Why are all the best sprinters of West African heritage?

[FVM]

The numbers are staggering: in the last eight Olympics, 63 out of 64 men's 100m finalists were of West African heritage. They come from as different countries as Canada and Jamaica, but their ancestors lived in the same geographic region.

There are visible and tangible traits such as skeletal structure, high proportion of fast-twitch muscle fibers, but why are these more prevalent in one human population? What was the evolutionary pressure that led to this selection? Also of interest is the divide between West and East Africa: East Africans dominate the distance events, but they produce no sprinters. I have heard ideas such as the adaptation to the pastoral lifestyle in highland climes for them, but I haven't heard any hypothesis for the West African concentration of individuals with a lot of explosive strength and speed.

P.S. I hope this thread doesn't descend into mindless racism. This is a fascinating topic that you can't avoid if you follow athletics at all.

Click to read more...

 

[Jack Straw]

The numbers are staggering: in the last eight Olympics, 63 out of 64 men's 100m finalists were of West African heritage. They come from as different countries as Canada and Jamaica, but their ancestors lived in the same geographic region.

There are visible and tangible traits such as skeletal structure, high proportion of fast-twitch muscle fibers, but why are these more prevalent in one human population? What was the evolutionary pressure that led to this selection? Also of interest is the divide between West and East Africa: East Africans dominate the distance events, but they produce no sprinters. I have heard ideas such as the adaptation to the pastoral lifestyle in highland climes for them, but I haven't heard any hypothesis for the West African concentration of individuals with a lot of explosive strength and speed.

P.S. I hope this thread doesn't descend into mindless racism. This is a fascinating topic that you can't avoid if you follow athletics at all.

I saw an article or paper or blog or something on this topic a number of years ago. I don't remember if there was anything conclusive but I'm sure there's stuff out there if you search.

The general answer is probably something along the lines of - over time humans have adapted to their environment, whatever it may be.

 

[FVM]

I saw an article or paper or blog or something on this topic a number of years ago. I don't remember if there was anything conclusive but I'm sure there's stuff out there if you search.

The general answer is probably something along the lines of - over time humans have adapted to their environment, whatever it may be.

I did a quick search and came up with some bits and pieces, but really nothing comprehensive. There's a gene, ACTN3, that is expressed only in fast-twitch muscle fibers. There's a mutated version of that gene that causes a deficiency of alpha-actinin 3, and prevents you from becoming an elite sprinter. But this mutation occurs only in 20-50% of the general population (depending on your heritage), so it's only a small piece of the puzzle. The lack of ACTN3 means you can't become a good sprinter, but having it guarantees nothing by itself.

That was the most concrete piece of data I found with a preliminary search. It seems we simply don't know much yet of the genetics behind elite level speed. And the evolutionary explanation is yet another beast entirely. Like you said, the general answer probably is over time humans have adapted to their environment, whatever it may be. But what kind of environment selects for explosive speed? I've always heard that humans hunted by endurance, not by explosiveness, as we lose to most of the animal kingdom in that respect.

 

[saskriders]

Did agriculture take longer to dominate East African cultures? If I am not mistaken in early hunter gatherer societies hunting would have been something that required running all day to track down animals. I am not sure when East Africa adopted agriculture relative to other regions, but if it was later maybe it could explain why good distance running ability is still a significant trait in the gene pool. A cultural explanation that would be part of the puzzle too is that poorer people have less ability to take part in sports requiring expensive equipment

 

[dnlfrncs]

I did a quick search and came up with some bits and pieces, but really nothing comprehensive. There's a gene, ACTN3, that is expressed only in fast-twitch muscle fibers. There's a mutated version of that gene that causes a deficiency of alpha-actinin 3, and prevents you from becoming an elite sprinter. But this mutation occurs only in 20-50% of the general population (depending on your heritage), so it's only a small piece of the puzzle. The lack of ACTN3 means you can't become a good sprinter, but having it guarantees nothing by itself.

That was the most concrete piece of data I found with a preliminary search. It seems we simply don't know much yet of the genetics behind elite level speed. And the evolutionary explanation is yet another beast entirely. Like you said, the general answer probably is over time humans have adapted to their environment, whatever it may be. But what kind of environment selects for explosive speed? I've always heard that humans hunted by endurance, not by explosiveness, as we lose to most of the animal kingdom in that respect.

There is also the centre of gravity theory, so body type may also play a role.

 

[FVM]

Did agriculture take longer to dominate East African cultures? If I am not mistaken in early hunter gatherer societies hunting would have been something that required running all day to track down animals. I am not sure when East Africa adopted agriculture relative to other regions, but if it was later maybe it could explain why good distance running ability is still a significant trait in the gene pool. A cultural explanation that would be part of the puzzle too is that poorer people have less ability to take part in sports requiring expensive equipment

I believe that East Africans have lived mostly pastoral lifestyle for a long time already, but I could be wrong here. Culture surely plays a role too, but sprinting is not more expensive than distance running, so it can't explain that difference.

