Search This Blog

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Recent African origin of modern humans (Out of Africa)


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In paleoanthropology, the recent African origin of modern humans, or the "out of Africa" theory (OOA), is the most widely accepted model of the geographic origin and early migration of anatomically modern humans. The theory is called the "out-of-Africa" theory in the popular press, and the "recent single-origin hypothesis" (RSOH), "replacement hypothesis", or "recent African origin model" (RAO) by experts in the field. The concept was speculative before it was corroborated in the 1980s by a study of present-day mitochondrial DNA, combined with evidence based on physical anthropology of archaic specimens.

Genetic studies and fossil evidence show that archaic Homo sapiens evolved to anatomically modern humans solely in Africa between 200,000 and 60,000 years ago,[1] that members of one branch of Homo sapiens left Africa at some point between 125,000 and 60,000 years ago, and that over time these humans replaced more primitive populations of the genus Homo such as Neanderthals and Homo erectus.[2] The date of the earliest successful "out of Africa" migration (earliest migrants with living descendants) has generally been placed at 60,000 years ago based on genetics, but migration out of the continent may have taken place as early as 125,000 years ago according to Arabian archaeological finds of tools in the region.[3]

The recent single origin of modern humans in East Africa is the predominant position held within the scientific community.[4][5][6][7][8] There are differing theories on whether there was a single exodus or several. A growing number of researchers also suspect that "long-neglected North Africa" was the original home of the modern humans who first trekked out of the continent.[9][10][11]

The major competing hypothesis is the multiregional origin of modern humans, which envisions a wave of Homo sapiens migrating earlier from Africa and interbreeding with local Homo erectus populations in multiple regions of the globe. Most multiregionalists still view Africa as a major wellspring of human genetic diversity, but allow a much greater role for hybridization.[12][13]

Genetic testing in the last decade has revealed that several now extinct archaic human species may have interbred with modern humans. These species have been claimed to have left their genetic imprint in different regions across the world: Neanderthals in all humans except Sub-Saharan Africans, Denisova hominin in Australasia (for example, Melanesians, Aboriginal Australians and some Negritos) and there could also have been interbreeding between Sub-Saharan Africans and an as-yet-unknown hominin (possibly remnants of the ancient species Homo heidelbergensis). However, the rate of interbreeding was found to be relatively low (1-10%) and other studies have suggested that the presence of Neanderthal or other archaic human genetic markers in modern humans can be attributed to shared ancestral traits originating from a common ancestor 500,000 to 800,000 years ago.[14][15][16][17][18]

History of the theory

With the development of anthropology in the early 19th century, scholars disagreed vigorously about different theories of human development. Those such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach and James Cowles Prichard held that since the creation, the various human races had developed as different varieties sharing descent from one people (monogenism). Their opponents, such as Louis Agassiz and Josiah C. Nott, argued for polygenism, or the separate development of human races as separate species or had developed as separate species through transmutation of species from apes, with no common ancestor.


The frontispiece to Huxley's Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature (1863): the image compares the skeletons of apes to humans.

Charles Darwin was one of the first to propose common descent of living organisms, and among the first to suggest that all humans had in common ancestors who lived in Africa.[19] Darwin first suggested the "Out of Africa" hypothesis after studying the behaviour of African apes, one of which was displayed at the London Zoo. The anatomist Thomas Huxley had also supported the hypothesis and suggested that African apes have a close evolutionary relationship with humans.[20] These views were however opposed by Ernst Haeckel the German biologist who was a proponent of the Out of Asia theory. Haeckel argued that humans were more closely related to the primates of Southeast Asia and rejected Darwin’s hypothesis of Africa.[21][22]

In the Descent of Man, Darwin speculated that humans had descended from apes which still had small brains but walked upright, freeing their hands for uses which favoured intelligence. Further, he thought such apes were African:[23]
In each great region of the world the living mammals are closely related to the extinct species of the same region. It is, therefore, probable that Africa was formerly inhabited by extinct apes closely allied to the gorilla and chimpanzee; and as these two species are now man's nearest allies, it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived on the African continent than elsewhere. But it is useless to speculate on this subject, for an ape nearly as large as a man, namely the Dryopithecus of Lartet, which was closely allied to the anthropomorphous Hylobates, existed in Europe during the Upper Miocene period; and since so remote a period the earth has certainly undergone many great revolutions, and there has been ample time for migration on the largest scale.
—Charles Darwin, Descent of Man[24]
The prediction was insightful, because in 1871 there were hardly any human fossils of ancient hominids available. Almost fifty years later, Darwin's speculation was supported when anthropologists began finding numerous fossils of ancient small-brained hominids in several areas of Africa (list of hominina fossils).

The debate in anthropology had swung in favour of monogenism by the mid-20th century. Isolated proponents of polygenism held forth in the mid-20th century, such as Carleton Coon, who hypothesized as late as 1962 that Homo sapiens arose five times from Homo erectus in five places.[25] The "Recent African origin" of modern humans means "single origin" (monogenism) and has been used in various contexts as an antonym to polygenism.

In the 1980s Allan Wilson together with Rebecca L. Cann and Mark Stoneking worked on the so-called "Mitochondrial Eve" hypothesis. In his efforts to identify informative genetic markers for tracking human evolutionary history, he started to focus on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) – genes that sit in the cell, but not in the nucleus, and are passed from mother to child. This DNA material is important because it mutates quickly, thus making it easy to plot changes over relatively short time spans. By comparing differences in the mtDNA Wilson believed it was possible to estimate the time, and the place, modern humans first evolved. With his discovery that human mtDNA is genetically much less diverse than chimpanzee mtDNA, he concluded that modern human populations had diverged recently from a single population while older human species such as Neandertals and Homo erectus had become extinct. He and his team compared mtDNA in people of different ancestral backgrounds and concluded that all modern humans evolved from one 'lucky mother' in Africa about 150,000 years ago.[26] With the advent of archaeogenetics in the 1990s, scientists were able to date the "out of Africa" migration with some confidence.

