Better together: Thinking anthropologically about genetics

Algee‐Hewitt, Bridget F. B.; Goldberg, Amy

doi:10.1002/ajpa.23022

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To this point, Algee‐Hewitt and Goldberg () suggest that we remember to think about genetics anthropologically, meaning that we should be mindful to employ our unique understanding of human genetic diversity, the falsity of biological race, and human behavior and migration when posing research questions and employing classic statistical modeling in genetics. This call for an integrative approach to human variability and ancestry has been heeded by researchers investigating population histories of contemporary communities.…”

Section: Toward An Anthropologically Minded Geneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reimaging Process in 2016: Deliberations on a Year of Integrative Slow Science in Biological Anthropology

Nelson

2017

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The year 2016 in biological anthropology represented a return to the methodical study of classic questions and increased integrative team-based research that utilizes multiple methodological approaches. This review is not comprehensive, but rather highlights several papers that reflect trends in four areas of research within biological anthropology: paleoanthropology, primatology, human biology, and anthropological genetics. Methodological innovation enabled scholars in paleoanthropology to tackle questions once hampered by small sample size. Primatologists approached studies of behavior and reproduction with the rigor characteristic of the subdiscipline, while paying increasing attention to anthropogenic influences on primate habitats. Like their colleagues in paleoanthropology, human biologists also returned to enduring questions regarding reproduction, human adaptation, and behavior, including, notably, a focus on variability in cultural practice and meaning, as well as resource inequity. The publications representing anthropological genetics signify a movement toward an incorporation of multiple lines of evidence in our understanding of human and nonhuman primate ancestry. In total, these papers reveal shifts in biological anthropology toward research that is increasingly aware of the limits of siloed science and attuned to addressing issues salient to the populations and communities in which we work. [comparative morphology, Anthropocene, anthropological genetics, human biology] RESUMEN El año 2016 en la antropología biológica representó un retorno al estudio metódico de cuestiones clásicas, y a la creciente investigación integradora basada en equipos que utiliza múltiples aproximaciones metodológicas. Esta revisión no es exhaustiva, sino que más bien destaca varios artículos que reflejan tendencias en cuatroáreas de investigación dentro de la antropología biológica: paleoantropología, primatología, biología humana, y genética antropológica. La innovación metodológica le permitió a los investigadores en paleoantropología abordar cuestiones antes obstaculizadas por pequeños tamaños de muestra. Los primatólogos se aproximaron a los estudios de comportamiento y reproducción con el rigor característico de la subdisciplina, a la vez que prestando una creciente atención a las influencias antropogénicas sobre los hábitats de los primates. Como sus colegas en paleoantropología, los biólogos humanos también retornaron a cuestiones recurrentes con relación a la reproducción, adaptación humana, y comportamiento, incluyendo, notablemente, un enfoque en la variabilidad en las prácticas y significados culturales, así como en la inequidad de los recursos. Las publicaciones representando la genética antropológica, indican un movimiento hacia la incorporación de múltiples líneas de evidencia en nuestro entendimiento de la ascendencia de primates humanos y no humanos. En total, estos artículos revelan cambios en la antropología biológica hacia la investigación que está cada vez más consciente de los límites de una ciencia

show abstract

Section: Toward An Anthropologically Minded Geneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reimaging Process in 2016: Deliberations on a Year of Integrative Slow Science in Biological Anthropology

Nelson

2017

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Geographic substructure in craniometric estimates of admixture for contemporary American populations

Algee‐Hewitt

2017

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is considerable variation in admixture estimates, not just between, but notably within, all four of the populations. This substructure can be explained by differences in geography, including regions, divisions, and states. This article's findings agree with census trends and speak broadly to admixture dynamics and ancestral diversity among contemporary Americans. They are also specifically relevant to those cases in the FDB. The presence of subpopulations has implications for cranial research, forensic identification, and studies of biological variation in the United States.

show abstract

Exchanging fluids

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of evolutionary influences on patterns of human mating, social interactions, and differential health is increasing, yet these insights have rarely been applied to historical analyses of human population dynamics. The genetic and evolutionary forces behind biases in interethnic mating and in the health of individuals of different ethnic groups in Latin America and the Caribbean since the European colonization of America are still largely ignored. We discuss how historical and contemporary sociocultural interactions and practices are strongly influenced by population-level evolutionary forces. Specifically, we discuss the historical implications of functional (de facto) polygyny, sex-biased admixture, and assortative mating in Latin America. We propose that these three evolutionary mechanisms influenced mating patterns, shaping the genetic and cultural landscape across Latin America and the Caribbean. Further, we discuss how genetic differences between the original populations that migrated at different times into Latin America contributed to their accommodation to and survival in the different local ecologies and interethnic interactions. Relevant medical and social implications follow from the genetic and cultural changes reviewed.

show abstract

Better together: Thinking anthropologically about genetics

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Reimaging Process in 2016: Deliberations on a Year of Integrative Slow Science in Biological Anthropology

Reimaging Process in 2016: Deliberations on a Year of Integrative Slow Science in Biological Anthropology

Geographic substructure in craniometric estimates of admixture for contemporary American populations

Exchanging fluids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About