Ancient DNA reveals mysterious Indigenous group from Colombia that disappeared 2,000 years ago
A new analysis of ancient DNA from hunter-gatherers who lived millennia to centuries ago has revealed a previously unknown genetic lineage of humans who lived in what is now Colombia.
People of this lineage lived near present-day Bogotá around 6,000 years ago but disappeared around 4,000 years later, according to a study published May 28 in the journal Science Advances. The findings could shed light on major cultural changes that occurred during that time.
It's thought that the first Americans journeyed along the Bering Land Bridge from Asia during the last ice age and arrived in North America at least 23,000 years ago, according to trackways found at White Sands National Park in New Mexico. It's still debated when the first people arrived in South America, but there's evidence of people at the site of Monte Verde II, in Chile, from 14,550 years ago.
Some of the early Indigenous people who reached South America settled in the Altiplano, a plateau near what is now Bogotá. This region underwent several cultural shifts during the Early and Middle Holocene (11,700 to 4,000 years ago), and researchers already knew about the development of a type of ceramic pottery that emerged during the Herrera period beginning about 2,800 years ago. But how this technology came to the area is still a matter of debate.
To investigate ancient population movements in the region, researchers sequenced genomes using samples from the bones and teeth of 21 skeletons from five archaeological sites in the Altiplano spanning a period of 5,500 years. These included seven genomes from a site known as Checua dating back 6,000 years, nine from the Herrera period around 2,000 years ago, three from the Muisca period, whose remains date to 1,200 to 500 years ago, and two from Guane populations north of Bogotá about 530 years ago.
"These are the first ancient human genomes from Colombia ever to be published," study co-author Cosimo Posth, a paleogeneticist at the University of Tübingen in Germany, said in a statement.
The genomes from the Checua site belonged to a relatively small group of hunter-gatherers, the team found. Their DNA isn't particularly similar to that of Indigenous North American groups, nor to any ancient or modern populations in Central or South America. "Our results show that the Checua individuals derive from the earliest population that spread and differentiated across South America very rapidly," study co-author Kim-Louise Krettek, a doctoral student at the Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Paleoenvironment at the University of Tübingen, said in the statement.
But some 4,000 years later, that population had completely vanished. Evidence of their DNA wasn't present in later groups who inhabited the region, either. "We couldn't find descendants of these early hunter-gatherers of the Colombian high plains — the genes were not passed on," Krettek said. "That means in the area around Bogotá there was a complete exchange of the population."
The findings suggest that cultural changes that occurred at the start of the Herrera period, such as the more widespread use of ceramics, were brought into the region by migrating groups from Central America into South America sometime between 6,000 and 2,000 years ago.
"In addition to technological developments such as ceramics, the people of this second migration probably also brought the Chibchan languages into what is present-day Colombia," study co-author Andrea Casas-Vargas, a geneticist at the National University of Colombia, said in the statement. "Branches of this language family are still spoken in Central America today." Chibchan speakers were widespread in the Altiplano at the time of European contact, and genetic markers linked to people who spoke Chibchan languages first appeared there 2,000 years ago.
RELATED STORIES
—Newly discovered 'ghost' lineage linked to ancient mystery population in Tibet, DNA study finds
—'Mystery population' of human ancestors gave us 20% of our genes and may have boosted our brain function
—Unknown human lineage lived in 'Green Sahara' 7,000 years ago, ancient DNA reveals
The Chibchan-related ancestry may have spread and mixed with other groups on multiple occasions. The genetic composition of later Altiplano individuals is more similar to that of pre-Hispanic individuals from Panama than to Indigenous Colombians, suggesting some mixing in Colombia. Ancient remains from Venezuela also carry some Chibchan-related ancestry, though they aren't as closely linked to ancient Colombians. This suggests the possibility of multiple Chibchan language expansions into South America.
