Research shows Humans came out of Africa

Researchers at the University of Cambridge claim that they have proven the theory that humans evolved from a single point in Africa by combining studies of genetic variations in humans with skull measurements.

Researchers say that variations in skull measurements across the globe show Humans have origins in Africa.

“Humans seem to have poured out of Africa, spread out across the world, but at a really quite uniform rate such that you get this lovely gradual loss of diversity,” said study team member William Amos of the University of Cambridge

The team studied genetic diversity of human populations around the world and measurements of over 6,000 skulls from across the globe in academic collections.

After taking a set of measurements across all the skulls the team showed that not only was variation highest amongst the sample from south eastern Africa, but that it did decrease at the same rate as the genetic data the further the skull was away from Africa.

Lead researcher, Dr Andrea Manica from the University’s Department of Zoology, said: “The origin of anatomically modern humans has been the focus of much heated debate. Our genetic research shows the further modern humans have migrated from Africa the more genetic diversity has been lost within a population.”

To ensure the validity of their single origin evidence the researchers attempted to use their data to find non-African origins for modern humans. Researcher Dr Francois Balloux explains: “To test the alternative theory for the origin of modern humans we tried to find an additional, non-African origin. We found this just did not work. Our findings show that humans originated in a single area in Sub-Saharan Africa.”

However, some have been quick to point out flaws in the study, which appears in the journal Nature. John Hawks Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison noted that differences in skull features are related to genetics, and genetic variation depends on how much mixing occurs with other populations.

“The main problem with the paper is that it takes some assumptions from genetics papers of 10 to 15 years ago that we now know are wrong,” Hawks said.