In 2000, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence of "Mungo Man 3" (LM3) of ancient Australia was published indicating that Mungo Man was an extinct subspecies that diverged before the most recent common ancestor of contemporary humans. The results, if correct, supports the multiregional origin of modern humans hypothesis.[27][28] This work was later questioned[29][30] and explained by W. James Peacock, leader of the team who sequenced Mungo man's aDNA.[31] In addition, a large-scale genotyping analysis of aboriginal Australians, New Guineans, Southeast Asians and Indians in 2013 showed close genetic relationship between Australian, New Guinean, and the Mamanwa people, with divergence times for these groups estimated at 36,000 y ago. Further, substantial gene flow was detected between the Indian populations and aboriginal Australians, indicating an early "southern route" migration out of Africa, and arrival of other populations in the region by subsequent dispersal. This basically opposes the view that there was an isolated human evolution in Australia.[32]

The question of whether there was inheritance of other typological (not de facto) Homo subspecies into the Homo sapiens genetic pool is debated.

Early Homo sapiens

Anatomical comparison of the skulls of a modern human (left) and Homo neanderthalensis (right).

Anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 250,000 years ago. The trend in cranial expansion and the acheulean elaboration of stone tool technologies which occurred between 400,000 years ago and the second interglacial period in the Middle Pleistocene (around 250,000 years ago) provide evidence for a transition from H. erectus to H. sapiens.[33] In the Recent African Origin (RAO) scenario, migration within and out of Africa eventually replaced the earlier dispersed H. erectus.

Homo sapiens idaltu, found at site Middle Awash in Ethiopia, lived about 160,000 years ago.[34] It is the oldest known anatomically modern human and classified as an extinct subspecies.[35] Fossils of early Homo sapiens were found in Qafzeh cave in Israel and have been dated to 80,000 to 100,000 years ago. However these humans seem to have either become extinct or retreated back to Africa 70,000 to 80,000 years ago, possibly replaced by south bound Neanderthals escaping the colder regions of ice age Europe.[36] Hua Liu et al. analyzed autosomal microsatellite markers dates to c. 56,000±5,700 years ago mtDNA evidence. He interprets the paleontological fossil of early modern human from Qafzeh cave as an isolated early offshoot that retracted back to Africa.[37]

All other fossils of fully modern humans outside Africa have been dated to more recent times. The oldest well dated fossil of modern humans found outside Africa is from Manot Cave in Israel, named Manot 1, which have been dated to 54,700 years ago.[38][39] Fossils from Lake Mungo, Australia have been dated to about 42,000 years ago.[40][41] The Tianyuan cave remains in Liujiang region China have a probable date range between 38,000 and 42,000 years ago. They are most similar in morphology to Minatogawa Man, modern humans dated between 17,000 and 19,000 years ago and found on Okinawa Island, Japan.[42][43] However, others have dated Liujang Man to 111,000 to 139,000 years before the present.[44]

Beginning about 100,000 years ago evidence of more sophisticated technology and artwork begins to emerge and by 50,000 years ago fully modern behaviour becomes more prominent. Stone tools show regular patterns that are reproduced or duplicated with more precision while tools made of bone and antler appear for the first time.[45][46]

Genetic reconstruction

Two pieces of the human genome are quite useful in deciphering human history: mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome. These are the only two parts of the genome that are not shuffled about by the evolutionary mechanisms that generate diversity with each generation: instead, these elements are passed down intact. According to the hypothesis, all people alive today have inherited the same mitochondria[47] from a woman who lived in Africa about 160,000 years ago.[48][49] She has been named Mitochondrial Eve. All men living today have inherited their Y chromosomes from a man who lived 140,000–500,000 years ago, probably in Africa. He has been named Y-chromosomal Adam. Based on comparisons of non-sex-specific chromosomes with sex-specific ones, it is now believed that more men than women participated in the out-of-Africa exodus of early humans.[50]

Mitochondrial DNA

Map of early diversification of modern humans according to mitochondrial population genetics (see: Haplogroup L).

The first lineage to branch off from Mitochondrial Eve is L0. This haplogroup is found in high proportions among the San of Southern Africa, the Sandawe of East Africa. It is also found among the Mbuti people.[51][52]

These groups branched off early in human history and have remained relatively genetically isolated since then. Haplogroups L1, L2 and L3 are descendents of L1-6 and are largely confined to Africa. The macro haplogroups M and N, which are the lineages of the rest of the world outside Africa, descend from L3. L3 is about 84,000 years old, and haplogroup M and N are almost identical in age at about 63,000 years old. [53]

Genomic analysis

Although mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal DNA are particularly useful in deciphering human history, data on the genomes of dozens of population groups have also been studied. In June 2009, an analysis of genome-wide SNP data from the International HapMap Project (Phase II) and CEPH Human Genome Diversity Panel samples was published.[54] Those samples were taken from 1138 unrelated individuals.[54] Before this analysis, population geneticists expected to find dramatic differences among ethnic groups, with derived alleles shared among such groups but uncommon or nonexistent in other groups.[55] Instead the study of 53 populations taken from the HapMap and CEPH data revealed that the population groups studied fell into just three genetic groups: Africans, Eurasians (which includes natives of Europe and the Middle East, and Southwest Asians east to present-day Pakistan), and East Asians, which includes natives of Asia, Japan, Southeast Asia, the Americas, and Oceania.[55]
The study determined that most ethnic group differences can be attributed to genetic drift, with modern African populations having greater genetic diversity than the other two genetic groups, and modern Eurasians somewhat more than modern East Asians.[55] The study suggested that natural selection may shape the human genome much more slowly than previously thought, with factors such as migration within and among continents more heavily influencing the distribution of genetic variations.[56] A May 2002 study examined three groups, African, European, and Asian. It found greater genetic diversity among Africans than among Eurasians, and that genetic diversity among Eurasians is largely a subset of that among Africans, supporting the 'out of Africa' model.[57]