 

[FVM]

There is also the centre of gravity theory, so body type may also play a role.

Yeah I saw that mentioned too, specifically that Africans have slightly higher center of gravity and longer limbs on average, which would aid in running in general. That could be one part of the puzzle. But if so, why do Europeans and Asians have different body types? What was the advantage they gained from adapting those traits, as we all descend from Africa anyway when you go back in time far enough.

 

[Suiteness]

It all boils down to genetics and cultural heritage. I know that Ethiopians and Kenyans for instance use to hunt their prey by chasing them to the point of them collapsing from exhaustion. Considering that they would do that running in high altitudes, you can start to picture how they would become suited to long distance running.

 

[Jack Straw]

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/why-kenyans-make-such-great-runners-a-story-of-genes-and-cultures/256015/

 

[Jack Straw]

Eastern Africa also has a somewhat higher elevation than Western Africa. Living at higher elevation would be expected to lead over time to an adaptation for greater aerobic endurance.

 

[Dr Pepper]

It all boils down to genetics and cultural heritage. I know that Ethiopians and Kenyans for instance use to hunt their prey by chasing them to the point of them collapsing from exhaustion. Considering that they would do that running in high altitudes, you can start to picture how they would become suited to long distance running.

Well, sure, that will explain why they win so many marathons and long-distance Olympic races, but it doesn't explain the speed factor.

Unless they hunt cheetahs on foot.

 

[Eisen]

It all boils down to genetics and cultural heritage. I know that Ethiopians and Kenyans for instance use to hunt their prey by chasing them to the point of them collapsing from exhaustion. Considering that they would do that running in high altitudes, you can start to picture how they would become suited to long distance running.

On foot until exhaustion? What the hell did they hunt?

 

[Jack Straw]

On foot until exhaustion? What the hell did they hunt?

Native Americans hunted deer that way. Heck, wolves hunt deer that way.

 

[Suiteness]

Well, sure, that will explain why they win so many marathons and long-distance Olympic races, but it doesn't explain the speed factor.

Unless they hunt cheetahs on foot.

They actually do. They will track and kill cheetahs who hunt and kill their goats.

 

[Eisen]

Native Americans hunted deer that way. Heck, wolves hunt deer that way.

I'd would have thought that the deer has a lot more endurance.

 

[Knave]

On foot until exhaustion? What the hell did they hunt?

A gazelle is going to outrun a person over short distances and likely do it for a few hours. But we run on two feet - which is more efficient (not faster in short distance) and we can sweat (cool down much more efficiently)... so over the course of a day - a person can run further than a gazelle. Eventually the gazelle literally can't run from the hunter anymore... and the hunter kills it.

I remember hearing about it in a documentary. Pretty cool.

The key things to remember: we run on two feet which is more efficient, less tiring & we sweat to cool down which is much better than panting through the tongue (a small surface area).

 

[Suiteness]

A gazelle is going to outrun a person over short distances and likely do it for a few hours. But we run on two feet - which is more efficient (not faster in short distance) and we can sweat (cool down much more efficiently)... so over the course of a day - a person can run further than a gazelle. Eventually the gazelle literally can't run from the hunter anymore... and the hunter kills it.

I remember hearing about it in a documentary. Pretty cool.

The key things to remember: we run on two feet which is more efficient, less tiring & we sweat to cool down which is much better than panting through the tongue (a small surface area).

It's called persistence hunting.

 

[Eisen]

A gazelle is going to outrun a person over short distances and likely do it for a few hours. But we run on two feet - which is more efficient (not faster in short distance) and we can sweat (cool down much more efficiently)... so over the course of a day - a person can run further than a gazelle. Eventually the gazelle literally can't run from the hunter anymore... and the hunter kills it.

I remember hearing about it in a documentary. Pretty cool.

The key things to remember: we run on two feet which is more efficient, less tiring & we sweat to cool down which is much better than panting through the tongue (a small surface area).

Pretty interesting.

 

[FVM]

A gazelle is going to outrun a person over short distances and likely do it for a few hours. But we run on two feet - which is more efficient (not faster in short distance) and we can sweat (cool down much more efficiently)... so over the course of a day - a person can run further than a gazelle. Eventually the gazelle literally can't run from the hunter anymore... and the hunter kills it.

I remember hearing about it in a documentary. Pretty cool.

The key things to remember: we run on two feet which is more efficient, less tiring & we sweat to cool down which is much better than panting through the tongue (a small surface area).

That really is a neat way to hunt. And exhausting But it doesn't help at all with the West African sprinting genes. That's the problem.

