Ávila-Arcos Maria C, de la Fuente Castro Constanza, Nieves-Colón Maria A, Raghavan Maanasa
International Laboratory for Human Genome Research, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Front Genet. 2022 Apr 26;13:880170. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.880170. eCollection 2022.
Paleogenomics - the study of ancient genomes - has made significant contributions, especially to our understanding of the evolutionary history of humans. This knowledge influx has been a direct result of the coupling of next-generation sequencing with improved methods for DNA recovery and analysis of ancient samples. The appeal of ancient DNA studies in the popular media coupled with the trend for such work to be published in "high impact" journals has driven the amassing of ancestral human remains from global collections, often with limited to no engagement or involvement of local researchers and communities. This practice in the paleogenomics literature has led to limited representation of researchers from the Global South at the research design and subsequent stages. Additionally, Indigenous and descendant communities are often alienated from popular and academic narratives that both involve and impact them, sometimes adversely. While some countries have safeguards against 'helicopter science', such as federally regulated measures to protect their biocultural heritage, there is variable oversight in others with regard to sampling and exportation of human remains for destructive research, and differing requirements for accountability or consultation with local researchers and communities. These disparities reveal stark contrasts and gaps in regional policies that lend themselves to persistent colonial practices. While essential critiques and conversations in this sphere are taking place, these are primarily guided through the lens of US-based heritage legislation such as the Native American Graves and Protection Act (NAGPRA). In this article, we aim to expand the scope of ongoing conversations by taking into account diverse regional contexts and challenges drawing from our own research experiences in the field of paleogenomics. We emphasize that true collaborations involve knowledge sharing, capacity building, mutual respect, and equitable participation, all of which take time and the implementation of sustainable research methods; amass-and-publish strategy is simply incompatible with this ethos.
古基因组学——对古代基因组的研究——已经做出了重大贡献,尤其是在帮助我们理解人类进化史方面。这一知识的大量涌入是下一代测序技术与改进的古代样本DNA回收和分析方法相结合的直接结果。古代DNA研究在大众媒体上的吸引力,以及此类研究成果在“高影响力”期刊上发表的趋势,促使人们从全球各地的收藏中收集古代人类遗骸,而当地研究人员和社区往往很少参与或根本没有参与。古基因组学文献中的这种做法导致全球南方的研究人员在研究设计及后续阶段的代表性有限。此外,原住民和后裔社区往往被排除在涉及并影响他们的大众和学术叙事之外,有时还会受到不利影响。虽然一些国家有针对“直升机式科学”的保障措施,比如通过联邦法规来保护其生物文化遗产,但其他国家在对用于破坏性研究的人类遗骸的采样和出口方面的监督各不相同,对与当地研究人员和社区进行问责或协商的要求也各不相同。这些差异揭示了区域政策中存在的鲜明对比和差距,这些差距助长了持续的殖民行为。虽然这一领域正在进行重要的批评和讨论,但这些主要是通过美国本土遗产立法,如《美国原住民坟墓保护与归还法》(NAGPRA)的视角来引导的。在本文中,我们旨在通过考虑不同的区域背景和挑战来扩大正在进行的讨论范围,这些背景和挑战来自我们在古基因组学领域的研究经验。我们强调,真正的合作需要知识共享、能力建设、相互尊重和平等参与,所有这些都需要时间以及可持续研究方法的实施;收集并发表的策略与这种理念根本不相容。