogeny within these Native American haplogroups. In particular, we have defined eight new clades, namely A2w1a, A2w1b, A2w2, A2w3, A2w4, A2p3, A2ar, and B2t1 (together with other minor sub-clades).
Two Guatemalan B2 haplotypes allowed the topology of the haplogroup B2t branch to be re-defined with respect to the current Build 16 version of Phylotree (Figure 4). There are four complete genomes belonging to B2t available; all of them share the sequence motif A10792G-A15244G-C16259T-T16357C-C16467T.
...
The two Maya mitogenomes were found in two Q’eqchi’; these haplotypes are identical and share the transition C16095T. The other two mitogenomes (one sampled in Mexico and the other of unknown origin) and one semi-complete genome (EF657505; coding region) share the transition G15884A and determine the sub-lineage B2t1 (Figure 4).
A search of the characteristic HVS-I motif of B2t in the literature (excluding substitution C16467T because it is absent in most control region datasets) reveals that this is a minor haplogroup in America; however, it is present at moderate frequency (5%) in the Nahua, in ‘Mestizos’ from Mexico [31,50] and in an ‘Hispanic’ dataset from USA [59].
Further search of B2t control region profiles in EMPOP reveals the relevant presence of B2t members in Mexico, most of them in the Zoque, which is an ethnic group inhabiting neighboring regions (Chiapas) to Guatemala.
There are also a few B2t members classified as ‘admixed’ individuals from the USA (which could constitute recent arrivals from Mexico). B2t therefore has a dominant Mesoamerican distribution. The estimated coalescence age of B2t and B2t1 is 5.8 and 4.1 kya, respectively (Table 1).
Ten Maya mitogenomes could be classified within different sub-branches of haplogroup A2 (Figure 5). Five of these mitogenomes carry the very stable diagnostic coding region variant C10199T (one mutational hit in Phylotree and 0 in [60]), and therefore belong to haplogroup A2p.
Figure 5 shows the updated topology for A2p, which is reconstructed on the basis of 13 mitogenomes and one coding region segment (EF657488). A2p, as a whole, can be dated in 8.8 kya (Table 1).
Seven out of these 14 mtDNAs were sampled in Mexico and five in Guatemala (there is no geographic information for the other two; both belong to sub-clade A2p2). Two pairs of mitogenomes from Mexico allow two sub-branches of haplogroup A2p1 (A2p motif?+?G5585A-T6488C-A8537G) to be determined: A2p1a (A2p1 motif?+?T16092C) and A2p1b (A2p1 motif?+?C16400T). A2p1 is a recent clade with an estimated divergence age of 3.7 kya, while A2p1a and A2p1b are 1.3 and 2.0 kya old, respectively.
The five Guatemalan samples belong, together with one Mexican haplotype (HQ012055), to haplogroup A2p3 (A2p motif?+?C16234T); however, all of the Mayan sequences share the substitution T16209C, thus determining a new sub-branch, A2p3a. A2p3a is also relatively new, with an estimated age of 1.5 kya.
By searching the control region motif of A2p in the EMPOP dataset, A2p, as a whole, appears mainly in South America (Colombia and Venezuela). A few members of A2p3 can be found in control region databases in Mexico [31], or even sporadically in the North of South America (Venezuela [61]), but the Maya clade A2p3a seems to be basically restricted to the Guatemalan territory.
The sequence motif A7124G-T1101C defines haplogroup A2w, and its topology was determined by 32 mitogenomes, a large number of them analyzed within The 1000 Genome Project in a Colombian sample set (Figure 5). Thus, 27 A2w mitogenomes appeared in Colombia, two in Guatemala, one in Mexico, and one in a ‘Hispanic’ population from the USA (there is an additional mitogenome of unknown origin).
In Phylotree, there is only one sub-lineage determined within this haplogroup, namely, A2w1, with the diagnostic motif 573.XC-C16187T. We describe here three additional branches: A2w2, A2w3, and A2w4. The two A2w Guatemalan profiles match entirely and were found in the Q’eqchi’; they share six transitions and belong to the sub-clade A2w1a1.
The general topology of A2w is far to be star-like (as measured by the star-likeness index, Additional file 3), and its estimated age using the average distance to the root is paradoxically larger than the age of the entire A2w.
