Mitochondrial Eve
- Thread starter C.E.O
- Start date
Firstly eve is not really 1 person but a group of them, secondly it only refers to people who are descended from those who migrated out of Africa. At some point after the migration there was a bottle neck where the surviving lines got down to 100 women (from memory).
Also there could have been other women alive and with decedents but they only have surviving male decedents. Mitochondria from males doesn't get passed on the children so if a women has only male children her Mitochondrial line dies out but she still existed and still had children
Also there could have been other women alive and with decedents but they only have surviving male decedents. Mitochondria from males doesn't get passed on the children so if a women has only male children her Mitochondrial line dies out but she still existed and still had children
"Fossils?" There were _people_ before her. Mitochondrial Eve was just a woman in a society that was our most recent common ancestor on the female side. At the time there was nothing to distinguish her from any of the other women around. Her offspring just survived to modern day.
Well specifically the lack of variety. As you probably know mitochondrial DNA is passed down only by the mother, so we can track it back more easily.
Not one, but a group, it's the first time to hear this, it's totally new for me.
I remember I read that we never be under 2000 person, but I don't know about women.
No; mitochondrial eve is the woman all women alive today can trace their ancestry back to. as single woman. if you postulate a group of women, then you need to go back a few more generations to the woman all of them are descended from.
Actually all humans can trace their mitochondrial DNA back to a small group who survived large-scale climate change.
Mitochondrial Eve cannot therefore be a single human. All humans carry mitochondrial DNA which can be traced back to this small group which most likely contained several women. The size of the group meant that those females were most probably quite closely related.
Mitochondrial Eve cannot therefore be a single human. All humans carry mitochondrial DNA which can be traced back to this small group which most likely contained several women. The size of the group meant that those females were most probably quite closely related.
Replying with underlining doesn't change the fact you've got it wrong.
From Wikipedia on Mitochondrial Eve : "In other words, she was the most recent woman from whom all living humans today descend, on their mother's side, and through the mothers of those mothers and so on, back until all lines converge on one person."
You simply need to go back a few more generations with your 'group' and the women will have a common ancestral greatgrandmother, Mitochonrial Eve.
You should look to find that other missing half before making unsupportable suggestions. The wikipedia article is a good starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_eve
There is more than one definition of human. The biology definition is based on DNA. There is another definition of human that is based on the mind and disposition. Wolves and poodles are both dogs via DNA, but only one is domesticated in terms of disposition; canine DNA but different brain firmware.
Going from wandering, into civilization, was not due to major changes in the DNA, into another human species. It was all about changes in temperament via the brain and education. Eve was connected to change of temperament. She may have had the same mitochondrial DNA as the earlier pre-humans (wild), but she differed based on the new disposition (domesticated).
The new disposition involved willpower. Willpower, in turn, is not limited to the DNA based instincts. Modern humans can chose unnatural behavior (requires social mops and zoo keepers) and depart from natural DNA based instincts. Eve represents the change when the mind/brain allowed human to use willpower to depart from the DNA. Today the science mind can directly tweak the DNA to create unnatural like designer babies.
The mitochondrial DNA could be misleading in terms of the temperament change from prehuman (wild like the wolf) to human (domesticated) based on disposition and willpower outside the limits of the DNA. Religion came before science and did not base Eve on a chemical standard (DNA) that would not occur until centuries in the future. They could see disposition thousands of years ago.
Going from wandering, into civilization, was not due to major changes in the DNA, into another human species. It was all about changes in temperament via the brain and education. Eve was connected to change of temperament. She may have had the same mitochondrial DNA as the earlier pre-humans (wild), but she differed based on the new disposition (domesticated).
The new disposition involved willpower. Willpower, in turn, is not limited to the DNA based instincts. Modern humans can chose unnatural behavior (requires social mops and zoo keepers) and depart from natural DNA based instincts. Eve represents the change when the mind/brain allowed human to use willpower to depart from the DNA. Today the science mind can directly tweak the DNA to create unnatural like designer babies.
The mitochondrial DNA could be misleading in terms of the temperament change from prehuman (wild like the wolf) to human (domesticated) based on disposition and willpower outside the limits of the DNA. Religion came before science and did not base Eve on a chemical standard (DNA) that would not occur until centuries in the future. They could see disposition thousands of years ago.
Good question. Yes. All animals that mate and have sex via small sperm that are absent mitochondria (which includes chimps) can have a 'mitochondrial eve' as one of their progenitors. I use lower case 'eve' to distinguish from the human 'Eve', in which that 'eve' is specific to the modern species in question.
This appears to be all conjecture on your part. Do you have any support for your assertions? It appears relatively meaningless.