Future studies could involve sequencing more ancient genomes in the Altiplano and nearby regions, the researchers wrote in the study. Such research might help narrow down when Central American populations arrived in the region and how widespread they became.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Millions of Californians could see higher health insurance premiums in 2026
Health insurance premiums for Californians buying coverage through Covered California will rise by an average of 10.3% in 2026, the state marketplace announced Thursday. Officials warned that costs could climb even higher if Congress allows enhanced federal subsidies to expire at the end of next year. The projected increase — up from a 7.9% hike in 2025 — is driven largely by rising medical and prescription drug costs. But the looming expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, which have lowered costs for millions of Americans since 2021, could trigger a far steeper jump in what consumers pay. If lawmakers fail to act, the average Covered California enrollee could see monthly premiums rise by 66% from the loss of federal aid alone, affecting 1.7 million people statewide. 'Skyrocketing health insurance premiums are the last thing Americans need right now,' said Jessica Altman, Covered California's executive director, in a statement. 'There is still time for Congress to act and protect the health care of millions.' Covered California is the state's Affordable Care Act marketplace, where residents can compare and purchase health plans, often with financial assistance. California is taking steps to soften the impact, allocating $190 million in state subsidies for 2026 to help its lowest-income residents. Still, officials say that will cover only a fraction of the $2.1 billion gap left by expiring federal assistance. Despite the uncertainty, Covered California says its marketplace remains strong, with 11 insurers offering plans statewide and most residents having multiple carrier options. Aetna will exit in 2026, affecting about 21,000 enrollees who will need to switch plans. The state's 10.3% average increase is about half the projected national average of 20%, which officials credit to aggressive rate negotiations and a healthier risk pool.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Approval Rating With Medicaid Recipients Takes a Nosedive: Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's approval rating with Medicaid recipients has dropped a staggering 16 points since January, a new poll from Morning Consult shows on Thursday. Why It Matters The shift occurred as Republicans advanced major cuts to Medicaid in the party's signature budget legislation, a bill the president dubbed "the big, beautiful bill." Medicaid covers more than 71 million low-income Americans and serves as a cornerstone of health coverage for vulnerable populations. Recently, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reached an agreement that provided U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) access to certain Medicaid user data, a move that raised privacy and access-to-care concerns among advocates and some officials. Critics warned that such measures could deter eligible patients from seeking care. What To Know In the poll, the president's approval rating with the group is 36 percent, a drop from 52 percent during the president's first week in office. Trump's disapproval mark is 55 percent, soaring from 34 percent during the same time frame. Morning Consult conducts the surveys weekly among 14,695 U.S. adults, including 3,134 Medicaid recipients. The poll has a margin of error of 1 percent to 2 percent. The survey noted that "The biggest political question facing the Republican Party ahead of the next couple of election cycles is whether it can consolidate gains made in recent years among lower-income Americans. In the wake of those Medicaid cuts, that sure looks like a very steep climb," Cameron Easley, Morning Consult's head of U.S. Political Analysis, wrote. The president's overall approval rating with U.S. adults in the poll is 44 percent compared to a 50 percent disapproval rating. President Donald Trump speaks at the Kennedy Center on August 13 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) President Donald Trump speaks at the Kennedy Center on August 13 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What People Are Saying Political analyst Craig Agranoff told Newsweek via text message on Thursday: "The notable decline in his approval rating among Medicaid recipients, signals growing discontent within a key demographic reliant on public health programs. This drop, sharper than among the general public, appears tied to Republican led efforts to cut Medicaid funding through legislation like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which accelerated the slide when proposed in March and enacted in July. "It's particularly concerning for the GOP, as it erodes support even among Republican and independent Medicaid users, potentially complicating efforts to maintain gains with working class voters ahead of midterms. If unaddressed, this could highlight vulnerabilities in Trump's coalition where policy impacts clash with economic promises." Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont posted to X on Wednesday: "Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' is a direct attack on the 1 in 3 Americans with disabilities who rely on Medicaid for their health care. It cannot stand. We must work together until every American with a disability has the freedom, opportunity and respect that they deserve." Trump wrote on Truth Social in May: "Republicans MUST UNITE behind, 'THE ONE, BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL!' Not only does it cut Taxes for ALL Americans, but it will kick millions of Illegal Aliens off of Medicaid to PROTECT it for those who are the ones in real need. The Country will suffer greatly without this Legislation, with their Taxes going up 65%. It will be blamed on the Democrats, but that doesn't help our Voters. We don't need 'GRANDSTANDERS' in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE! It is time to fix the MESS that Biden and the Democrats gave us. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" What Happens Next The president's approval rating will continue to be tracked by numerous outlets and pollsters leading up to the 2026 midterm election season.
