Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rivendell Rose's avatar

Good essay. I was an archeologist for a time (it was my major) and most of my field experience was with California Bay Area sites. They were hunter gatherers, subsisting mostly on acorns (our native oaks produce more nutritious acorns than European varieties) but the one plant they did cultivate was tobacco. There’s lots of debate about why they didn’t deliberately grow other staple food plants since they obviously knew how considering all the tabaco they grew. They would combine it with crushed shells to increase the potency.

Expand full comment
Andrew Cutler's avatar

>These plants are believed to have evolved in the Eastern Andes before spreading North, then West across the ocean before finally reaching Africa, landing on the continent from their foothold in Australia. How exactly this ocean-crossing occurred is still a matter of debate

Fascinating!

The third citation puts forth a conundrum on dating: "Bally and colleagues placed the mutation event of NbRdr1 to NbRdr1m at 710–880 thousand years BP [37], long before humans occupied the continent 65,000 years BP [9]. If this were the case, it seems distribution of the allele either has not spread beyond the region it first occurred in or has shrunk to this region from a broader distribution over this vast time period."

I don't know that much about plant genetics, but is it possible that this highly diverged mutation is from the Americas, and arrived as you suggest? Then the American Nicotiana crossed with the local variety.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts