Question

From genetics of macro evolution:

1a What is the methodology of data collection?

1b what is the major trend?

1c how much weight should this finding carry in the overall conclusions?

be combined into a single which a tem for chili -2800 B.P Proto Sonoran (-2400 BP.), and Proto Mayan conesus -2200 BP Ths the earliest on-Comanguean dates for Each type isumalpan a spatial model escmerica and abuting regions are over 3,700y discussed bek, and they can therefore d geographically through mapping which need to be taken into consideration consensus modeL ficu particular strengths and Because these merits and de- oldest date, sggesting that speakers to each line of evidence is prob- a number of different con- ferent weighting combinations antily (some are Note thal te orrent word-dil-is derived from the Atec languags Nahuatl, which reconstructs to a much ma receat date (1500 R.P: Table 1) maximum fint map, Fig. 24, was established using cqual weighting ef a language family has heen weighted as mak eewwe traitonally by lingst as sugestive of the location of for each ope of evidenoe (each s model, areas in central-east Mex informat of the chill pepper. The second model assigned a high weight to genetic spoken in cloan-Chinantecan n aanecan evidence (weighted 1/2) and equal but lower weights to the other currenitly three lines of evidence (each weighted 1/6). This assumes that Mexico are the most land by identilying where Chorolegan, genetic data might be superior to one or more of the other lines of evidence used because, for example, it might suffer less from bias. This results in primary support for northeastern disest prosinity (Fig. 10 Genetk vidence. Daring the fall of 2006 and 2007, expeditions sampling eceaco to sample pepulations of wild C n29) This 28). The third approach assigned a low weight to archo prox most complete set of wild C anmuom from Mexico 10) and equal higher weights to the other three lines of ev dae Based largely on this set, 139 wild opes dis (each weighted 1/3). This weighting was motivated by the ob wer tihe entire exploration area were chosen as were 49 servation that the current archacological data are assembled that are endemik landraces (anchopou, and from macroremains of only two sites in Mexico. This weighting gwibllo) (3) This collection was screened with 17 simple se- Mexico and 24 because both Mexico result as equally consistency of amplification and pobmorphism within erage proportio our sample. For each wild plant, a dis- pepper domestication (Fig. 2C). Additional information, from yet to be discovered, would justify the av other sites and m n of shared SSR alleles These distances were then a stronger weighting for archacobotanical data patialy intermolated to produce in each grid cell an estimated Another weighting strategy produces different models based genetic similarity between wild curred in the cell) and the group of regardless of where they occ anahsis of genetic revealed a broad area of populations (if any oc on randomly assigning combinations of weights for the four types domesticated chili peppers of evidence. This approach allows us to explore the universe of of between wild and domesticated types the individual lines of evidence. Fig. S3 shows the percentile dis- similarity in the northeasterm tribution obtained for this approach. The resulting maps suggest again that either central-east Mexico or northeastern Mexico or quadrant of Mexico (Fig. LD), including the states of Tamaulipas, Ledn, San Luis Potosi, and Veracruz. In contrast, genetic conceivably, both areas were locations of the domestication of similarity between wild and cultivated types was southern and northwest Mexico, generally low in C annaum Discussion Consensus Model The four lines of evidence-archacological. ecological, paleobiolinguistic, and genetic-were We have embraced the template of multidisciplinary approaches to study crop origins proposed first by de Candolle (36) and later all expressed as "A) Equal weights B) High weight genetics C) Low weight archaeology 0 250 500 007009 1.0 Re 2. Consensus models of the lieihood that cultvated chili pepper originated in an area. The models were obtained by combining the four lines of evidence for the origin of domesticated chill pepper (Fig. 1)A) equal weights; (8) genetics 1/2, all others 1/6 weight, and (C) archaeology 1/10, all others 1/3 weight. After combining the values were scaled between 0 and 1 and then squared to give more weight to the higher values

Answer 1

1a. Methodology of data collection in this case are :-

- Archaeology

- Specicies distribution modelling

- Paleobiolinguistic

1b. The major trend is from equal weight to low weight . Firstly it was equal in terms of archaeology ,genetics and other factors ,then slowly it got rises by genetics being 1/2 and other factors 1/6 . And now at present it's low weight with 1/10 archeology and 1/3 other factors .

1c. In the overall conclusion , the findings weight low in which archeology has 1/10 part and other factors 1/3.