Rase Mixing, Old School: Researchers find Neatherthal DNA in Modern Humans

Babbler

Deity
Joined
Sep 18, 2002
Messages
5,399
Neanderthal genes 'survive in us'

By Paul Rincon
Science reporter, BBC News

Many people alive today possess some Neanderthal ancestry, according to a landmark scientific study.

The finding has surprised many experts, as previous genetic evidence suggested the Neanderthals made little or no contribution to our inheritance.

The result comes from analysis of the Neanderthal genome - the "instruction manual" describing how these ancient humans were put together.

Between 1% and 4% of the Eurasian human genome seems to come from Neanderthals.

But the study confirms living humans overwhelmingly trace their ancestry to a small population of Africans who later spread out across the world.
“ [Neanderthals] are not totally extinct, in some of us they live on - a little bit ”
Professor Svante Paabo Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology

The most widely-accepted theory of modern human origins - known as Out of Africa - holds that the ancestors of living humans ( Homo sapiens ) originated in Africa some 200,000 years ago.

A relatively small group of people then left the continent to populate the rest of the world between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago.

While the Neanderthal genetic contribution - found in people from Europe, Asia and Oceania - appears to be small, this figure is higher than previous genetic analyses have suggested.

"They are not totally extinct. In some of us they live on, a little bit," said Professor Svante Paabo, from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

Professor Chris Stringer, research leader in human origins at London's Natural History Museum, is one of the architects of the Out of Africa theory. He told BBC News: "In some ways [the study] confirms what we already knew, in that the Neanderthals look like a separate line.

"But, of course, the really surprising thing for many of us is the implication that there has been some interbreeding between Neanderthals and modern humans in the past."

John Hawks, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the US, told BBC News: "They're us. We're them.

"It seemed like it was likely to be possible, but I am surprised by the amount. I really was not expecting it to be as high as 4%," he said of the genetic contribution from Neanderthals.

The sequencing of the Neanderthal genome is a landmark scientific achievement, the product of a four-year-long effort led from Germany's Max Planck Institute but involving many other universities around the world.

The project makes use of efficient "high-throughput" technology which allows many genetic sequences to be processed at the same time.

The draft Neanderthal sequence contains DNA extracted from the bones of three different Neanderthals found at Vindija Cave in Croatia.

Retrieving good quality genetic material from remains tens of thousands of years old presented many hurdles which had to be overcome.

The samples almost always contained only a small amount of Neanderthal DNA amid vast quantities of DNA from bacteria and fungi that colonised the remains after death.

The Neanderthal DNA itself had broken down into very short segments and had changed chemically. Luckily, the chemical changes were of a regular nature, allowing the researchers to write software that corrected for them.

Writing in Science journal, the researchers describe how they compared this draft sequence with the genomes of modern people from around the globe.

"The comparison of these two genetic sequences enables us to find out where our genome differs from that of our closest relative," said Professor Paabo.
“ Those things that made the Neanderthals apparent to us as a population - those things didn't work ”
Dr John Hawks University of Wisconsin-Madison

The results show that the genomes of non-Africans (from Europe, China and New Guinea) are closer to the Neanderthal sequence than are those from Africa.

The most likely explanation, say the researchers, is that there was limited mating, or "gene flow", between Neanderthals and the ancestors of present-day Eurasians.

This must have taken place just as people were leaving Africa, while they were still part of one pioneering population. This mixing could have taken place either in North Africa, the Levant or the Arabian Peninsula, say the researchers.

The Out of Africa theory contends that modern humans replaced local "archaic" populations like the Neanderthals.

But there are several variations on this idea. The most conservative model proposes that this replacement took place with no interbreeding between modern humans and Neanderthals.

Unique features

Another version allows for a degree of assimilation, or absorption, of other human types into the Homo sapiens gene pool.

The latest research strongly supports the Out of Africa theory, but it falsifies the most conservative version of events.

The team also identified more than 70 gene changes that were unique to modern humans. These genes are implicated in physiology, the development of the brain, skin and bone.

The researchers also looked for signs of "selective sweeps" - strong natural selection acting to boost traits in modern humans. They found 212 regions where positive selection may have been taking place.

The scientists are interested in discovering genes that distinguish modern humans from Neanderthals because they may have given our evolutionary line certain advantages over the course of evolution.

The most obvious differences were in physique: the muscular, stocky frames of Neanderthals contrast sharply with those of our ancestors. But it is likely there were also more subtle differences, in behaviour, for example.

Dr Hawks commented that the amount of Neanderthal DNA in our genomes seemed high: "What it means is that any traits [Neanderthals] had that might have been useful in later populations should still be here.

"So when we see that their anatomies are gone, this isn't just chance. Those things that made the Neanderthals apparent to us as a population - those things didn't work. They're gone because they didn't work in the context of our population."

Researchers had previously thought Europe was the region where Neanderthals and modern humans were most likely to have exchanged genes. The two human types overlapped here for some 10,000 years.

The authors of the paper in Science do not rule out some interbreeding in Europe, but say it was not possible to detect this with present scientific methods.

Paul.Rincon-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/8660940.stm

Published: 2010/05/06 18:02:55 GMT

neanderthals_786.gif


So what do you think?
 
I hope it's true just because the thought that africans are more human than everybody else would be a total mind screw for white supremecists. Soon they'll be trying to promote a racially pure neanderthal nation.:lol:
 
Rase?...

rase, verb - tear down so as to make flat with the ground; "The building was levelled"

What does demolition have to do with Neanderthals?
 
I hope it's true just because the thought that africans are more human than everybody else would be a total mind screw for white supremecists. Soon they'll be trying to promote a racially pure neanderthal nation.:lol:

You'd think the fact that we originated in Africa would be enough of a mindscrew. :p


Probably a joke on "rasist."