Movement out of Africa


Red Sea crossing

By some 70,000 years ago, a part of the bearers of mitochondrial haplogroup L3 migrated from East Africa into the Near East. The date of this first wave of "out of Africa" migration was called into question in 2011, based on the discovery of stone tools in the United Arab Emirates, indicating the presence of modern humans between 100,000 and 125,000 years ago.[3][58] New research showing slower than previously thought genetic mutations in human DNA published in 2012, indicating a revised dating for the migration of between 90,000 and 130,000 years ago.[59]

Some scientists believe that only a few people left Africa in a single migration that went on to populate the rest of the world,[60] based in the fact that only descendents of L3 are found outside Africa. From that settlement, some others point to the possibility of several waves of expansion. For example, geneticist Spencer Wells says that the early travellers followed the southern coastline of Asia, crossed about 250 kilometres (155 mi) of sea, and colonized Australia by around 50,000 years ago. The Aborigines of Australia, Wells says, are the descendants of the first wave of migrations.[61]

It has been estimated that from a population of 2,000 to 5,000 individuals in Africa,[62] only a small group, possibly as few as 150 to 1,000 people, crossed the Red Sea.[63] Of all the lineages present in Africa only the female descendants of one lineage, mtDNA haplogroup L3, are found outside Africa. If there had been several migrations, one would expect descendants of more than one lineage to be found outside Africa. L3's female descendants, the M and N haplogroup lineages, are found in very low frequencies in Africa (although haplogroup M1 populations are very ancient and diversified in North and Northeast Africa) and appear to be more recent arrivals. A possible explanation is that these mutations occurred in East Africa shortly before the exodus and became the dominant haplogroups after the exodus from Africa through the founder effect. Alternatively, the mutations may have arisen shortly after the exodus from Africa.

Other scientists have proposed a multiple dispersal model according to which there were two migrations out of Africa, one across the Red Sea and along the coastal regions to India (the coastal route), which would be represented by haplogroup M. Another group of migrants with haplogroup N followed the Nile from East Africa, heading northwards and crossing into Asia through the Sinai. This group then branched in several directions, some moving into Europe and others heading east into Asia. This hypothesis is supported by the relatively late date of the arrival of modern humans in Europe as well as by both archaeological and DNA evidence. Results from mtDNA collected from aboriginal Malaysians called Orang Asli and the creation of a phylogentic tree indicate that the hapologroups M and N share characteristics with original African groups from approximately 85,000 years ago and share characteristics with sub-haplogroups among coastal southeast Asian regions, such as Australasia, the Indian Subcontinent, and throughout continental Asia, which had dispersed and separated from its African origins approximately 65,000 years ago. This southern coastal dispersion would have occurred before the original theory of dispersion through the Levant approximately 45,000 years ago.[64] This hypothesis attempts to explain why haplogroup N is predominant in Europe and why haplogroup M is absent in Europe. Evidence of the coastal migration is hypothesized to have been destroyed by the rise in sea levels during the Holocene epoch.[65][66] Alternatively, a small European founder population that initially expressed both haplogroup M and N could have lost haplogroup M through random genetic drift resulting from a bottleneck (i.e. a founder effect).

Today at the Bab-el-Mandeb straits, the Red Sea is about 20 kilometres (12 mi) wide, but 50,000 years ago sea levels were 70 m (230 ft) lower (owing to glaciation) and the water was much narrower. Though the straits were never completely closed, they were narrow enough and there may have been islands in between to have enabled crossing using simple rafts.[67][68] Shell middens 125,000 years old have been found in Eritrea,[69] indicating the diet of early humans included seafood obtained by beachcombing.

Subsequent expansion

Map of early human migrations[70]
1. Homo sapiens
2. Neanderthals
3. Early Hominids

From the Near East, these populations spread east to South Asia by 50,000 years ago, and on to Australia by 40,000 years ago, Homo sapiens for the first time colonizing territory never reached by Homo erectus. Europe was reached by Cro-Magnon some 40,000 years ago. East Asia (Korea, Japan) was reached by 30,000 years ago. It is disputed whether subsequent migration to North America took place around 30,000 years ago, or only considerably later, around 14,000 years ago.[71]

The group that crossed the Red Sea travelled along the coastal route around the coast of Arabia and Persia until reaching India, which appears to be the first major settling point. Haplogroup M is found in high frequencies along the southern coastal regions of Pakistan and India and it has the greatest diversity in India, indicating that it is here where the mutation may have occurred.[72] Sixty percent of the Indian population belong to Haplogroup M.

The indigenous people of the Andaman Islands also belong to the M lineage. The Andamanese are thought to be offshoots of some of the earliest inhabitants in Asia because of their long isolation from mainland Asia. They are evidence of the coastal route of early settlers that extends from India along the coasts of Thailand and Indonesia all the way to Papua New Guinea. Since M is found in high frequencies in highlanders from New Guinea as well, and both the Andamanese and New Guineans have dark skin and Afro-textured hair, some scientists believe they are all part of the same wave of migrants who departed across the Red Sea ~60,000 years ago in the Great Coastal Migration.

