It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Whilst an African origin of modern humans is well established, the timings and routes of their expansions into Eurasia are the subject of heated debate, due to the scarcity of fossils and the lack of suitably old ancient DNA. Here, we use high-resolution palaeoclimate reconstructions to estimate how difficult it would have been for humans in terms of rainfall availability to leave the African continent in the past 300k years. We then combine these results with an anthropologically and ecologically motivated estimate of the minimum level of rainfall required by hunter-gatherers to survive, allowing us to reconstruct when, and along which geographic paths, expansions out of Africa would have been climatically feasible. The estimated timings and routes of potential contact with Eurasia are compatible with archaeological and genetic evidence of human expansions out of Africa, highlighting the key role of palaeoclimate variability for modern human dispersals.
It is still unclear when and by which route modern humans expanded out of Africa. Here, Beyer et al. use paleoclimate reconstructions and estimates of human precipitation requirements to evaluate the survivability of spatial and temporal migration corridors to Eurasia over the last 300,000 years.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details



1 University of Cambridge, Department of Zoology, Cambridge, UK (GRID:grid.5335.0) (ISNI:0000000121885934); Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam, Germany (GRID:grid.413453.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2224 3060)
2 University of Cambridge, Department of Zoology, Cambridge, UK (GRID:grid.5335.0) (ISNI:0000000121885934); GNS Science, Lower Hutt, New Zealand (GRID:grid.15638.39)
3 University of Tartu, cGEM, cGEM, Institute of Genomics, Tartu, Estonia (GRID:grid.10939.32) (ISNI:0000 0001 0943 7661); King’s College London, Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, London, UK (GRID:grid.13097.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 2322 6764)
4 University of Cambridge, Department of Zoology, Cambridge, UK (GRID:grid.5335.0) (ISNI:0000000121885934)