We are 5% Neanderthal

TimeTraveler

Immortalist
Registered Senior Member
This new study has found that 5% of us are Neanderthal. The study is scientific, and has been conducted in both Europe and Africa.

Study finds a bit of caveman in many

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 29 (UPI) -- Two U.S. researchers say many people may have a bit of Neanderthal in their genes.

A study published in the journal PLoS Genetics says people of European descent may be 5 percent Neanderthal.

Used sequence data from the Environmental Genome Project, Vincent Plagnol and Jeffrey Wall of the the University of Southern California found strong evidence for ancient admixture in both a European and a West African population, the study said.

The researchers looked at 34 people from Utah with ancestors from Northern and Western Europe and Yoruba people from West Africa.

The researchers focused on linkage "disequilibriums", or sections within genes that did not make sense if only modern human matings are considered, the London Telegraph reported.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/ind...UPI-1-20060829-21370800-bc-us-neanderthal.xml
http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/ind...UPI-1-20060829-21370800-bc-us-neanderthal.xml

What does this mean, and how does this change our current definition of race? 5% Neanderthal, and accross our appearance based definition of races.

Neanderthals: Still in Our Genes?[

Neanderthals: Still in Our Genes?
Jennifer Viegas, Discovery News
small text
large text

Aug. 22, 2006 — Individuals of European descent may be 5 percent Neanderthal, while West Africans could be related to an archaic human population, according to a recent study of genes of people from Yoruba and individuals living in Utah with ancestry from Northern and Western Europe.

Since both groups spread, the find suggests we all have a bit of archaic DNA in our genes. This counters the view that modern humans left Africa and replaced all other existing hominid populations.
advertisement
line

"Instead of a population that left Africa 100,000 years ago and replaced all other archaic human groups, we propose that this population interacted with another population that had been in Europe for much longer, maybe 400,000 years," co-author Vincent Plagnol told Discovery News.

Plagnol, a researcher in the Department of Molecular and Computational Biology at the University of Southern California, and colleague Jeffrey Wall analyzed patterns of ancestral linkage in 135 modern individuals.

Using statistics and computer modeling, they focused on linkage disequilibriums, or sections within genes that did not make sense if only modern human matings were considered. The missing genetic links only fit if some other hominid population was introduced into the model, according to the paper, which was published in PLoS Genetics.

"We considered the data from modern human DNA and fitted a model to explain what we see," explained Plagnol. "We found that a simple model cannot explain the data if we do not add an ‘ancestral population.’ If this population did not cross with modern humans — or almost did not — the effect is too small to explain the data. We find that a rate of 5 percent is what is needed to explain what we see."

The researchers agree with recent studies that concluded Neanderthals did not contribute any mitochondrial DNA — genetic material that is passed from mothers to children. However, they say other portions of the European genome, such as those associated with nuclear DNA, may still harbor the Neanderthal imprint.



Plagnol said different parts of the genome have different ancestry, so an individual could have a fraction of a certain chromosome that was inherited from a Neanderthal, but then possess "very typical homo sapiens mtDNA."

The scientists are not certain what early human group could have contributed to West African DNA, but both Europeans and Africans in the study showed about the same 5 percent archaic contribution. Neanderthals are believed to have originated in Africa around 400,000 years ago, but they left and then settled in Europe, hence the apparent lack of interaction with modern humans in Africa.
advertisement
line

Alan Templeton, of Washington University in St.Louis, also conducted DNA studies and came to similar conclusions.

"The humans who were in Africa and the humans who were in Eurasia were regularly interchanging genes," he said, "there was interbreeding and when humans came out of Africa 100,000 years ago they did not replace these other human populations in Eurasia."

New technologies are being developed to sequence nuclear DNA from fossils, so in the near future, scientists may learn more about how modern human genes compare with those of archaic humans, like Neanderthals.

Any comments?
 
Makes sense that some horny guys would have mated with Neandertal females (or vice versa) from time to time, as it's known that Homo sapiens and Homo neandertalensis overlapped in geography and time in Europe and the Middle East.

I'll have to read the articles in detail to see if there's conclusive evidence, however.
 
TimeTraveler said:
This new study has found that 5% of us are Neanderthal. The study is scientific, and has been conducted in both Europe and Africa.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/ind...UPI-1-20060829-21370800-bc-us-neanderthal.xml

What does this mean, and how does this change our current definition of race? 5% Neanderthal, and accross our appearance based definition of races.



Any comments?

I'm proud of my Neanderthal genes. I love the 'club' meetings, spear throwing and bison hunts on the weekends, camp fire dancing and cave painting. Where's my comb and my wolly rhino underwear? :D
 
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...d=949111&md5=ae8fd317d8c4f75ab1bb56d623ed9489

Mt DNA was isolated from 12 Neandertal specimens, not full genome DNA or partial genome data.

The retrieval and the analysis of Neandertal mtDNA sequences have allowed the exclusion of the possibility of a mitochondrial contribution of Neandertals to the modern human gene pool 1 and 6. In addition, a low genetic diversity was observed among Neandertals, similar to that observed among modern humans [5].

