Mark of Kri
Registered Member
- Holliday, T. W., Gautney, J. R., Friedl, L. (2014). "Right for the Wrong Reasons: Reflections on Modern Human Origins in the Post-Neanderthal Genome Era". Current Anthropology. 55(6): 696-724A common theme among the RAO-supporting commentators (Harvati, Hublin, Stringer) is that the 1%–4% contribution of genes to some modern humans from Neanderthals (and similar genetic contributions from the “Denisovans”) is insignificant, and therefore RAO remains the most viable model of modern human origins.
While (some) living humans only have 1-4% of Neanderthal genes which might be considered trivial - it turns out (some) Upper Palaeolithic humans had a larger percentage of Neanderthal genes:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v524/n7564/full/nature14558.htmlHere we analyse DNA from a 37,000–42,000-year-old modern human from Peştera cu Oase, Romania. Although the specimen contains small amounts of human DNA, we use an enrichment strategy to isolate sites that are informative about its relationship to Neanderthals and present-day humans. We find that on the order of 6–9% of the genome of the Oase individual is derived from Neanderthals, more than any other modern human sequenced to date.
I wouldn't say 6-9% is negligible or trivial. In my view these findings seem to have falsified the Out of Africa (Recent African Origin) hypothesis. What do you think?