Notably, the findings of Harding et al.[73] show that, at least with regard to dark skin color, the haplotype background of Papua New Guineans at MC1R (one of a number of genes involved in melanin production) is identical to that of Africans (barring a single silent mutation). Thus, although these groups are distinct from Africans at other loci (due to drift, bottlenecks, etc.), it is evident that selection for the dark skin color trait likely continued (at least at MC1R) following the exodus. This would support the hypothesis that suggests that the original migrants from Africa resembled pre-exodus Africans (at least in skin color), and that the present day remnants of this ancient phenotype can be seen among contemporary Africans, Andamanese and New Guineans. Others suggest that their physical resemblance to Africans could be the result of convergent evolution.[74][75]

From Arabia to India the proportion of haplogroup M increases eastwards: in eastern India, M outnumbers N by a ratio of 3:1. However, crossing over into East Asia, Haplogroup N reappears as the dominant lineage. M is predominant in South East Asia but amongst Indigenous Australians N reemerges as the more common lineage. This discontinuous distribution of Haplogroup N from Europe to Australia can be explained by founder effects and population bottlenecks.[76] In addition to genetic analysis, Petraglia et al. also examines the microlithic materials from Indian subcontinent and explains the expansion of population based on the reconstruction of paleoenvironment. He proposed that microlithic industries could be traced back to 35ka in South Asia, and the new technology might be influenced by environmental change and population pressure.[77]

Competing hypotheses

The multiregional hypothesis, initially proposed by Milford Wolpoff, holds that the evolution of humans from H. erectus at the beginning of the Pleistocene 1.8 million years BP has been within a single, continuous worldwide population. Proponents of multiregional origin reject the assumption of an infertility barrier between ancient Eurasian and African populations of Homo. Multiregional proponents point to the fossil record and genetic evidence in chromosomal DNA. One study suggested that at least 5% of the human modern gene pool can be attributed to ancient admixture, which in Europe would be from the Neanderthals.[78] But the study also suggests that there may be other reasons why humans and Neanderthals share ancient genetic lineages.[79][80]

Tesla’s Ultra-Speed Hyperloop Transportation System Will Change Transportation As We Know It



hyperloop-quay-valley-elon-musk
Elon Musk is at it again. Next year the construction of an innovative, ultra-speed transportation system called Hyperloop will commence in central California. It is the world’s first supersonic overland transport system, with the ability to reach speeds up to 800 mph.

Like most other Musk-inspired creations, the Hyperloop concept seems like something straight out of the future.

We feel now that we’re at a stage where questions are answered on a theoretical level so now we’re moving on to prototyping,” Dirk Ahlborn, CEO of Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HTT), told IBTimes UK.

To begin, the first 5-mile stretch Hyperloop system will begin construction in 2016 in a brand-new sustainable community called Quay Valley, located between Los Angeles and San Francisco.

This five-mile stretch will allow us to completely test the technology, from the boarding process to the safety procedures – really everything except top speed,” Ahlborn said.


hyperloop

Musk’s vision sees the Hyperloop as a 400-mile long network of above-ground tubes with very low air pressure inside them, which allows bus-sized capsules to travel through those tubes at near supersonic speeds (approaching 800 mph).

When built, the full-scale version of the vacuum transportation network will take passengers and freight at speeds of up to 760mph.  The system is being deemed as a 1000% improvement on today’s transport.

We will move people and cargo at speeds never thought possible. We will make the world smaller, cleaner and more efficient,” states HTT on their official website.

Beyond the US, dozens of other countries have expressed an interest in Hyperloop, including China and the United Arab Emirates. For Ahlborn, these countries offer the most hope for full-scale systems being implemented because, “if they decide to build something like Hyperloop, they just build it.”

Almost 200 engineers from NASA, Yahoo!, and Airbus are involved in the project realization. There is also a group of 25 students from University of California (UCLA) working on different issues including cost estimation, route planning, and capsule design.

 hyperloop-htt-musk-quay-valley

This proposed transportation system is extraordinary, with a glowing potential to change the way the world commutes as we know it. Someone in New York could simply hop on and be in Miami in under 2 hours, or Los Angeles in just over 3 hours. Not to mention how much more affordable this type of transportation will likely be compared to flying. We are so excited about this! Stay tuned for more updates on the Hyperloop as things progress.

New Guinea


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Guinea
(Papua Island)
LocationNewGuinea.svg
Geography
Location Melanesia
Coordinates 5°30′S 141°00′E / 5.500°S 141.000°E / -5.500; 141.000Coordinates: 5°30′S 141°00′E / 5.500°S 141.000°E / -5.500; 141.000
Archipelago Malay archipelago
Area 786,000 km2 (303,000 sq mi)
Area rank 2nd
Highest elevation 4,884 m (16,024 ft)
Highest point Puncak Jaya
Country
Provinces Papua
West Papua
Largest settlement Jayapura
Provinces Central
Simbu
Eastern Highlands
East Sepik
Enga
Gulf
Hela
Jiwaka
Madang
Morobe
Oro
Southern Highlands
Western
Western Highlands
West Sepik
Milne Bay
National Capital District
Largest city Port Moresby
Demographics
Population ~ 11,306,940 (as of 2014)
Density 14 /km2 (36 /sq mi)
Ethnic groups Papuan and Austronesian

New Guinea (also, Tok Pisin: Niugini, Dutch: Nieuw-Guinea, and Indonesian: Papua; historically: Irian/ Irian Jaya) is a large Island in the southwest Pacific Ocean. It is the world's second-largest island, after Greenland, covering a land area of 786,000 km2.