National Geographic
an hour ago
- National Geographic
High Cost of Cheap Coal: The Coal Paradox
A coal train rumbling across Montana is a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) long yet carries barely a day's fuel for a large power plant. The U.S. burns more than a billion tons of coal a year. Photograph by William Campbell/Corbis Learn about the high cost of cheap coal, including pollution and global warming. On a scorching August day in southwestern Indiana, the giant Gibson generating station is running flat out. Its five 180-foot-high (54.9-meter-high) boilers are gulping 25 tons (22.7 metric tons) of coal each minute, sending thousand-degree steam blasting through turbines that churn out more than 3,000 megawatts of electric power, 50 percent more than Hoover Dam. The plant's cooling system is struggling to keep up, and in the control room warnings chirp as the exhaust temperature rises. But there's no backing off on a day like this, with air conditioners humming across the Midwest and electricity demand close to record levels. Gibson, one of the biggest power plants in the country, is a mainstay of the region's electricity supply, pumping enough power into the grid for three million people. Stepping from the sweltering plant into the air-conditioned offices, Angeline Protogere of Cinergy, the Cincinnati-based utility that owns Gibson, says gratefully, "This is why we're making all that power." Next time you turn up the AC or pop in a DVD, spare a thought for places like Gibson and for the grimy fuel it devours at the rate of three 100-car trainloads a day. Coal-burning power plants like this one supply the United States with half its electricity. They also emit a stew of damaging substances, including sulfur dioxide—a major cause of acid rain—and mercury. And they gush as much climate-warming carbon dioxide as America's cars, trucks, buses, and planes combined. Here and there, in small demonstration projects, engineers are exploring technologies that could turn coal into power without these environmental costs. Yet unless utilities start building such plants soon—and lots of them—the future is likely to hold many more traditional stations like Gibson. Last summer's voracious electricity use was just a preview. Americans' taste for bigger houses, along with population growth in the West and air-conditioning-dependent Southeast, will help push up the U.S. appetite for power by a third over the next 20 years, according to the Department of Energy. And in the developing world, especially China, electricity needs will rise even faster as factories burgeon and hundreds of millions of people buy their first refrigerators and TVs. Much of that demand is likely to be met with coal. For the past 15 years U.S. utilities needing to add power have mainly built plants that burn natural gas, a relatively clean fuel. But a near tripling of natural gas prices in the past seven years has idled many gas-fired plants and put a damper on new construction. Neither nuclear energy nor alternative sources such as wind and solar seem likely to meet the demand for electricity. Where guests are guardians Meanwhile, more than a quarter trillion tons of coal lie underfoot, from the Appalachians through the Illinois Basin to the Rocky Mountains—enough to last 250 years at today's consumption rate. You hear it again and again: The U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal. About 40 coal-burning power plants are now being designed or built in the U.S. China, also rich in coal, could build several hundred by 2025. Mining enough coal to satisfy this growing appetite will take a toll on lands and communities. Of all fossil fuels, coal puts out the most carbon dioxide per unit of energy, so burning it poses a further threat to global climate, already warming alarmingly. With much government prodding, coal-burning utilities have cut pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides by installing equipment like the building-size scrubbers and catalytic units crowded behind the Gibson plant. But the carbon dioxide that drives global warming simply goes up the stacks—nearly two billion tons of it each year from U.S. coal plants. Within the next two decades that amount could rise by a third. There's no easy way to capture all the carbon dioxide from a traditional coal-burning station. "Right now, if you took a plant and slapped a carbon-capture