Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-29-2017 3:05 PM
451 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,182 Year: 6,788/21,208 Month: 2,549/2,634 Week: 212/525 Day: 45/82 Hour: 1/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   40k-Year-Old Man Had Recent Neanderthal Ancestor
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 25 (760601)
06-23-2015 5:11 PM


Apparently a man who lived only forty thousand years ago had Neanderthal ancestors only a few generations back.

quote:
"Early Man from Romania Had Close Neanderthal Relatives, DNA Shows" from L A Times:

A new discovery, announced Monday in the journal Nature, adds a piece to the puzzle. DNA testing of an ancient jawbone has confirmed that a man who lived in Romania about 40,000 years ago descended from a Neanderthal ancestor just four to six generations less than 200 years before him.

"To our amazement, this guy had three or four times more Neanderthal DNA than any modern human we had ever looked at," said Svante Paabo, director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, and co-senior author of the Nature study. "This is the first time we can say it's dramatically more, and close in the family tree."


Genetic evidence has been the basis of the OOA model of human origins and is usually considered standing in contrast to the physical evidence which supports the Multiregional model.

But some of these new findings (see the other thread: New Type of Ancient Human FoundDescendants Live Today? ) show us that the genetic evidence, when considered in its entirety, is more likely going to end up supporting the MH model than it will the OOA model (which is now as full of holes as Swiss cheese).


Love your enemies!

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by AZPaul3, posted 06-23-2015 6:58 PM Jon has responded

  
AdminAsgara
Administrator
Posts: 2072
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 2 of 25 (760603)
06-23-2015 5:46 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the 40k-Year-Old Man Had Recent Neanderthal Ancestor thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
jar
Member
Posts: 28454
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 3 of 25 (760604)
06-23-2015 6:19 PM


Not sure how this could be in conflict with OOF
I don't see how this adds any support to a Multiregional model or is in anyway in conflict with the Out of Africa model.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 6:37 PM jar has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 4 of 25 (760605)
06-23-2015 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by jar
06-23-2015 6:19 PM


Re: Not sure how this could be in conflict with OOF
I can live with that.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by jar, posted 06-23-2015 6:19 PM jar has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3422
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 5 of 25 (760606)
06-23-2015 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
06-23-2015 5:11 PM


I don't see how a population of H. neanderthalensis known to exist at 35k years ago and a population of H. sapiens known to be in the same region at the time conflicts with Out-Of-Africa. What this evidence shows is that the gene flow between the populations may have continued more recently than previously hypothesized.

The question now is why, with such recent crossings, is there not more neanderthal DNA in present sapiens populations. Maybe girls back then just didn't like the bad-boy neanderthal look all that much. Couldn't have been the other way because, lets face it, those neanderthal girls were just plain ugly ... with a capital U.

Edited by AZPaul3, : splng


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 5:11 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 7:25 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 25 (760608)
06-23-2015 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by AZPaul3
06-23-2015 6:58 PM


I don't see how a population of H. neanderthalensis known to exist at 35k years ago and a population of H. sapiens known to be in the same region at the time conflicts with Out-Of-Africa. What this evidence shows is that the gene flow between the populations may have continued more recently than previously hypothesized.

The issue of interbreeding was discussed in the other thread (linked to in the OP). But basically, the OOA tree model fails to account for the fact that while we carry recent African-origin genetic material we also carry genes of recent non-African origin, which is and always has been the MH position.

The fact that this person's material didn't make it into today's gene pool also supports the MH explanation that the paucity of lineages outside of Africa results from lineage extinctions.

The question now is why, with such recent crossings, is there not more neanderthal DNA in present sapiens populations.

According to the article, the individual in question is not an ancestor of any modern human populations.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by AZPaul3, posted 06-23-2015 6:58 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by caffeine, posted 06-29-2015 11:25 AM Jon has responded
 Message 16 by Taq, posted 07-01-2015 1:15 PM Jon has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5541
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 7 of 25 (760609)
06-23-2015 7:55 PM


The folks at the Max Planck Institute have been doing awesome research into ancient DNA. And the technology is improving all the time!

This sure beats measuring bones, as we used to have to do a couple of decades ago to try and determine relationships.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 9:47 PM Coyote has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 25 (760620)
06-23-2015 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Coyote
06-23-2015 7:55 PM


This sure beats measuring bones, as we used to have to do a couple of decades ago to try and determine relationships.

It may beat it, but let's hope it doesn't replace it!


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Coyote, posted 06-23-2015 7:55 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Coyote, posted 06-23-2015 10:35 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5541
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 9 of 25 (760621)
06-23-2015 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Jon
06-23-2015 9:47 PM


True.

I got some good results measuring bones a few decades ago as part of my Ph.D. work. I used a good multivariate stat and had a decent sample size, and lots of variables.