Names

The island has been known by various names.

The name Papua was used to refer to parts of the island before contact with the West.[1] Its etymology is unclear;[1] one theory is that it is from Tidore, the language used by the Sultanate of Tidore, which controlled parts of the island's coastal region.[2] The name came from papo (to unite) and ua (negation), which means not united or, territory that geographically is far away (and thus not united).[2]

Ploeg reports that the word papua is often said to derive from the Malay word papua or pua-pua, meaning 'frizzly-haired', referring to the highly curly hair of the inhabitants of these areas.[3] Another possibility, (put forward by Sollewijn Gelpke in 1993) is that it comes from the Biak phrase sup i papwa which means 'the land below [the sunset]' and refers to the islands west of the Bird's Head, as far as Halmahera. Whatever the origin of the name Papua, it came to be associated with this area, and more especially with Halmahera, which was known to the Portuguese by this name during the era of their colonization in this part of the world.

When the Portuguese and Spanish explorers arrived in the island via the Spice Islands, they also referred to the island as Papua.[2] However, the name New Guinea would later be used by Westerners starting with the Spanish explorer Íñigo Ortíz de Retes in 1545, referring to the similarities of the indigenous people's appearance with the natives of the Guinea region of Africa.[2] The Dutch, who arrived later under Lemaire and Schouten, called it Schouten island, but later this name is used only to refer to islands to the north of the coast of Papua proper, the Schouten Islands or Biak Island. When the Dutch colonized it as part of Netherlands East Indies, they called it Nieuw Guinea.[2]

The name Irian was used in the Indonesian language to refer the island and Indonesian province, as "Irian Jaya province". The name was promoted in 1945 by Marcus Kaisiepo,[1] brother of the future governor Frans Kaisiepo. It is taken from the Biak language of Biak Island, and means to rise, or rising spirit. This name of Irian is the name used in the Biak language and other languages such as Serui, Merauke and Waropen languages.[2] The name was used until 2001, when the name Papua was again used for the island and the province. The name Irian, which was originally favored by natives, is now considered to be a name imposed by the authority of Jakarta.[1]

Geography


New Guinea located with respect to Melanesia

Topographical map of New Guinea.

New Guinea is an island in the north of the continent of Australia. It is isolated by the Arafura Sea to the west and the Torres Strait and Coral Sea to the east. Sometimes considered to be the easternmost island of the Malay archipelago, it lies north of Australia's Top End, Gulf of Carpentaria and Cape York peninsula, and west of the Bismarck Archipelago and the Solomon Islands Archipelago.

The shape of New Guinea is often compared to that of a bird of paradise, and this results in the usual names for the two extremes of the island: the Bird's Head Peninsula in the northwest (Vogelkop in Dutch, Kepala Burung in Indonesian; also known as the Doberai Peninsula), and the Bird's Tail Peninsula in the southeast (also known as the Papuan Peninsula).

A spine of east–west mountains, the New Guinea Highlands, dominates the geography of New Guinea, stretching over 1,600 km (1,000 mi) from the 'head' to the 'tail' of the island. The western half of the island of New Guinea contains the highest mountains in Oceania, rising up to 4,884 m (16,024 ft) high, and ensuring a steady supply of rain from the equatorial atmosphere. The tree line is around 4,000 m (13,100 ft) elevation and the tallest peaks contain permanent equatorial glaciers—which have been retreating since at least 1936.[4][5][6] Various other smaller mountain ranges occur both north and west of the central ranges. Except in high elevations, most areas possess a warm humid climate throughout the year, with some seasonal variation associated with the northeast monsoon season.

The highest peaks on the island of New Guinea are:
  • Puncak Jaya, sometimes known by its former Dutch name Carstensz Pyramid, is a mist covered limestone mountain peak on the Indonesian side of the border. At 4,884 metres (16,024 ft), Puncak Jaya makes New Guinea the world's fourth highest landmass.
  • Puncak Mandala, located in Papua, is the second highest peak on the island at 4,760 metres (15,617 ft).
  • Puncak Trikora, also in Papua, is 4,750 metres (15,584 ft).
  • Mount Wilhelm is the highest peak on the PNG side of the border at 4,509 metres (14,793 ft). Its granite peak is the highest point of the Bismarck Range.
  • Mount Giluwe 4,368 metres (14,331 ft) is the second highest summit in PNG. It is also the highest volcanic peak in Oceania.
Another major habitat feature is the vast southern and northern lowlands. Stretching for hundreds of kilometres, these include lowland rainforests, extensive wetlands, savanna grasslands, and some of the largest expanses of mangrove forest in the world. The southern lowlands are the site of Lorentz National Park, also a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The northern lowlands are drained principally by the Mamberamo River and its tributaries on the Indonesian side, and by the Sepik on the PNG side; the more extensive southern lowlands by a larger number of rivers, principally the Digul on the Indonesian side and the Fly on the PNG side. These are the island's major river systems, draining roughly northwest, northeast, southwest, and southeast, respectively. Many have broad areas of meander and result in large areas of lakes and freshwater swamps. The largest island offshore, Dolak (Frederik Hendrik, Yos Sudarso), lies near the Digul estuary, separated by a straight so narrow it has been named a "creek".
New Guinea contains many of the world’s ecosystem types: glacial, alpine tundra, savanna, montane and lowland rainforest, mangroves, wetlands, lake and river ecosystems, seagrasses, and some of the richest coral reefs on the planet.