This indirectly denotes that sampling of mitogenomes belonging to this sub-clade is probably sub-optimal (dominated by haplogroup members mainly from Colombia). Confirmatory evidence comes from the fact that a search of the control region motif of A2w1a reveals the presence of this haplogroup, mainly all across the Mesoamerican territory, e.g. Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, the Garifunas (and Chocó from Caribbean Colombia).
Additional haplotype searches in EMPOP indicate further matches in Honduras and Guatemala (as well as some admixed individual in the USA). Therefore, A2w1 has a wide Mesoamerican distribution but is most likely very prevalent in many South American locations apart from Colombia. Unfortunately, most of the A2w1 sub-branches are not searchable through control region motifs (Figure 5).
TMRCA of A2w, as estimated from maximum likelihood (ML), is 9.9 kya; A2w1 would be its oldest sub-clade (9.3 kya). A2w3 is much younger (3.5 kya), as there are some minor sub-clades such as A2w1b (1.5 kya) or A2w1a1a (1.6 kya). The clade containing the two Guatemalan sequences, A2w1a1, is 7.9 kya.
The two HVS-I variants T125C-T127C alone determine haplogroup A2ar. It is important to note that this seeming distinctive sequence motif occurs independently several times in the worldwide phylogeny (e.g. D4l2, L0d2d, M12a1; Phylotree).
There are three mitogenomes in A2ar, curiously, two of them sampled in Peru, and one in a Q’eqchi’ individual. This suggests that this minor clade has a Mesoamerican and South American distribution. A2ar seems to be an old sub-clade (12.2 kya) within the phylogeny of A2 (Table 1).
There are two additional A2 Q’eqchi’ individuals sharing exactly the same variants (#4 and #5 in Figure 5). The control region motif of this branch is rare; the most closely related mtDNA in the Americas is a Colla individual from Argentina.
Demographic patterns of the Maya as inferred from mtDNA data - The phylogeny of mtDNA control region haplotypes suggests a complex demographic history in Guatemala as a result of the superposition of different demographic events. The control region network mirrors a main star-like topology, most likely indicating the existence of a recent demographic expansion in the region.
This expansion could perfectly fit with the growth of the main Maya centers during the Classic period, about 1.8 kya ago. Superposed to this star-like phylogeny are some deep branches that seem to signal an underlying ancient, more stationary demographic history (which is more clearly revealed by analysis of the complete mitogenomes).
The presence of some derived haplotypes from the root occurring at a relatively high frequency reflects the existence of founder events in the different ethnic groups or relative isolation. Furthermore, the presence of identical haplotypes in the analyzed mitogenomes adds further support to the existence of moderate isolation of Maya into relatively small consanguineous groups.
However, gene flow between these isolated groups also occurred in Guatemala, as testified by the existence of many haplotypes shared between different Maya groups.
Analysis of mitogenomes reveals a few interesting features of the past Guatemalan demography (Figures 4 and ?and5).5). Some haplogroups, for example A2ar and A2w (and some of its sub-clades), date back to the Paleo-Indian period in the chronology of Mesoamericans.
These clades appeared about 10–12 kya, and could have arisen in Mesoamerica or in the limits with North America soon after the initial colonization of the Americas; they could have moved in successive colonization waves as far as to the southern continental cone (as already reported for other clades [19,20] or based on autosomal markers.
When examining the combined picture provided by the mitogenomes and the control region data, this is supported by the high prevalence of these clades in Mesoamerica and in South America, but only sporadically in admixed individuals from North America.
Some mtDNA clades examined in the present study provide clear evidence for the existence of an important gene flow occurring between the territories of Mesoamerica and South America during the Pre-Classic Era about 4 kya, connecting Mexico, Central American populations and South America (testified by the presence of some of these lineages in Venezuela [A2p3] or Colombia [A2w] or in Peru [A2ar]).
The data cannot disregard the possibility of migrations from South America to Central America and the Caribbean. There are previous evidences pointing to this possibility [21,30,65] but the magnitude of these migrations needs further investigation.
The phylogeographic characteristics of other mtDNA clades, however, point to demographic movements occurring to a more regional scale, almost exclusively within the Mesoamerican area. A number of these clades date back to the Pre-Classic and Classic Era (Figure 6); the development of the main Classic Maya Centers during the Classic period. This pattern can only be explained if a considerable gene flow across the different Maya territories is assumed.
