Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-18-2019 6:57 AM
736 online now:
Heathen, vimesey (2 members, 734 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 856,901 Year: 11,937/19,786 Month: 1,718/2,641 Week: 227/708 Day: 2/52 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   All Human Beings Are Descendants of Adam
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1677
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 6.2


Message 112 of 118 (705330)
08-26-2013 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Dr Jack
02-25-2011 9:55 AM


A very, very old Y-chromosome Adam.
One thing that would indicate that our methods are fundamentally flawed is if YcA and ME came out as living at the same time or if YcA lived before ME.

I know I'm replying to something posted over three years ago, but I only just read it since this thread's been bumped, and felt obliged to plow in.

Calculations showing that Y-chromosonal Adam lived before Mitochondrial Eve would not indicate any fatal flaw in the methods. It may be more a priori likely for Mitochondrial Eve to be older, for the simple reason that successful males can have a lot more offspring than successful females. It's not, however, a definite fact.

And based on the information we currently have, it seems that it's not true. Y-chromosonal Adam is substantially older than mitochondrial Eve. I'm surprised how little coverage this story has gotten, but a wildly divergent Y-chromosone lineage has been discovered by commerical DNA sampling, and further investigation has found it present at a low frequency amongst African American and West African men. This lineage is estimated to have split from other known lineages more than 300,000 years ago. Y-chromosone Adam, it seems, was not an anatomically modern human.

It's been suggested this could be the result of introgressive hybridisation with another species of human in West African prehistory, just as seems to have happened with Neanderthals and Denisovans outside Africa. The difference is that this particular hybridisation event has resulted in strict patrilineal descendants still living today.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Dr Jack, posted 02-25-2011 9:55 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by kofh2u, posted 08-26-2013 12:47 PM caffeine has responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1677
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 6.2


(2)
Message 114 of 118 (705434)
08-27-2013 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by kofh2u
08-26-2013 12:47 PM


Re: A very, very old Y-chromosome Adam.
A recent report in US NEWS magazine referred to this as Y-chromosomal Adam, but the scientist had less knowledge of Genesis than would have useful in connecting this to Noah, instead.

Knowledge of Genesis would have served no use, since this has nothing to do with the Bible. The name 'Adam' was inspired by the Bible because of the Bible's huge literary influence on our culture. This concept has no more connection to the Biblical Adam than a football team would have to kings of Israel if someone described an unequal match as 'pitting David against Goliath'.

Given the amount of confusion it seems to have provoked, clearly 'Y-chromosome Adam' was a really bad choice of words.

Y-chromosome Adam is simply the last common patrilineal ancestor of all living humans. So if you count your way back through everyone's father's father's father's father's father's...... and keep going until they all meet - that's Y-chromosome Adam.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by kofh2u, posted 08-26-2013 12:47 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by kofh2u, posted 09-07-2013 5:11 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019