There is an estimate at Understanding Genetics that the minimum number of humans required for a colonization process is 160. It also mentions some animal populations that have rebounded from near extinction with much lower numbers. Strangely there is no mention of haplogroups in the answer there, and it seems to assume a random sampling of humans rather than a picked group.
It would seem that if you were trying prevent mutation in all haplotypes you would probably need a larger gene pool. Common sense also implies that it would be easier to get a diverse gene pool from a smaller group by purposely selecting from different haplogroups.
If hand picking with gene profiling, what is the smallest group of humans that can form a viable human colony, where new gene infusion is unlikely?
- This question is looking for a lower limit number.
- The number should (at least, theoretically) provide population self-sustainability and long-term survival.
The answer should take two different approaches:
- An intra-solar-system colony that may have future additions to its numbers
- An interstellar colony that does not expect future additions to its numbers
- Let's define "long-term" as at least 200 years.
- This question is focusing on genetic/population considerations. Practically, a real colony may require more than the answer here indicates.