Other population movements occurring during the Post-Classic Era (involving the Aztec, Mixtec, Totonac, Pipil, K’ich’e, Kaqchikel, among others) could also contribute to the dispersal of these lineages into this region. In particular, the role of the Nahua people [66,67], also referred in the literature to as Aztecs (Aztec civilization), could be particularly important as a source of more recent gene flow between Mexico and Guatemala. The Nahua received different denominations in different places.
For instance, these groups were known as Pipiles in Guatemala, and their language was known to be a variant called Náhuatl Pipil. Various source of evidence (archaeological, linguistic, etc.) suggest that the Nahuas could have originated in the deserts of northern Mexico and southwestern USA and migrated into Central Mexico in several waves.
Although the origin of the Nahua people is uncertain; it is well-known that the Nahua occupied the Mesoamerican territories ranging across modern-day Central Mexico to southwards in Central America in the XVI century, including Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and even as far South as Panama [2].
The Pipiles were extinguished with the arrival of the Spaniards in colonial times, and the Nahua were gradually assimilated into ‘Mestizo’ society in most places. The last of the southern Nahua populations are the Pipil of El Salvador [68]. Some lineages found in Guatemala, such as haplogroup B1t1, are still found at high frequencies in present-day Nahua-speaking people from Mexico.
The large amount of shared variability observed between the different Maya ethnic groups (and with other Mesoamerican populations) analyzed in the present study and the lack of specific variability characterizing them is in agreement with a previous genetic study which obtained signs of genetic homogeneity among various Maya groupings by G-tests.
In contrast, these authors found significant heterogeneity from pair-wise comparisons between the Maya and other regional non-Mayan populations [37]. This would suggest that Mayan ethno-genesis is most likely very recent, perhaps occurring during the development of the Nahua civilization (1,100-500 ya). The large divergences observed in other cultural aspects of the Maya, such as linguistic ones, have probably developed very recently in the overall history of the Maya.
The complete genotype results for Y-chromosomal SNP variation are given in Additional file 4. Haplogroup Q is the major branch on the Y-chromosome tree (89%) in the male Maya population set (Figure 2B). Q1a3a1(×Q1a3a1a-c) represents the most common haplogroup (81%), and 8% of the Y-haplotypes fall within Q (×Q1a3a1).
The remaining subjects belong to the European haplogroups R1 (9%) and J2 (2%). The R1 sub-clades detected in Guatemalans were R1b1a2*(×xR1b1a2a1a1, R1b1a2a1a2a1b1a, R1b1a2a1a2b, R1b1a2a1a2c1a1a1), represented by three samples (two Q’eqchi’ and one ‘Ladino’), and one R1a1 member observed in one single K’iche’ individual.
The J2 carrier self-describes as ‘Ladino’ and also reported two generations of ‘Ladino’ ancestry interrupted by a Q’eqchi’ maternal grandmother. J2 is the most common haplogroup in Europe.
The individual described above (#GT24) bearing the mtDNA Sub-Saharan haplotype L3b1a carries a Y-chromosomal haplogroup R1*(×R1a, R1b1) of European ancestry.
Principal component analysis (PCA) and admixture analysis based on AIMs - PCA plot (Figure 7A) based on the 46 AIMs analyzed in the present study (Additional file 5) shows the relationship of the Guatemalan individuals with the three main CEPH panel continental groups, namely, Africans, Europeans and Native Americans, in the Euclidean space.
The three reference continental populations show a clear differentiation (Figure 7A; left). PC1 (28%) separates Africans from non-Africans, while PC2 (17%) separates Europeans from the other two groups. Guatemalan Maya profiles all fall within the Native American cluster.
Instead, ‘Ladino’ profiles form an scattered cluster located between Native Americans and Europeans; this pattern becomes clearer in a second PCA when eliminating the African reference samples (see PC1 [29%] in Figure 7A, right).
The projection of the ‘Ladino’ profiles towards the European pole in the PCA mirrors a moderate European admixture in these individuals. On the other hand, there is no clear differentiation between different Maya ethnic groups.
Additional analysis carried out using Discriminant analysis of Principal Components (DAPC) underlines the outcomes of PCA and provides further assessment of between-population structures (Additional file 6).
The admixture bar-plot in Figure 7B indicates the ancestral membership for each individual in the three reference populations (African, European, and Native American) and the Guatemalan AIM profiles. Only the results for the optimal k?=?3 are represented. These three components perfectly separate the profiles belonging to each of the main ancestral continental populations.
