Relethford John H
Department of Anthropology, State University of New York College at Oneonta, Oneonta, New York 13820, USA.
Am J Hum Biol. 2004 Jul-Aug;16(4):379-86. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.20045.
Migration is expected to affect craniometric variation in three ways: 1) movement into a different environment leading to developmental plasticity; 2) movement into a different environment followed by in situ adaptation through natural selection; and 3) changes in among-group differentiation and genetic distance through the action of gene flow. The relative influence of these three factors has been argued in the literature, most recently in a series of articles debating the statistical and biological significance of Boas's immigration studies as they relate to cranial plasticity. The Boas debate is discussed within the broader context of debate over genetic and environmental influences on craniometric variation. Additional examples are provided from an ongoing study of global craniometric variation. Although developmental plasticity and climatic adaptation have had an impact on craniometric variation, these factors tend not to erase, or even obscure greatly, underlying patterns of population structure and history that fit a neutral model of quantitative variation. Thus, craniometric data can be used to explore questions of gene flow and genetic affinity.
1)迁入不同环境导致发育可塑性;2)迁入不同环境后通过自然选择进行原地适应;3)通过基因流的作用改变群体间分化和遗传距离。文献中对这三个因素的相对影响进行了争论,最近在一系列文章中讨论了博厄斯移民研究与颅骨可塑性相关的统计和生物学意义。博厄斯之争是在关于遗传和环境对颅骨测量变异影响的更广泛争论背景下进行讨论的。从一项正在进行的全球颅骨测量变异研究中提供了更多例子。尽管发育可塑性和气候适应对颅骨测量变异有影响,但这些因素往往不会消除,甚至不会极大地掩盖符合数量变异中性模型的潜在群体结构和历史模式。因此,颅骨测量数据可用于探索基因流和遗传亲和性问题。