What does demolition have to do with Neanderthals?

Off-topic, but I read that as "Netherlands." :blush: Then again, the anagram is only one letter off if I'm doing it right...
 
I hope it's true just because the thought that africans are more human than everybody else would be a total mind screw for white supremecists. Soon they'll be trying to promote a racially pure neanderthal nation.:lol:

This starts to get at my first fear: there will be people who use this to push scientific racism.

A cool implication will be to see if Neanderthals had the same version of FOXP2 as us, which is informally known as a language gene. The very few people with a damaged copy don't understand some syntaxes in speech. While not conclusive, if Neanderthals had the same version as us, they very likely had language.

This was confirmed in 2007 it seems.
 
So hmm, would I be right in postulating that this transfer of genes occurred via rape? I mean, why else would homo sapiens sleep with neanderthals? It was probably just homo sapiens invading neanderthal hunting/living grounds, pillaging, looting, raping.. right? No interracial families?
 
lol the french
 
i can't say i blame 'em. i hear those neanderthal babes were pretty damn sexy.
 
So hmm, would I be right in postulating that this transfer of genes occurred via rape? I mean, why else would homo sapiens sleep with neanderthals? It was probably just homo sapiens invading neanderthal hunting/living grounds, pillaging, looting, raping.. right? No interracial families?

Depends how you define rape in this case. I can imagine one tribe killing off the men in the other tribe and taking the women. That's rape in a modern sense, it's also something that undoubtedly happened at every point in our evolutionary history, well beyond our common ancestor with chimpanzees.
 
So hmm, would I be right in postulating that this transfer of genes occurred via rape? I mean, why else would homo sapiens sleep with neanderthals? It was probably just homo sapiens invading neanderthal hunting/living grounds, pillaging, looting, raping.. right? No interracial families?

Is Neanderthal/Human intercourse considered bestiality? :mischief:
 
I believe that Neanderthals had bigger brains than we do. So make of that what you will.
 
Is Neanderthal/Human intercourse considered bestiality? :mischief:

I most often see them considered as a subspecies of Homo sapiens rather than a different species. It'd be a silly argument to have though.

I believe that Neanderthals had bigger brains than we do. So make of that what you will.

Brain size doesn't directly translate to intelligence, or we'd be pretty stupid animals compared to other areas of the kingdom.
 
I most often see them considered as a subspecies of Homo sapiens rather than a different species. It'd be a silly argument to have though.
Well, for us, yes. Presumably it's sensible for someone, somewhere.

Also, doesn't the consensus lean towards Homo neanderthalensis rather than Homo sapiens neanderthalensis? Would that rule out interbreeding? I'm told that species divergence typically rules out the production of effectively reproducing hybrids (give or take one-offs), but is this always the case? Or will this simply demand that they be classified as H. sapiens neanderthalensis after all?
 
Brain size doesn't directly translate to intelligence, or we'd be pretty stupid animals compared to other areas of the kingdom.

Well sure brain size matters, but the important thing is how big compared to the size of the animal itself.
 
This shouldn't be a surprise for anyone, Proof of cohabitation and burials of what appeared to be offspring of mixed couples had already been found.
 
Also, doesn't the consensus lean towards Homo neanderthalensis rather than Homo sapiens neanderthalensis?


I see Homo sapiens neanderthalensis more (enough that Homo neanderthalensis makes me pause) though that might just be a bias in what I get assigned to read.

Would that rule out interbreeding?

I'm told that species divergence typically rules out the production of effectively reproducing hybrids (give or take one-offs), but is this always the case? Or will this simply demand that they be classified as H. sapiens neanderthalensis after all?

Classification systems are rather silly when you extend it to how life actually works.

There's numerous examples of different species successfully interbreeding. Zebras and horses come to mind, members of the same genus but species. I think Zorses are sterile.... Jackal / wolf hybrids might be a better example. They diverged over 2,000,000 years ago (IIRC) yet produce fertile offspring.

I wouldn't be shocked if humans were theoretically able to reproduce with australopithecus which taxonomists consider a separate genus. This is, however, impossible to test. Some people have speculated a human / chimp hybrid might be possible, though I think that would take a lot of genetic engineering.

edit: it just occurred to me that I should point out that you and I and everyone reading this thread right now are often considered a subspecies of homo sapiens as well. We're usually classified as homo sapiens sapiens. Contrast that with H. sapiens neanderthalensis
 
Various wise things
Fair enough. I'm certainly no more than a vaguely interested laymen, I won't argue any point.

edit: it just occurred to me that I should point out that you and I and everyone reading this thread right now are often considered a subspecies of homo sapiens as well. We're usually classified as homo sapiens sapiens. Contrast that with H. sapiens neanderthalensis
I've heard that term, but I'd always thought it's use was dependent on the assertion that Neanderthals were also classified as Homo sapiens. Is that so, or does it have some other significance?
 
by the look of some ancient humans down under, I'd say there was some mixing between us and the erectus population - including the "hobbits" of Flores. During the ice age much of Indonesia was a continent so migrating populations would have not only met up with erectus but eventually carried their genes into Australia. The people of Flores have legends of the little people (hobbits) placing them close by in time, not ~30 kya as the Neandertals were disappearing. My question is: why weren't the erectus peoples of SE Asia evolving in our direction? Or in any direction (other than shrinking like the hobbits)? Seriously, we're told erectus evolved into us - but this didn't happen outside of a small region of E Africa. The erectus populations that left Africa more than a million years ago didn't evolve into us or even in our direction, they stayed in relative stasis or got even bulkier like Neandertals living in ice age Europe. I imagine some of these "Neandertal" genes are actually erectus genes.
 
Back
Top Bottom