Humans evolved faster after farming, wheels and metal working arose

[BillTre]

Rates of recent human evolution have been the subject of threads here several times.
Here is a AAAS news article. It is based on this behind a paywall Nature article.
16,000 ancient genomes from Europe and the Mideast were analyzed.
Changes associated with the new ways humans lived at this time included farming, using wheels, and metal use. Genomic changes were found in tuberculosis resistance (increased), body fat (reduced), red hair (increased), and male pattern baldness (decreased).

 

[berkeman]

body fat (reduced)

male pattern baldness (decreased)

Whelp, we've shot that all to hell more recently...

 

[BWV]

The articles online don't get much into potential causes, guessing that its that farming and animal domestication brought on a much higher exposure to diseases through higher population density and mutation of animal viruses and bacteria, also more intermingling of populations as groups with agriculture moved into less populated hunter gatherer areas, mating with and displacing the original populations

 

[256bits]

The articles online don't get much into potential causes, guessing that its that farming and animal domestication brought on a much higher exposure to diseases through higher population density and mutation of animal viruses and bacteria, also more intermingling of populations as groups with agriculture moved into less populated hunter gatherer areas, mating with and displacing the original populations

That would be the region of social behavioral genetics, which I believe there is something there but easily misinterpreted ( and probably has an influence on some social constructs that we see today, or have seen ie forced sterilization of the poor and eugenics )

From the writeup of the study
In other cases, the selection pressures behind genetic shifts remain murky. Using published studies and a database that combines health, lifestyle, and genetic data from hundreds of thousands of modern people in the United Kingdom, the team found that clusters of genes associated with traits such as walking pace, as well as genes correlated with behavioral outcomes such as income and years of schooling, became more common over the past 5000 years.

 

[BWV]

That would be the region of social behavioral genetics, which I believe there is something there but easily misinterpreted ( and probably has an influence on some social constructs that we see today, or have seen ie forced sterilization of the poor and eugenics )

From the writeup of the study
In other cases, the selection pressures behind genetic shifts remain murky. Using published studies and a database that combines health, lifestyle, and genetic data from hundreds of thousands of modern people in the United Kingdom, the team found that clusters of genes associated with traits such as walking pace, as well as genes correlated with behavioral outcomes such as income and years of schooling, became more common over the past 5000 years.

I don’t get how one could identify a gene associated with years of schooling based on comparing the British population in, say, 1700 vs today. I was supposing the genes measured were for more measurable traits such as TB resistance in the OP or things that gave clear survival advantages in the pre-modern world such as lactose tolerance

We look back 10,000 years with no knowledge of the actual history, but the real historical examples of contact of isolated populations can be catastrophic - what would historically ignorant researchers make of the changes in the populations genetics of Mexico from 1492-1700?

 

[256bits]

I don’t get how one could identify a gene associated with years of schooling based on comparing the British population in, say, 1700 vs today. I was supposing the genes measured were for more measurable traits such as TB resistance in the OP or things that gave clear survival advantages in the pre-modern world such as lactose tolerance

We look back 10,000 years with no knowledge of the actual history, but the real historical examples of contact of isolated populations can be catastrophic - what would historically ignorant researchers make of the changes in the populations genetics of Mexico from 1492-1700?

My sentiments entirely.
Will the researcher be able to differentiate the biases of their own nature/nurture imprints from that of he/she expects ancient societies to operate.

 

[Rive]

I don’t get how one could identify a gene associated with years of schooling based on comparing the British population in, say, 1700 vs today.

As far as I know, that one goes the other way. Regarding the referred database they are looking on present day population only and looking for correlations between genes/combinations and life data.

Then they can look for the history of these markers.

Of course these correlations won't tell why a combination of genes comes with more years of schooling, for example. It's just statistics, and requiring very delicate care in usage.

There is another source which is the genetic shifts over time, referenced to the supposed cultural/historical advancements. Of course it has limitations, though dating and in general: modern day methods in archeology leaving less and less to guesswork.

The article does not seems to be consistent that when it's about which approach.