No mt DNA shared with humans. That is weird if 5% of our genetic material is shared with Neandertals.
 
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...md5=64ea290b375284dc94f66d1a79337be7&ref=full

Thus, overall, the results suggest an African origin of the human mtDNA gene pool, as has been claimed when chimpanzee sequences ( [50 and 17]) and a nuclear insertion of the mitochondrial control region ( [53]) were used in similar analyses.

Both pairwise sequence comparisons and phylogenetic analyses tend to place the Neandertal mtDNA sequence outside modern human mtDNA variation. Furthermore, the divergence between the Neandertal mtDNA sequence and the modern human mitochondrial gene pool is estimated to be about four-fold older than the diversity of the modern human mtDNA gene pool. This shows that the diversity among Neandertal mtDNA sequences would have to be at least four times larger than among modern humans in order for other Neandertal sequences to be ancestral to modern human sequences. Thus, although based on a single Neandertal sequence, the present results indicate that Neandertals did not contribute mtDNA to modern humans.
 
TimeTraveler said:
This new study has found that 5% of us are Neanderthal. The study is scientific, and has been conducted in both Europe and Africa.

Proper link for this study.

http://genetics.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pgen.0020105

The authors rather conclude this:
All published Neanderthal mtDNA sequences are quite different from all known modern human mtDNA sequences, and it is extremely unlikely that Neanderthals made any contribution to the modern human mtDNA gene pool. Although this observation is consistent with the RAO model, it does not prove that Neanderthals and modern humans did not interbreed—the two groups may have mixed but Neanderthal mtDNA may have been lost by the chance action of genetic drift.

cowards.
 
I thought Neanderthals were a completely different species?
 
spuriousmonkey said:
So the only way we could have Neanderthal genes if human females had sex with Neanderthal males. And not vice versa.

Yea...............There must have been not to much to chose from back then, Neanderthals or Homosapiens. Everybody (men & women) must have been real ugly in those days. :D
 
If you actually read the paper. Which none of you will do you will find that the paper is purely based on a model. There is no factual evidence whatsoever that there is 5% Neanderthal genes in our genome. The model presupposes that the difference between the European and african population is due to Neanderthal influence and another one. The model predicts that this influence is 5%.

What it really means is that there is a model that predicts there is 5% archaic DNA in our genome. A likely source could be Neanderthal interference.

Or as the authors say
It would indicate that archaic populations such as Neanderthals must have made a substantial contribution to the modern gene pool in Europe. We observe a similar pattern for West African populations even though a clear source population has not yet been found.

Not that it has to be even an admixture event:
Even though we cannot exclude the possibility that an alternative demographic scenario is the cause of this pattern, this aspect of the data was chosen to be the most sensitive to an admixture event.

As the authors fully well tell in the real paper.


Not that you could know anything like this if you just read headlines or think biology is easy.
 
So, Spurious Monkey, thanks for reviewing this in greater detail.

Apparently, IF there was some contribution of neandertal genes to the sapiens gene pool, it would have been the sapiens women sneaking out for a fling with the neandertal males, not the other way around, is that correct? So, did the sapiens males know they were being cucolded? Did the females brag to their friends about how they 'got it on' with one of those 'neandertals'. Anyway, it raises lots of interesting social questions.

Technically, if they could breed and produce viable off-spring, neandertals were actually not a different species, but more like a different race than the sapiens race. That also makes sense to me.
 
spuriousmonkey said:

What the hell is genetic drift? I've never heard that term before, can you or they explain what it is?

The fact is, it seems obvious to me and everyone else that humans and neanderthals inter-breeded, if we are 5% neanderthal it would explain a lot on the historical and bone record level, but explain nothing on genetic levels because I'm sure not all neanderthals had the same genes.

What is important is, how do neanderthal genes influence brain development because all the other stuff does not really tell me anything. SO here is a question for you all, do we have neanderthal in our brains or in our bodies?
 
G. F. Schleebenhorst said:
It just proves that women are fucking stupid and need to be taught who to breed with.

How exactly do you control who women breed with? How exactly do you teach that?
 
Walter L. Wagner said:
So, Spurious Monkey, thanks for reviewing this in greater detail.

Apparently, IF there was some contribution of neandertal genes to the sapiens gene pool, it would have been the sapiens women sneaking out for a fling with the neandertal males, not the other way around, is that correct? So, did the sapiens males know they were being cucolded? Did the females brag to their friends about how they 'got it on' with one of those 'neandertals'. Anyway, it raises lots of interesting social questions.

Technically, if they could breed and produce viable off-spring, neandertals were actually not a different species, but more like a different race than the sapiens race. That also makes sense to me.


Yeah, maybe a race or breed, the question is, if at core there are two types, neanderthal and homosapian, could there have been others? Have humans been mating this way all along?
 
Likely there were many others. That might be part of why there is now so much variation in the human species, with a lot of admixture of other genes from other related 'species' that weren't fully speciated, so the offspring were viable.

Lots of room for more research in this area.

Just yesterday I saw a 60+ male of one race accompanying an obviously pregnant spouse of 30+ years of an entirely different race. If it's happening now, it certainly would have been happening then too!
 
Back
Top