Prior to the 1970s, archaeologists called the single Pleistocene landmass by the name Australasia,[7] although this word is most often used for a wider region that includes lands like New Zealand that are not on the same continental shelf. In the early 1970s, they introduced the term Greater Australia for the Pleistocene continent.[7] Then, at a 1975 conference and consequent publication,[8] they extended the name Sahul from its previous use for just the Sahul Shelf to cover the continent.[7]

Relation to surroundings

The Island of New Guinea lies to the east of the Malay Archipelago, with which it is sometimes included as part of a greater Indo-Australian Archipelago.[9] Geologically it is a part of the same tectonic plate as Australia. When world sea levels were low, the two shared shorelines (which now lie 100 to 140 metres below sea level),[10] combining with lands now inundated into the tectonic continent of Sahul,[7][8] also known as Greater Australia.[11]
The two landmasses became separated when the area now known as the Torres Strait flooded after the end of the last glacial period.

Anthropologically, New Guinea is considered part of Melanesia.[12]

Politically, the western half of the island comprises two provinces of Indonesia: Papua and West Papua. The eastern half forms the mainland of the country of Papua New Guinea.

New Guinea is differentiated from its drier, flatter,[13] and less fertile[14][15] southern counterpart, Australia, by its much higher rainfall and its active volcanic geology, with its highest point, Puncak Jaya, reaching an elevation of 4,884 m (16,023 ft). Yet the two land masses share a similar animal fauna, with marsupials, including wallabies and possums, and the egg-laying monotreme, the spiny anteater, or echidna. Other than bats and some two dozen indigenous rodent genera,[16] there are no pre-human indigenous placental mammals. Pigs, several additional species of rats, and the ancestor of the New Guinea singing dog were introduced with human colonization.

Human presence

The human presence on the island dates back at least 40,000 years to the oldest human migrations out of Africa. Research indicates that the highlands were an early and independent center of agriculture, with evidence of irrigation going back at least 10,000 years.[17] Because of the time depth of its inhabitation and its highly fractured landscape, an unusually high number of languages are spoken on the island, with some 1,000 languages (a figure higher than that of most continents) having been catalogued out of an estimated world-wide pre-Columbian total of 6,000 human dialects. Most are classified as Papuan languages, a generally accepted geographical term that a minority of authors hold to be a genetic one. A number of Austronesian languages are spoken on the coast and on offshore islands.

In the 16th century, Spanish explorers arrived at the island and called it Nueva Guinea. In recent history, western New Guinea was included in the Dutch East Indies colony. The Germans annexed the northern coast of the eastern half of the island as German New Guinea in their pre–World War I effort to establish themselves as a colonial power, whilst the south eastern portion was reluctantly claimed by Britain. Following the Treaty of Versailles, the German portion was awarded to Australia (which was already governing the British claim, named the Territory of Papua) as a League of Nations mandate. The eastern half of the island was granted independence from Australia as Papua New Guinea in 1975. The western half gained independence from the Dutch in 1961, but became part of Indonesia soon afterwards in controversial circumstances.[18]

Political divisions


Political divisions of New Guinea

The island of New Guinea is divided politically into roughly equal halves across a north-south line:

People

Dani tribesman in the Baliem Valley

The current population of the island of New Guinea is about eleven million. Many believe human habitation on the island dates to as early as 40,000 B.C.,[19] and first settlement possibly dated back to 60,000 years ago has been proposed. The island is presently populated by almost a thousand different tribal groups and a near-equivalent number of separate languages, which makes New Guinea the most linguistically diverse area in the world. Ethnologue's 14th edition lists 826 languages of Papua New Guinea and 257 languages of Irian Jaya, total 1073 languages, with 12 languages overlapping. They fall into one of two groups, the Papuan languages and the Austronesian languages.

The separation was not merely linguistic; warfare among societies was a factor in the evolution of the men's house: separate housing of groups of adult men, from the single-family houses of the women and children, for mutual protection against the other groups. Pig-based trade between the groups and pig-based feasts are a common theme with the other peoples of southeast Asia and Oceania. Most societies practise agriculture, supplemented by hunting and gathering.

Kurulu Village War Chief at Baliem Valley

The great variety of the island's indigenous populations are frequently assigned to one of two main ethnological divisions, based on archaeological, linguistic and genetic evidence: the Papuan and Austronesian groups.[20]

Current evidence indicates that the Papuans (who constitute the majority of the island's peoples) are descended from the earliest human inhabitants of New Guinea. These original inhabitants first arrived in New Guinea at a time (either side of the Last Glacial Maximum, approx 21,000 years ago) when the island was connected to the Australian continent via a land bridge, forming the landmass known as Sahul. These peoples had made the (shortened) sea-crossing from the islands of Wallacea and Sundaland (the present Malay Archipelago) by at least 40,000 years ago, subsequent to the dispersal of peoples from Africa (circa) 50,000 - 70,000 years ago.[citation needed]

Korowai tribesman

The ancestral Austronesian peoples are believed to have arrived considerably later, approximately 3,500 years ago, as part of a gradual seafaring migration from Southeast Asia, possibly originating in Taiwan. Austronesian-speaking peoples colonized many of the offshore islands to the north and east of New Guinea, such as New Ireland and New Britain, with settlements also on the coastal fringes of the main island in places. Human habitation of New Guinea over tens of thousands of years has led to a great deal of diversity, which was further increased by the later arrival of the Austronesians and the more recent history of European and Asian settlement through events like transmigration. About half of the 2.4 million inhabitants of Indonesian Papua are Javanese migrants.[21]

Large areas of New Guinea are yet to be explored by scientists and anthropologists. The Indonesian province of West Papua is home to an estimated 44 uncontacted tribal groups.[22]