The admixture bar-plot shows that most of the Guatemalan individuals have a dominant Native American ancestry (see also Figure 2C). However, a tiny portion of European co-ancestry at different scales can be observed across all Mayans. Therefore, admixture analysis agrees well with the results observed in PCA.
Thus, for instance, those Guatemalan profiles with a higher European component correspond to those located close to the European cluster in the PCA (Figure 7A). Also consistent with previous analysis is the finding that no notable differences could be detected between the different ethnic Maya groups analyzed in this study. As expected, European co-ancestry is substantially higher in the ‘Ladino’ samples.
In contrast to the significant Native American and European ancestry of Guatemalans, the average African component is very low in Guatemala, and it appears almost exclusively in ‘Ladinos’ (3.6%). There was only one Maya who shows a moderate percentage of African co-ancestry (4.4%).
This subject (#LaTinta_08, female) is of self-described Q’eqchi’ ancestry and carries a Native American mtDNA haplotype (B2t). This percentage of African ancestry in this Q’eqchi’ individual could simply mirror the variability of ancestry estimates using panels of AIMs containing a limited amount of SNPs [70], and not necessarily a real African genome ancestry.
Finally, for the AIM-InDel marker rs34122827, we found a third allelic state in one Mayan sample (#Marco_03). This allele corresponds to a T deletion occurring in the long allele background (allele 2D68Tdel). Interestingly, this variant was found to be specific to Europeans [71], whereas the carrier in our study is of K’iche’ ancestry.
Conclusions - The results of uniparental loci show that the Maya population samples are mainly composed of Native American haplogroups with a minor presence of sub-Saharan (only on the mtDNA) and/or European lineages (only on the Y chromosome).
AIM-InDels also points to the predominant Native American nature of the Maya (Figure 2C). In addition, ancestry proportions were different between ‘Ladinos’ and Mayans for the Native American and the European components, which is in agreement with previous studies.
In ‘Ladinos’, the main ancestry proportions are the Native American component (mtDNA: 91%; AIMs: 55%), and the European component in the male-specific genome (Y-chromosome: 75%).
Nhạc Sĩ Lữ Liên ( Nhóm Nhạc AVT - con gồm Bích Chiêu, Tuấn Ngọc, Anh Tú, Thúy Anh, Lan Anh và Lưu Bích.)
These results mirror the important demographic impact of the European colonizers in Guatemala (with a large effective population size) and their role in the extinction of the Native American population from the region.
In particular, the patterns observed in ‘Ladinos’ indicate that the male population from Guatemala suffered more dramatically the consequences of the European conquest as mirrored by the differential ancestry components of the mtDNA and the Y-chromosome in the ‘Ladinos’.
The Native American component of present-day Guatemalans was much better preserved in both male and female Maya, probably thanks to their geographic isolation in very inaccessible areas of the country.
Although African slaves arrived in Guatemala in the period between the VI and XVII century to replace the indigenous population as a labor force [72], our data indicate that the African genetic legacy in Guatemala is very low, and this agrees well with the documentation indicating the few amount of slaves arriving directly to the country.
This is in contrast to other American populations, e.g. in Colombia [25], Brazil [73] and the Caribbean [63], but is in agreement with the patterns observed in El Salvador [26], which has no coast in the Caribbean (Guatemala has also limited contact with the Caribbean sea and even today, the country has difficult access through this coast).
As shown by the admixture analysis based on AIMs, African ancestry is higher for ‘Ladinos’ (3.6%) than for the Maya (virtually 0%). The results as a whole are also in good agreement with the census: in modern-day Guatemala, ‘Afro-Guatemalan’ individuals comprise only ~1% of the total population and are found solely in a few communities living at the Caribbean coast where no subjects were recruited for this study.
Overall, the data reveal the existence of a fluid gene flow in Mesoamerica and a predominant unidirectional flow towards South America. The main movements could have occurred during the Pre-Classic (1800 BC-200 AD) and the Classic (200–1000 AD) Eras of the Mesoamerican chronology.
This period coincide with development of the Maya, which was the most distinctive and advanced Mesoamerican civilization. Phylogenetic features of control region mtDNA data and the mitogenomes analyzed also suggest a demographic scenario that is compatible with moderate local endogamy and isolation in the Maya combined with episodes of gene exchange between ethnic groups.
This pattern of variability is in agreement with a recent ethno-genesis of the Maya, which seems more established in cultural rather than a biological basis.
There is one main limitation in the present study. Thus, most of the demographic inferences carried out in this study are devoted to the analysis of the mtDNA variation (which only records the demographic processes affecting exclusively the female population).
