The first Americans dawdled on Bering land bridge for 10,000 years, say scientists

Remains of trees and pollen buried deep below the Bering Strait, together with DNA analysis, suggest that the first Americans may have lingered in Beringia, which linked Siberia to Alaska, for 10 millenniums before the last ice age finally thawed, allowing them to enter North America.

AP Photo/Rob Gillies
Canadian Inuit dogs pull a sled using traditional harnesses in February 2010 in Iqaluit, Canada. Inuit people are among the many descendants of the people now believed to have lingered for 10,000 years in the Bering land bridge, or Beringia.

Ancient traces of willow, birch, and pollen extracted from beneath the Bering Strait's sea floor indicate that early Siberians may have spent ten glacial millenniums camping out near Alaska before migrating south to become the Americas' first human inhabitants.

It's not news that humans entered America by crossing ancient Beringia, the broad landmass that once connected modern-day Alaska with modern-day Siberia. But it never seemed likely that they would would have lingered there long, given the time and place – the edge of the Arctic Circle, in the throes of an ice age.

Sediment cores drilled from that now-submerged landmass, however, suggest that Beringian lowlands of the time may have been bustling with more warmth and life than previously imagined.

"It was an area where people could have had resources, lived and persisted through the last glacial maximum," said Dennis O'Rourke, an anthropological geneticist from the University of Utah, in a press release. "That may have been critical for the people to subsist because they would have had wood for construction and for fires. Otherwise, they would have had to use bone, which is difficult to burn."

Dr. O'Rourke told the Monitor that despite the dominance of glaciers during that period – which extended down through North America as far south as Ohio – summers in Beringia may have been no colder than Alaskan summers of today.

A column co-authored by O'Rourke and published in the Feb. 28 issue of Science combined these new paleontological findings with DNA comparisons of Native American and Asian populations. One study they cited of mitochondrial DNA – genetic information passed from mothers to their children – found that the genetic blueprint common to all Native Americans arose some 25,000 years ago, whereas glacial melting prevented those populations from entering the Americas until about 15,000 years ago.

"This result indicated that a substantial population existed somewhere, in isolation from the rest of Asia, while its genome differentiated from the parental Asian genome," O'Rourke says.

The discovery that Beringia contained "refugia," human-friendly ecological areas that sustained shrubs, trees, and animals, makes the region look like a likely site for this isolation.

"The archaeological record in Siberia indicated that as the climate got colder as the last glacial maximum began, people there began moving south," says O'Rourke, explaining one scenario for how Siberian and Beringian populations could have become definitively separated. "Those out on the land bridge could have become isolated" while the Siberians sought warmer climes.

What would have driven people to trek east across Beringia in the first place?

"The people who became the first North Americans followed the earlier movements of land mammals and plants," explains the US Department of the Interior, which runs a website dedicated to Beringian heritage. "Unlike later migrations from Europe to North America, these migrations were not conscious efforts to populate a new continent, but rather a simple pursuit of food and shelter – the basic necessities of life."

Much of the Beringian lowlands are now submerged, making it hard to find archaeological proof of this long human layover. But O'Rourke says the low-lying, marshy areas of Alaska would be good places to start looking for evidence of human habitation.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.