device on it, you'd lose 25 percent of the energy," says Julio Friedmann, who studies carbon dioxide management at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. But a new kind of power station could change that. A hundred miles (161 kilometers) up the Wabash River from the Gibson plant is a small power station that looks nothing like Gibson's mammoth boilers and steam turbines. This one resembles an oil refinery, all tanks and silvery tubes. Instead of burning coal, the Wabash River plant chemically transforms it in a process called coal gasification. The Wabash plant mixes coal or petroleum coke, a coal-like residue from oil refineries, with water and pure oxygen and pumps it into a tall tank, where a fiery reaction turns the mixture into a flammable gas. Other equipment removes sulfur and other contaminants from the syngas, as it's called, before it's burned in a gas turbine to produce electricity. Cleaning the unburned syngas is cheaper and more effective than trying to sieve pollutants from power plant exhaust, as the scrubbers at a plant like Gibson do. "This has been called the cleanest coal-fired power plant in the world," says Steven Vick, general manager of the Wabash facility. "We're pretty proud of that distinction." The syngas can even be processed to strip out the carbon dioxide. The Wabash plant doesn't take this step, but future plants could. Coal gasification, Vick says, "is a technology that's set up for total CO2 removal." The carbon dioxide could be pumped deep underground into depleted oil fields, old coal seams, or fluid-filled rock, sealed away from the atmosphere. And as a bonus, taking carbon dioxide out of the syngas can leave pure hydrogen, which could fuel a new generation of nonpolluting cars as well as generate electric power. The Wabash plant and a similar one near Tampa, Florida, were built or refurbished with government money in the mid-1990s to demonstrate that gasification is a viable electricity source. Projects in North Dakota, Canada, the North Sea, and elsewhere have tested the other parts of the equation: capturing carbon dioxide and sequestering it underground. Researchers say they need to know more about how buried carbon dioxide behaves to be sure it won't leak back out—a potential threat to climate or even people. But Friedmann says, "For a first cut, we have enough information to say, 'It's a no-brainer. We know how to do this.'" Yet that's no guarantee utilities will embrace the gasification technology. "The fact that it's proved in Indiana and Florida doesn't mean executives are going to make a billion-dollar bet on it," says William Rosenberg of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. The two gasification power plants in the U.S. are half the size of most commercial generating stations and have proved less reliable than traditional plants. The technology also costs as much as 20 percent more. Most important, there's little incentive for a company to take on the extra risk and expense of cleaner technology: For now U.S. utilities are free to emit as much carbon dioxide as they like. Cinergy CEO James Rogers, the man in charge of Gibson and eight other carbon-spewing plants, says he expects that to change. "I do believe we'll have regulation of carbon in this country," he says, and he wants his company to be ready. "The sooner we get to work, the better. I believe it's very important that we develop the ability to do carbon sequestration." Rogers says he intends to build a commercial-scale gasification power plant, able to capture its carbon dioxide, and several other companies have announced similar plans. The energy bill passed last July by the U.S. Congress offers help in the form of loan guarantees and tax credits for gasification projects. "This should jump-start things," says Rosenberg, who advocated these measures in testimony to Congress. The experience of building and running the first few plants should lower costs and improve reliability. And sooner or later, says Rogers, new environmental laws that put a price on carbon dioxide emissions will make clean technology look far more attractive. "If the cost of carbon is 30 bucks a ton, it's amazing the kinds of technologies that will evolve to allow you to produce more electricity with less emissions." If he's right, we may one day be able to cool our houses without turning up the thermostat on the entire planet.