This is mainly due to the fact that the level of resolution provided by the mtDNA in our study is high compared to the resolution obtained for the other markers analyzed. Y-chromosomal and autosomal markers were genotyped in order to provide a more complete picture of the genetic patterns of Guatemalans.
For instance, these markers have revealed the existence of an important gender-bias in this country (as it occurs in other American countries [74,75]), which moreover differs in ‘Ladinos’ and Maya.
Lastly, the data generated in the present study represent one of the very few genetic studies carried out in Native Guatemalans, and the ethnic groups sampled are analyzed here for the first time with a particular combination of uniparental and AIMs.
The results provide new insight into the admixture characteristics of the Guatemalan population, with a clear gender bias observed in the ‘Ladinos’ but virtually absent in the Maya. The data also show important insights into the demography and the ethno-history of the Guatemalans and the important role of Mesoamerica as a passageway between North and South America.
Last but not least, the data are also of particular interest from a forensic genetics point of view, as the results of our study may also contribute to the on-going work of the Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG) in prosecuting crimes against humanity that took place during the 1960–1996 civil war.
Ladino’ individuals were mainly recruited in cities (Guatemala Capital City and Cobán in the department of Alta Verapaz), while indigenous people were sampled directly in their communities in and around the highlands of Guatemala (Verapaz), the geographic heart of the country.
Guatemala does not have legal regulations on the usage of native inhabitants DNA pool (according to the Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Forenses during the sample period; INACIF; http://www.inacif.gob.gt/).
However, we ensured that every subject fully understood the aim of our study, which conforms to the Spanish Law for Biomedical Research (Law 14/2007-3 of July) and which was approved by the ethical commission of the Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.
A document of informed consent was translated by a native Maya translator to the members of the villages and in particular to the donors. In case volunteers were analphabetic, fingerprints were used as signatures. The individual ethnic origin of participants was recorded by a detailed genealogy questionnaire.
If self-reported family relationships were recognized during recruitment, just samples from one family member were considered for the analysis, independently from the degree of relationship. Distant relationships cannot be disregarded.
Recruitment of samples was limited by two main factors: (i) Maya linguistic diversity and their reservation towards medical study participation, and (ii) logistical difficulties for DNA sampling in a partially rough terrain with very difficult access.
DNA extraction was carried out from saliva samples on buccal swabs by organic standard procedures. Mitochondrial DNA sequencing and mtDNA SNP genotyping.
A total of 110 samples (2 Achi, 2 Kaqchikel, 2 K’iche’, 11 ‘Ladino’, 18 Poqomchi’, and 75 Q’eqchi’) where analyzed for the mtDNA (see Additional file 1 for more details). All samples were amplified and double-strand sequenced for the entire mtDNA control region. Mutations are referenced with respect to the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS).
Haplogroup nomenclature follows Phylotree Build 16 (http://www.phylotree.org;). The sequences were initially classified into haplogroups using HaploGrep and manually checked according to recommendations. Potential sequence artifacts were checked as reported previously.
In order to increase the phylogenetic resolution of mtDNA HVS-I/II within the Native American phylogeny, we genotyped coding region mtDNA SNPs (mtSNPs) using a single multiplex SNaPshot reaction, as described previously. Unexpected mtSNP phylogenetic patterns according to the known phylogeny were confirmed by repeating the SNP genotyping using single-plex minisequencing and automatic sequencing.
Based on the information provided by the control region profiles (Additional file 1), 12 Native American lineages (carried by 10 Q’eqchi’ and 2 Poqomchi’) were selected for entire mtDNA genome sequencing following previously described protocols;
Additional file 2. The criterion for selection was mainly based on the particularities of the mutational changes carried by these profiles when compared against the known variability in other Native American datasets and phylogeny. The complete genomes analyzed in the present study have been submitted to GenBank under the accession numbers KM051465-KM051476.
Y-chromosome SNP genotyping - A total of 58 males (1 Kaqchikel, 2 K’iche’, 4 ‘Ladino’, 8 Poqomchi’, and 43 Q’eqchi’) were genotyped for the Y-chromosome (Additional file 4) using a set of 26 SNP markers.
Sixteen of these SNPs were analyzed in two reactions following the strategy of compound multiplexes described previously. We adopted the revised haplogroup tree by the Y Chromosome Consortium YCC (2008) and nomenclature adjustments according to the Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree 2013 by the International Society of Genetic Genealogy.
We also applied two additional multiplex reaction containing SNPs M242, M3, M19, M194 and M199, which identify Native American populations as described before, as well as Y-SNPs M167, M222, U106, U198 and U152 belonging to the R1b1a2 haplogroup, in order to determine the most frequent European haplogroups.
Genotyping of Ancestry Informative Markers (AIMs) - The same samples analyzed for mtDNA were also genotyped for 46 AIM-InDel markers [71], which allow the proportion of ancestry accounted for main continental groups to be estimated. AIM-Indelplex PCR amplification and capillary electrophoresis were performed as described previously.
Phylogenetic analysis and estimation of coalescent times - We used HVS-I data to build phylogenetic networks with the aid of the program Network 4.6.1.1 [90,91] and by hand. Hypervariable sites in HVS-I segment such as A16182C, A16183C, and T16519C were not considered (as usual).
Maximum parsimony trees were built for the complete genomes obtained in the present study and those collected from the literature belonging to haplogroups represented by the Guatemalan mitogenomes, and following the known worldwide phylogeny (Phylotree). Estimation of the coalescent times of the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) was computed using two different procedures.
TMRCA was initially calculated using a ML procedure (Table 1). For this purpose, the software PAML 3.13 [92] was used assuming the HKY85 mutation model (ignoring indels, as usual) and using gamma-distributed rates (approximated by a discrete distribution with 32 categories) and three partitions: HVS-I (positions 16051–16400), HVS-II (positions 68–263), and the remainder.
TMRCA was also computed from the averaged distance (?) of the haplotypes of a clade to the respective root haplotype together with a heuristic estimate of the standard error (s) calculated from an estimate of the genealogy.
These estimates were computed on the mitogenomes considering (i) the whole variation observed (excluding indels and hotspots) and (ii) using only synonymous mutations. The ‘star-likeness’ of the trees was measured using the star index ?/n?×?s2; this index can take values between 1/n (single haplotype representing n mtDNAs) and 1 (perfect star phylogeny).
Both methods show very similar divergence ages when applied to mitogenomes. However, the averaged distance to the root shows an anomalous behavior on A2w1 and its sub-clades, with ages that are about twice (averaged on all sub-clades) larger than estimates based on ML (compare to a 1.2 of averaged discrepancy for the rest of the sub-clades).
Estimates based on synonymous mutations show also large discrepancies with the ML method. In addition, A2w1 shows very low values of star-likeness (Additional file 3), which could be indicative of an overrepresentation of the A2w1 mitogenomes sampled in South America (coupled with the underrepresentation of A2w1 members from other Mesoamerican locations where this clade is probably present) or simply due to a limited sample size in this phylogenetic branch.
Overall, the existence of a non-star-likeness phylogenetic pattern in A2w1 is what makes the ML method more reliable and consistent for the estimation of TMCRA. Thus, ML estimates were used for discussion throughout the text.
Admixture proportions from autosomal data were inferred by comparing genetic profiles from the present study with those publicly available from the Human Genome Diversity Cell Line Panel, HGCP-CEPH (Centre d’Etude du Polymorphisme Humain.)
These reference parental samples (N?=?327) came from populations of three different continents: Africa (Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa; N?=?105), Europe (France, Italy, Orkney Islands, Russia, Russia Caucasus; N?=?158), and America (Brazil, Colombia, Mexico; N?=?64).
Present-day East Asians were not taken into account as a reference population, assuming that these populations did not substantially contribute to the recent genetic heritage of the Guatemalan people, as is the case in other American locations.
Statistical analysis of AIMs included different tools aimed at disentangling the population structure of the Guatemalan study samples. Multivariate analyses were carried out using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). PCA condenses in a few principal components (usually two; PC1 and PC2) an initial set of data that can contain quantitative variables, into a group of fewer variables resulting in a linear combination of the originals.
PCA was performed using the statistic software R (R v.3.0.1, http://www.r-project.org/), together with the SNPassoc package (SNPassoc v.1.8-5, http://www.creal.cat/jrgonzalez/software.htm; [96]).
To further estimate individual ancestry proportions we used ADMIXTURE [97]. This software uses a ML estimation of individual ancestries from multilocus SNP data (AIMs).