So far DNA analysis in the same area is confusing, in part because it is much more detailed and because the sample size is still small. It takes a while to figure out what's going on.

But I think we'll eventually get more information from DNA than measuring bones--which is good!


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 9:47 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1216
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 10 of 25 (761174)
06-29-2015 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jon
06-23-2015 7:25 PM


According to the article, the individual in question is not an ancestor of any modern human populations.

Of course, there is no way that could be known.

Whether this sort of thing is considered as disproving an OOA model depends on exactly what you mean by 'out-of-Africa'. The idea of total replacement has been pretty convincingly disproven by the genetic evidence that we do carry genes from many archaic, non-African populations.

But whilst this extreme version of out of Africa is disproved by the genetic evidence, so is the extreme version of the multiregional hypothesis, since modern populations in Europe and Asia seem to have inherited only a minority of their genes from the middle Palaeolithic inhabitants of Europe and Asia. It looks like there was a population expansion from Africa, but that the expanding population interbred with local populations. The genetic signature of these archaic populations was mostly swamped by the expanding Africans - except for a few genes, most of which presumably were locally adaptive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jon, posted 06-23-2015 7:25 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 06-29-2015 11:31 AM caffeine has responded
 Message 13 by Jon, posted 06-29-2015 8:52 PM caffeine has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28454
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


(2)
Message 11 of 25 (761175)
06-29-2015 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by caffeine
06-29-2015 11:25 AM


I don't think anyone has ever suggested that humans stopped screwing around just because they left Africa. I remember seeing a cave wall that said "What happened in Romania stays in Romania."

I don't think anyone has thought that emerging humans didn't screw anyone they found along their road trips.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by caffeine, posted 06-29-2015 11:25 AM caffeine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by caffeine, posted 06-29-2015 1:55 PM jar has not yet responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1216
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 12 of 25 (761198)
06-29-2015 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by jar
06-29-2015 11:31 AM


I don't think anyone has ever suggested that humans stopped screwing around just because they left Africa. I remember seeing a cave wall that said "What happened in Romania stays in Romania."

I don't think anyone has thought that emerging humans didn't screw anyone they found along their road trips.

Several people have argued that there was no interbreeding between the recent emigrants from Africa and archaic humans elsewhere, and this is not just an old-fashioned view - some still argue in favour of the idea today. Here's an article from the American Journal of Physical Anthropology from as recent as 2011 arguing that the apparent sign of Neanderthal DNA in non-African populations is better explained by ancient African population structure than interbreeding.

ABE: On further thought, I'm willing to concede you're probably right about this. I was trying to find a clear statement from supporters of the total replacement model, but the most confident claims that there was no admixture go more like this:

quote:
We indeed show that the absence of Neanderthal mtDNA sequences in Europe is compatible with at most 120 admixture events between the two populations despite a likely cohabitation time of more than 12,000 y. This extremely low number strongly suggests an almost complete sterility between Neanderthal females and modern human males, implying that the two populations were probably distinct biological species.

So I guess it's not really a claim that modern humans didn't get it on with archaic humans, but simply that they couldn't make babies (or not fertile ones at least)

Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 06-29-2015 11:31 AM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 06-30-2015 7:12 AM caffeine has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 25 (761248)
06-29-2015 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by caffeine
06-29-2015 11:25 AM


Of course, there is no way that could be known.

I assumed the article meant that no known sequences from today have the characteristics expected in an ancestor of this individual.

...since modern populations in Europe and Asia seem to have inherited only a minority of their genes from the middle Palaeolithic inhabitants of Europe and Asia.

I think you mean that modern populations in Europe and Asia seem to have preserved only a minority of their Neanderthal genes.

The genetic signature of these archaic populations was mostly swamped by the expanding Africans - except for a few genes, most of which presumably were locally adaptive.

Or they were just swamped by the expanding African genes...

Edited by Jon, : No reason given.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by caffeine, posted 06-29-2015 11:25 AM caffeine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by caffeine, posted 07-01-2015 12:56 PM Jon has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18242
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 14 of 25 (761265)
06-30-2015 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by caffeine
06-29-2015 1:55 PM


So I guess it's not really a claim that modern humans didn't get it on with archaic humans, but simply that they couldn't make babies (or not fertile ones at least)

As I understand it the Neander head is larger than the Cro-magnon head, and this raises the possibility of increased death during childbirth for mother and child.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by caffeine, posted 06-29-2015 1:55 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1216
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 15 of 25 (761445)
07-01-2015 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Jon
06-29-2015 8:52 PM


I think you mean that modern populations in Europe and Asia seem to have preserved only a minority of their Neanderthal genes.

Isn't that a different way of saying the same thing?

Or they were just swamped by the expanding African genes...

That's a better way of saying what I was trying to say, though!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Jon, posted 06-29-2015 8:52 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Jon, posted 07-01-2015 8:17 PM caffeine has responded

  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017