[悦读] 怡悦三石已皓 阅读寂静 （共54只，更新：2/25--17：06 ）

陈姗姗

xsnakex110

顶起

zhang179

thx

newbeetao

两篇新阅读并且都已经确认哈哈，这两天考的筒子多多放狗啊！

ssyyy321

ding

nancyyue1219

我找到了智利鸡骨头的那篇在National Geographic News上的原稿，但是GMAT上肯定是缩减了的吧。求考古。希望对大家有帮助。

Chicken Bone Spurs Debate Over Americas' First Visitors
Ker Than
for National Geographic News
July 28, 2008

In 2007 scientists suggested that seafaring Polynesians and their chickens beat Columbus to the New World by a century.

A chicken bone found in Chile dating to A.D. 1320 to 1410—well before the explorer's arrival—and evidence of a genetic mutation linking that bone to chickens in Polynesia supported the theory. Since chickens weren't native to the Americas, they had to have arrived with human visitors.

chicken picture

Enlarge Photo

_ Printer Friendly

Email to a Friend
What's This?
SHARE
Digg StumbleUpon Reddit
RELATED

   Did Columbus Bring Syphilis to Europe? (January 16, 2008)
   Rat DNA Offers Clues to Pacific Colonization, Study Says (June 9, 2004)
   HOTOS: Explore French Polynesia

But now the fossil has become a bone of contention in a new study, which contradicts the genetic evidence linking Chilean and Polynesian chickens.

A genetic comparison of chicken breeds from around the world reveal that modern-day Chilean chickens—which some scientists have argued carry Polynesian blood—are merely an offshoot of the common poultry found in restaurants and fast-food chains worldwide. In other words, the Chilean chicken could have come from anywhere.

"The Chilean chicken is a Kentucky Fried Chicken chicken, which is the ubiquitous chicken worldwide," said lead study author Alan Cooper of the Australian Center for Ancient DNA in Adelaide.

The new study is detailed in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Contradicting Evidence

The new findings contradict a study published last year, based on research led by Alice Storey of the University of Auckland in New Zealand and colleagues.

Using genetic and radiocarbon dating techniques, Storey's team had concluded that a chicken bone unearthed in Chile predates Columbus' arrival in the Americas by a century or more.

"We don't disprove that theory, but we don't find any evidence for it at all," Cooper told National Geographic News.

(Explore an time line of ancient human migration.)

Storey's team had reported that their ancient chicken bone carried a genetic mutation that linked it to chickens living on Pacific islands from the same time period.

In their new research, Cooper and his team show that the mutation is not unique to ancient Chilean or Polynesian chickens. Rather, it is present in modern Chilean chickens as well as in thousands of other chicken breeds living worldwide.

"The Chilean modern birds turn out to have standard European chicken DNA," Cooper said. "We found no evidence of them being having an unusual lineage."

(Get the facts on DNA.)

Stalemate

Storey conceded that the mutation her team found may not be unique.

"Initially we had recognized this mutation which we thought was unique to the Pacific," she said. "Their study suggests that's not true."

She added, however, that her team still stands by their original radiocarbon dating results and will publish new supporting evidence soon.

"We're absolutely confident with what we have," Storey said. "As long as the date stands, the genetics that they present really are irrelevant."

Terry Jones, an archaeologist at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo in California, was not involved in either study.

"I see a stalemate here," Jones said.

"I don't think this is the final word by any means. The burden of proof on this issue is extremely high. Neither study seems to have met it."

pli857

顶

nancyyue1219

我又从live science 找到相似的关于智利鸡骨头的文章，这篇可能更接近。只是希望对大家有帮助。

Which came first–the chicken or the European?

Popular history, and a familiar rhyme about Christopher Columbus, holds that Europeans made contact with the Americas in 1492, with some arguing that the explorer and his crew were the first outsiders to reach the New World.

But chicken bones recently unearthed on the coast of Chile—dating prior to Columbus’ “discovery” of America and resembling the DNA of a fowl species native to Polynesia—may challenge that notion, researchers say.

“Chickens could not have gotten to South America on their own—they had to be taken by humans,” said anthropologist Lisa Matisoo-Smith from the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Polynesians made contact with the west coast of South America as much as a century before any Spanish conquistadors, her findings imply.

DNA in bone

The chicken bones were discovered at an archaeological site called El Arenal, on the south coast of Chile, alongside other materials belonging to the indigenous population. While chickens aren’t native to the region, it was believed the local Araucana species found there now was brought to the Americas by Spanish settlers around 1500.

Tests on the bones, however, now indicate the birds arrived well before any European made landfall in South America, Matisoo-Smith and her colleague Alice Storey found.

“We had the chicken bone directly dated by radio carbon. The calibrated date was clearly prior to 1492,” Matisoo-Smith told LiveScience, noting that it could have ranged anywhere from 1304 to 1424. “This also fits with the other dates obtained from the site (on other materials), and it fits with the cultural period of the site.”

Did Polynesians continue eastwards?

DNA extracted from the bones also matched closely with a Polynesian breed of chicken, rather than any chickens found in Europe.

Polynesia was settled by sailors who migrated from mainland Southeast Asia, beginning about 3,000 years ago. They continued gradually eastwards, but were never thought to have journeyed further than Easter Island, about 2,000 miles off the coast of continental Chile.

The chicken DNA suggests at least one group did make the harrowing journey across the remaining stretch of Pacific, Matisoo-Smith said.

“We cannot say exactly which island the voyage came from. The DNA sequence is found in chickens from Tonga, Samoa, Niue, Easter Island and Hawaii,” Matisoo-Smith said. “If we had to guess, we would say it was unlikely to have come from West Polynesia and most likely to have come from Easter Island or some other East Polynesian source that we have not yet sampled.”

The results are detailed in the latest issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Kon-Tiki trip in reverse

It might be the most tangible, but this isn’t the first evidence that pre-Columbian voyages from the Pacific to South America were possible.

In 1947, Thor Heyerdahl, the famous Norwegian anthropologist, made the voyage from Peru to Polynesia aboard his Kon-Tiki raft to prove the trip was doable with a rudimentary vessel.

There are more scientific arguments, too, said Matisoo-Smith.

“There is increasing evidence of multiple contacts with the Americas,” she said, “based on linguistic evidence and similarities in fish hook styles.” Physical evidence of human DNA from Polynesia has yet to be found in South America, she added.

mslucky

renlvying

thank u~!