Finally, phylogeographic searchers of mtDNA profiles were carried out on an in-house database containing >27,000 mitogenomes and >170,000 partial (mainly HVS-I) mtDNA sequences. Additional exploratory haplotype searchers were carried out on EMPOP (http://empop.org), Familytree (https://familysearch.org/), and the Sorenson (http://www.smgf.org/) databases.
Note that frequencies obtained from these additional database searchers provide only approximate figures given that their web-interfaces were not conceived specifically for population genetic purposes (e.g. forensic casework in the case of EMPOP).
Acknowledgments
We greatly thank all the sample contributors in Guatemala. JS was supported by research grants from the German FAZIT-STIFTUNG and the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD). VAI was supported by funding from the EUROFORGEN project and the Xunta de Galicia (EM 2012/045). The research leading to these results has received funding from the People Program (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program FP7/2007-2013/ under REA grant agreement n° 290344, and the grants from the “Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación” (SAF2008-02971) from the Plan Galego IDT, Xunta de Galicia (EM 2012/045) given to AS.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4422311/
Adobe bricks (mud bricks) are a long time New Mexico architectural building staple. Modern historic preservation efforts within Santa Fe’s historic district are to be commended for their preservation. New Mexico visitors travel with high expectations to see and experience ancient traditions of culture which adobe bricks encase and accurately preserve.
Made of earth, traditional adobe bricks have a high clay content and straw mixture. If produced manually the earth mix is cast in open moulds onto the ground and left to be sun-dried, not kiln-fired.
When used for construction they are laid up into a wall using an earth mortar. Before drying out, the finished walls are smoothed down and often a clay render applied as a surface coating.
Adobe brick building is an ancient technique common in the Americas and the Middle East. The oldest structural ruins made of earth date back to 8300 BC with some adobe buildings aged 800+ years still in use today! “Adobe” is a signature of Santa Fe New Mexico’s architecture and is beautifully preserved in many a historic building such as the De Vargas Street House (aka Oldest House in the USA).
Built in 1200 CE, the original adobe home sits on the partial foundation of an ancient Indian Pueblo. Modern day use as a museum provides New Mexico visitors a viewing of this ancient art of adobe building. The De Vargas Street House has quiet a history and is a short stroll from Pueblo Bonito Inn- Santa Fe.
The Palace of the Governors (1610) is an adobe structure located on the north side of Santa Fe’s Plaza. The Palace of the Governors served as the seat of government for the state of New Mexico for centuries and is the oldest continuously occupied public building in the United States.
The Palace originally served the Spanish colony of Nuevo Mexico, which at one time comprised present-day states of Texas, Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Nevada,California, and New Mexico.
After the Mexican War of Independence, the Mexican province of Santa Fe de Nuevo Mexico was administered from the Palace of the Governors. When New Mexico was annexed as a U.S. territory the Palace became New Mexico’s first territorial capitol.*
“Adobe” is the Spanish name derived from the older Arabic “al-tob”, dating from the Moorish occupation of Spain. Adobe walls have a number of advantages and relatively few disadvantages. Adobe bricks are fireproof, durable and biodegradable!
Adobe is a non-toxic building material and can provide sufficient thermal mass to ensure excellent thermal efficiency and low sound transmission levels through walls to create a general feeling of solidity and security.
Due to the nature of clay and the drying process, adobe bricks exhibits good water resistance. It is important to provide weather protection to extend life to the adobe brick especially in exposed situations.
Adobe can be cut relatively easily to provide for fittings or services like vigas, corbels, pass through, etc. Many people today find the pattern and texture of adobe walls very attractive as is the case at Pueblo Bonito bed and breakfast inn.
Accurately highlighting traditional historic Santa Fe culture and adobe living, Pueblo Bonito was originally built in 1860. Once a private residence, now a popular downtown bed and breakfast. Its painstaking preservation efforts over the past 30 years has transformed this massive 2 foot thick adobe walled structure into a one of a kind Santa Fe travel experience!
Adobe walls surround 18 guest rooms each with a traditional kiva fireplace and adorable mosaic tiled private bathroom-essential modern conveniences!
Traditional room features include: colorful nichos vanities, natural wood floors and vigas, hand plastered nichos and bancos, hand carved corbels and much more. Santa Fe, New Mexico is a top historic treasure for US travel buffs wanting to experience a true slice of historic dating back over 400 years.
...
5 Reasons Why You Are Seeing 4:44 – The Meaning of 444 – Willow ...
https://willowsoul.com/blogs/.../5-reasons-why-you-are-seeing-4-44-the-meaning-of-44...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.