Biodiversity and ecology

With some 786,000 km² of tropical land — less than one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the Earth's surface — New Guinea has an immense biodiversity, containing between 5 and 10 percent of the total species on the planet. This percentage is about the same amount as that found in the United States or Australia. A high percentage of New Guinea's species are endemic, and thousands are still unknown to science: probably well over 200,000 species of insect, between 11,000 to 20,000 plant species, and over 650 resident bird species. Most of these species are shared, at least in their origin, with the continent of Australia, which was until fairly recent geological times, part of the same landmass (see Australia-New Guinea for an overview). The island is so large that it is considered 'nearly a continent' in terms of its biological distinctiveness.
In the period from 1998 to 2008, conservationists identified 1,060 new species in New Guinea, including 218 plants, 43 reptiles, 12 mammals, 580 invertebrates, 134 amphibians, 2 birds and 71 fish.[23]

The western crowned pigeon is native to New Guinea.

The floristic region of Malesia

Biogeographically, New Guinea is part of Australasia rather than the Indomalayan realm, although New Guinea's flora has many more affinities with Asia than its fauna, which is overwhelmingly Australian. Botanically, New Guinea considered part of Malesia, a floristic region that extends from the Malay Peninsula across Indonesia to New Guinea and the East Melanesian Islands. The flora of New Guinea is a mixture of many tropical rainforest species with origins in Asia, together with typically Australasian flora. Typical southern hemisphere flora include the conifers Podocarpus and the rainforest emergents Araucaria and Agathis, as well as tree ferns and several species of Eucalyptus.

New Guinea has 284 species and six orders of mammals: monotremes, three orders of marsupials, rodents and bats; 195 of the mammal species (69%) are endemic. New Guinea has 578 species of breeding birds, of which 324 species are endemic. The island's frogs are one of the most poorly known vertebrate groups, totalling 282 species, but this number is expected to double or even triple when all species have been documented. New Guinea has a rich diversity of coral life and 1,200 species of fish have been found. Also about 600 species of reef-building coral — the latter equal to 75 percent of the world’s known total. The entire coral area covers 18 million hectares off a peninsula in northwest New Guinea.

Ecoregions

Terrestrial

According to the WWF, New Guinea can be divided into twelve terrestrial ecoregions:[24]

Freshwater

The WWF and Nature Conservancy divide New Guinea into five freshwater ecoregions:[25]

Marine

The WWF and Nature Conservancy identify several marine ecoregions in the seas bordering New Guinea:[26]

History

Early history


The continent of Sahul before the rising ocean sundered Australia and New Guinea after the last ice age

The first inhabitants of New Guinea arrived at least around 40,000 years ago, having travelled through the south-east Asian peninsula. These first inhabitants, from whom the Papuan people are probably descended, adapted to the range of ecologies and, in time, developed one of the earliest known agricultures. Remains of this agricultural system, in the form of ancient irrigation systems in the highlands of Papua New Guinea, are being studied by archaeologists. This work is still in its early stages, so there is still uncertainty as to precisely what crop was being grown, or when/where agriculture arose. Sugar cane was cultivated for the first time in New Guinea around 6000 B.C.[27]

The gardens of the New Guinea Highlands are ancient, intensive permacultures, adapted to high population densities, very high rainfalls (as high as 10,000 mm/yr (400 in/yr)), earthquakes, hilly land, and occasional frost. Complex mulches, crop rotations and tillages are used in rotation on terraces with complex irrigation systems. Western agronomists still do not understand all of the practices, and it has been noted that native gardeners are as, or even more, successful than most scientific farmers in raising certain crops.[28] There is evidence that New Guinea gardeners invented crop rotation well before western Europeans.[29] A unique feature of New Guinea permaculture is the silviculture of Casuarina oligodon, a tall, sturdy native ironwood tree, suited to use for timber and fuel, with root nodules that fix nitrogen. Pollen studies show that it was adopted during an ancient period of extreme deforestation.

In more recent millennia, another wave of people arrived on the shores of New Guinea. These were the Austronesian people, who had spread down from Taiwan, through the South-east Asian archipelago, colonising many of the islands on the way. The Austronesian people had technology and skills extremely well adapted to ocean voyaging and Austronesian language speaking people are present along much of the coastal areas and islands of New Guinea. These Austronesian migrants are considered the ancestors of most people in insular Southeast Asia, from Sumatra and Java to Borneo and Sulawesi, as well as coastal new Guinea.[30]

Precolonial history


Group of natives at Mairy Pass. Mainland of British New Guinea in 1885.

Papuans on the Lorentz River, photographed during the third South New Guinea expedition in 1912-13.

The western part of the island was in contact with kingdoms in other parts of modern-day Indonesia. Negarakertagama mentioned the region of Wanin in eastern Nusantara as part of Majapahit's tributary. This has been identified with the Onin Peninsula, part of the Bomberai Peninsula near the city of Fakfak.[31][32] The sultans of Tidore, in Maluku Islands, claimed sovereignty over various coastal parts of the island.[33] During Tidore's rule, the main exports of the island during this period were resins, spices, slaves and the highly priced feathers of the bird-of-paradise.[33] Sultan Nuku, one of the most famous Tidore sultans who rebelled against Dutch colonization, called himself "Sultan of Tidore and Papua",[34] during his revolt in 1780s. He commanded loyalty from both Moluccan and Papuan chiefs, especially those of Raja Ampat Islands. Following Tidore's defeat, much of the territory it claimed in western part of New Guinea come under Dutch rule as part of Dutch East Indies.[34]