 

[Jack Straw]

A gazelle is going to outrun a person over short distances and likely do it for a few hours. But we run on two feet - which is more efficient (not faster in short distance) and we can sweat (cool down much more efficiently)... so over the course of a day - a person can run further than a gazelle. Eventually the gazelle literally can't run from the hunter anymore... and the hunter kills it.

I remember hearing about it in a documentary. Pretty cool.

The key things to remember: we run on two feet which is more efficient, less tiring & we sweat to cool down which is much better than panting through the tongue (a small surface area).

That's only part of it. The other part is biochemical- the ability to use oxygen to burn fuel. Wolves run down prey over great distances- 40-50 miles, because they have a tremendous aerobic capacity. Top sled dogs are even more aerobically fit than wolves. You can train for that to an extent, but it's mostly genetic.

 

[Sens Rule]

On foot until exhaustion? What the hell did they hunt?

That is the "human" advantage over most other land animals over tens or hundreds of thousands of years. Aside from bigger brains. We can run longer then almost any animal... Because we can sweat, and standing up we are far less exposed to sunlight. So humans would run after antelope or deer or whatever for extremely long distances until the animals basically died on their feet from exhaustion, or were slowed enough to spear them or whatever.

 

[Sens Rule]

That really is a neat way to hunt. And exhausting But it doesn't help at all with the West African sprinting genes. That's the problem.

Just a very guess, with limited information.

First... Africans in general are more different between each other genetically, then they are between whites or Asians.

Whites and Asians are general homogeneous as large groups. If someone is black or African... They aren't necessarily similar to each other. I guess the premise of that is the basis of this thread.

I will throw in... All non-Africans have some Neandrethal DNA in their genes from 60-100,000 years ago (or more). Africans do not have this 1-2-3% of Neandrethal genes from relatively recently in terms of evolution. Maybe that is an issue?

The question is not just why are West Africans are possibly better sprinters. It is why West Africans brought to the Caribbean (and specifically Jamaica) are the best sprinters. I think that there is likely some additional issue as to why the decedents of Jamaican slaves from West Africa are consistently the top sprinters. First, a large group of slaves must have been taken from some tribes in West Africa with very good genetics for sprinting. Second, the weakest slaves would often quickly die on the trip to the America's or soon after. So you have the best genetics for sprinting... And then the weakest half or 2/3rds of that population dies out. Then you would have the richest slaveholders buying the strongest female and male slaves... That survived, Who would inevitably breed with each other... And with likely not a lot of mixing of genes like in much of the rest of latin America. And this would go on for many generations.

 

[FVM]

Just a very guess, with limited information.

First... Africans in general are more different between each other genetically, then they are between whites or Asians.

Whites and Asians are general homogeneous as large groups. If someone is black or African... They aren't necessarily similar to each other. I guess the premise of that is the basis of this thread.

I will throw in... All non-Africans have some Neandrethal DNA in their genes from 60-100,000 years ago (or more). Africans do not have this 1-2-3% of Neandrethal genes from relatively recently in terms of evolution. Maybe that is an issue?

The question is not just why are West Africans are possibly better sprinters. It is why West Africans brought to the Caribbean (and specifically Jamaica) are the best sprinters. I think that there is likely some additional issue as to why the decedents of Jamaican slaves from West Africa are consistently the top sprinters. First, a large group of slaves must have been taken from some tribes in West Africa with very good genetics for sprinting. Second, the weakest slaves would often quickly die on the trip to the America's or soon after. So you have the best genetics for sprinting... And then the weakest half or 2/3rds of that population dies out. Then you would have the richest slaveholders buying the strongest female and male slaves... That survived, Who would inevitably breed with each other... And with likely not a lot of mixing of genes like in much of the rest of latin America. And this would go on for many generations.

Yes, human diversity is at its greatest in Africa, so they really have the most genetically different human populations there. As to the Neanderthal admixture, that could theoretically play a role, but I haven't seen any such suggestion so far.

As to the part about Jamaica in particular creating the elite sprinters - I kinda assume it's largely due to their success creating track programs so they have the favorable cultural conditions, on top of the genetic heritage. When you look at the top sprinters, there are often guys from small islands in Caribbean like Trinidad and Tobago, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Bahamas... in addition to the dominant teams of US and Jamaica. Those tiny island countries have a fraction of the population of Jamaica, which itself is only 2.9 million people. So it's about the whole Caribbean area, and North America too.

Could it be due to slavery and selection pressures there? I read that the idea about strongest slaves surviving the trip to America is quite misleading, as they mostly died of dehydration so "strongest" could mean the ones who retained most salt in their body. And supposedly the whole idea of breeding the slaves like that is a myth. It didn't really go down like that. Granted, I don't know much about that history, so if someone has more accurate information of that time period, feel free to share.