[QUOTE]Originally posted by blitz77:
Hmmm? What was I making it out to be? Anyway, it highlights what previous measurements of the difference were based on-only single based substitutions between the two.
quote:
But the technique only picks up a particular type of variation, called a single base substitution. These occur whenever a single "letter" differs in corresponding strands of DNA from the two species.
Well, even that is not really true. DNA-DNA hybvridization cannot in fact discriminate between single-base pair differences. The only way to do that is by direct DNA sequence comparisons. And when doing so, obviously, indels are taken into account.
quote:
As they only compared about 0.3% of the DNA, they only glanced at the differences. Also, there are much greater differences in gene expression and other epigenetic factors.
Greater than what?
Are not chimp genomes also expressing genes at different rates than us?
It is not that WE are so much more diffeent than chimps than previously thought, it is just a new way of looking at the differences, for one thing, and the type of titles used in these articles are indicative of the anthropocentrism in not only , but
in some scientists, as well. For it is THE difference which may be larger than thought, not that WE are so much different.