European contact

The first European contact with New Guinea was by Portuguese and Spanish sailors in the 16th century. In 1526-27, the Portuguese explorer Jorge de Meneses saw the western tip of New Guinea and named it ilhas dos Papuas. In 1528, the Spanish navigator Álvaro de Saavedra also recorded its sighting when trying to return from Tidore to New Spain. In 1545, the Spaniard Íñigo Ortíz de Retes sailed along the north coast of New Guinea as far as the Mamberamo River, near which he landed on 20 June, naming the island 'Nueva Guinea'.[35] The first map showing the whole island (as an island) was published in 1600 and shows it as 'Nova Guinea'. In 1606, Luís Vaz de Torres explored the southern coast of New Guinea from Milne Bay to the Gulf of Papua including Orangerie Bay, which he named Bahía de San Lorenzo. His expedition also discovered Basilaki Island naming it Tierra de San Buenaventura, which he claimed for Spain in July 1606.[36] On 18 October, his expedition reached the western part of the island in present-day Indonesia, and also claimed the territory for the King of Spain.

New Guinea from 1884 to 1919. The Netherlands controlled the western half of New Guinea, Germany the north-eastern part, and Britain the south-eastern part.

A successive European claim occurred in 1828, when the Netherlands formally claimed the western half of the island as Netherlands New Guinea. In 1883, following a short-lived French annexation of New Ireland, the British colony of Queensland annexed south-eastern New Guinea. However, the Queensland government's superiors in the United Kingdom revoked the claim, and (formally) assumed direct responsibility in 1884, when Germany claimed north-eastern New Guinea as the protectorate of German New Guinea (also called Kaiser-Wilhelmsland).

The first Dutch government posts were established in 1898 and in 1902: Manokwari on the north coast, Fak-Fak in the west and Merauke in the south at the border with British New Guinea. The German, Dutch and British colonial administrators each attempted to suppress the still-widespread practices of inter-village warfare and headhunting within their respective territories.[37]

In 1905, the British government transferred some administrative responsibility over southeast New Guinea to Australia (which renamed the area "Territory of Papua"); and, in 1906, transferred all remaining responsibility to Australia. During World War I, Australian forces seized German New Guinea, which in 1920 became the Territory of New Guinea, to be administered by Australia under a League of Nations mandate. The territories under Australian administration became collectively known as The Territories of Papua and New Guinea (until February 1942).

Before about 1930, European maps showed the highlands as uninhabited forests.[citation needed] When first flown over by aircraft, numerous settlements with agricultural terraces and stockades were observed. The most startling discovery took place on 4 August 1938, when Richard Archbold discovered the Grand Valley of the Baliem River, which had 50,000 yet-undiscovered Stone Age farmers living in orderly villages. The people, known as the Dani, were the last society of its size to make first contact with the rest of the world.[38]

World War II

Australian soldiers display Japanese flags they captured at Kaiapit, New Guinea in 1943.

Netherlands New Guinea and the Australian territories were invaded in 1942 by the Japanese. The Australian territories were put under military administration and were known simply as New Guinea. The highlands, northern and eastern parts of the island became key battlefields in the South West Pacific Theatre of World War II. Papuans often gave vital assistance to the Allies, fighting alongside Australian troops, and carrying equipment and injured men across New Guinea. Approximately 216,000 Japanese, Australian and U.S. soldiers, sailors and airmen died during the New Guinea Campaign.[39]

Since World War II

Following the return to civil administration after WW2, the Australian section was known as the Territory of Papua-New Guinea (1945–49) and then as Papua and New Guinea. Although the rest of the Dutch East Indies achieved independence as Indonesia on 27 December 1949, the Netherlands regained control of western New Guinea.
During the 1950s, the Dutch government began to prepare Netherlands New Guinea for full independence and allowed elections in 1959; the elected New Guinea Council took office on 5 April 1961. The Council decided on the name of West Papua for the territory, along with an emblem, flag, and anthem to complement those of the Netherlands. On 1 October 1962, the Dutch handed over the territory to the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority, until 1 May 1963, when Indonesia took control. The territory was renamed West Irian and then Irian Jaya. In 1969, Indonesia, under the 1962 New York Agreement, organised a referendum named the Act of Free Choice, in which Papuan tribal elders reached a consensus to continue the union with Indonesia.[citation needed]

Map of New Guinea, with place names as used in English in the 1940s

There has been resistance to Indonesian integration and occupation,[21] both through civil disobedience (such as Morning Star flag raising ceremonies) and via the formation of the Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM, or Free Papua Movement) in 1965. Amnesty International has estimated more than 100,000 Papuans, one-sixth of the population, have died as a result of government-sponsored violence against West Papuans.[40]

From 1971, the name Papua New Guinea was used for the Australian territory. On 16 September 1975, Australia granted full independence to Papua New Guinea.

In 2000, Irian Jaya was formally renamed "The Province of Papua" and a Law on Special Autonomy was passed in 2001. The Law established a Papuan People's Assembly (MRP) with representatives of the different indigenous cultures of Papua. The MRP was empowered to protect the rights of Papuans, raise the status of women in Papua, and to ease religious tensions in Papua; block grants were given for the implementation of the Law as much as $266 million in 2004.[41] The Indonesian courts' enforcement of the Law on Special Autonomy blocked further creation of subdivisions of Papua: although President Megawati Sukarnoputri was able to create a separate West Papua province in 2003 as a fait accompli, plans for a third province on western New Guinea were blocked by the courts. (King, 2004, p. 91) Critics argue that the Indonesian government has been reluctant to establish or issue various government implementing regulations so that the legal provisions of special autonomy could be put into practice, and as a result special autonomy in Papua has failed.[42]

Inequality (mathematics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality...