PDA

View Full Version : Neanderthal Genome Sequencing Yields Surprising Results and Opens a New Door to Future Studies



Arne
05-06-2010, 07:47 PM
BERKELEY, CA —The veil of mystery surrounding our extinct hominid cousins, the Neanderthals, has been at least partially lifted to reveal surprising results. Scientists with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) have sequenced genomic DNA from fossilized Neanderthal bones. Their results show that the genomes of modern humans and Neanderthals are at least 99.5-percent identical, but despite this genetic similarity, and despite the two species having cohabitated the same geographic region for thousands of years, there is no evidence of any significant crossbreeding between the two. Based on these early results, Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis last shared a common ancestor approximately 700,000 years ago

http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/assets/images/2006/Nov/15-Wed/Neanderthal_2D.jpg
Neanderthals are the closest hominid relatives of modern humans. The two species co-existed in Europe and western Asia as late as 30,000 years ago. (American Museum of Natural History)



In a paper published in the November 17, 2006 issue of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by Edward Rubin, director of both JGI and Berkeley Lab’s Genomics Division, reports the development of a “Neanderthal metagenomic library,” which they used to characterize more than 65,000 DNA base pairs of Neanderthal origin. Their results not only provide new information about Neanderthals, but also point the way to a new strategy for studying aspects of Neanderthal biology that would never be evident from archaeological artifacts and fossils.

In addition, the technology described in the paper also marks an important advance in the field of metagenomics, which is increasingly being used to sequence the complex mixtures of microbes found in the environment. Metagenomics techniques are considered crucial for tapping the potential of Earth’s more exotic microbe-containing environments to find bio-based solutions to problems of renewable energy production, environmental clean-up, and carbon sequestration, as well as breakthroughs in critical areas such as pharmaceuticals and agriculture.

“The current state of our knowledge concerning Neanderthals and their relationship to modern humans is largely inference and speculation based on archaeological data and a limited number of hominid remains,” the authors state in their Science paper. “In this study, we have demonstrated that Neanderthal genomic sequences can be recovered using a metagenomic library-based approach, and that specific Neanderthal sequences can be obtained from such libraries.”

The title of the Science paper is Sequencing and analysis of Neanderthal genomic DNA. Co-authoring the paper with Rubin were James Noonan, Graham Coop, Sridhar Kudaravalli, Doug Smith, Johannes Krause, Joe Alessi, Feng Chen, Darren Platt, Svante Pääbo and Jonathan Pritchard.

Said Rubin, “We predict that in the near future anthropologists will be able to develop hypotheses about our extinct ancestors through the scanning of billions of base pairs of DNA sequences available on the web rather than only being able to study the limited number of bony remains and associated artifacts that are available in hard to access museum collections and field sites. Plus, the new techniques we have developed will have useful applications across a range of genomics efforts related to DOE’s energy and environment missions”

In the summer of 1856, a partial skeleton of a hominid was found at the Feldhofer Cave in the Neander Valley of Germany. This skeleton would eventually be dubbed the “Neanderthal” man and its discovery generated enormous public curiosity and scientific debate that have continued for the past 150 years.

Starting around 1997, scientists began applying genetic technology to the study of Neanderthals. Research led by Svante Pääbo, currently of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, established that Neanderthals were cousins rather than ancestors of modern humans. This research also indicated that humans and Neanderthals broke off into separate species about 500,000 years ago. However, these studies were based on analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), genetic material that lies outside the nucleus of the cell. Although mtDNA tends to remain preserved longer than nuclear DNA, it provides limited biological information. The vast majority of the genome is comprised of nuclear DNA, which contains almost all of the genes.

“Nuclear DNA is where all the biology is,” said Noonan, a post-doctoral fellow in Rubin’s research group who holds joint appointments with Berkeley Lab and JGI. “If you want to understand how traits like language and cognition are encoded, you have to study nuclear DNA.”

Studying ancient genomes from fossilized material by directly sequencing the DNA, as has been done for the genomes of humans and other contemporary organisms, represents a major challenge. As a fossil ages, its DNA is degraded by chemical processes. It also becomes contaminated with DNA from the microbes that colonize both the fossil and its immediate environment, and by other organisms, including the humans who handle the fossil.

http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/assets/images/2006/Nov/15-Wed/Rubin-Noonan.jpg

Dr. Edward (Eddy) Rubin is a research geneticist and the director of the Joint Genome Institute. He has been a pioneer in the field of metagenomics, in which DNA extracted directly from an environmental sample is used to obtain a profile of the microbial community within the sample. James Noonan is a post-doctoral fellow in Dr. Rubin’s research group. (photo by Roy Kaltschmidt, Berkeley Lab Creative Services Office)



While a group led by co-author Pääbo is attempting to directly sequence the Neanderthal genome, Rubin, Noonan and their colleagues are meeting the fossilized DNA challenge with a unique solution that’s been described as a “targeted approach.” Essentially, they “immortalize” all of the DNA in a fossil sample into metagenomic libraries where individual fragments of the ancient DNA are propagated in microbes. The DNA propagated in the microbes can either be sequenced or specific sequences can in a targeted manner be specifically fished out of the library and studied.

Said Noonan, “Since direct sequencing is random, you can't go after specific sequences for genes that might be different between humans and Neanderthals. Instead you have to wait for the sequences to show up in the reads, which could take a long time. Also, with direct sequencing, once the DNA has been sequenced, it's gone, and you have to go get more from the specimen. In principle, employing the targeted library approach we are able to circumvent this and other problems. Once the Neanderthal DNA is cloned using our method, we have it forever, and we can recover specific sequences from the library whenever they are needed.”

Since the findings reported in this Science paper suggest that only about 0.5-percent of Neanderthal genome differs from the human genome, focusing scientific attention on those sequences promises to be more efficient and cost-effective than trying to directly sequence the entire Neanderthal genome. Also, the metagenomic library approach enables scientists to obtain specific sequences from multiple Neanderthal specimens precisely and without having to generate lots of random sequences.

For the results reported in their Science paper, Rubin and Noonan and their colleagues extracted all the DNA in the femur bone of a 38,000-year-old male Neanderthal specimen from Vindija, Croatia. Using a combination of the sequencing technologies deployed in the Human Genome Project, plus a new massively parallel pyrosequencing technology, in which enormous amounts of DNA sequence is rapidly and inexpensively generated, they were able to recover 65,250 base pairs of Neanderthal DNA from the approximately 6 million base pairs of contaminating DNA in the fossil. A critical factor in helping to confirm that the recovered DNA was Neanderthal rather than human was the short length of the individual Neanderthal sequences.

Said Rubin, “We determined that the ancient DNA fragments from Neanderthal in the sample were about 50 to 70 base pairs in length, compared to the hundreds to thousands of base pair lengths of contemporary human DNA that could have contaminated the fossil. This makes sense because modern human DNA wouldn’t have suffered the 38,000 years of insults that the Neanderthal DNA experienced.”

Comparing Neanderthal to human and chimpanzee genomes showed that at multiple locations the Neanderthal DNA sequences matched chimpanzee DNA but not human.

“This enabled us to calculate for the first time when in pre-history Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis coalesced to a single genome,” Rubin said.

Comparative genomics in this study indicated that the common genetic ancestor of Neanderthal and modern humans lived about 706,000 years ago. The ancestors of all humans and Neanderthals split into two separate species some 330,000 years later. Rubin and his colleagues were also able to shed new light on the long-standing question of whether Neanderthals and humans mated during the thousands of years the two species cohabitated parts of Europe. Some scientists have suggested that rather than die out, Neanderthals as a species were bred out of existence by the overwhelming populations of Homo sapiens.

Said Rubin, “While unable to definitively conclude that interbreeding between the two species of humans did not occur, analysis of the nuclear DNA from the Neanderthal suggests the low likelihood of it having occurred at any appreciable level.”

With their metagenomic library-based approach to genome sequencing and analysis, Rubin and Noonan believe that in the future, scientists will be able to study specific sequences within the Neanderthal genome to determine the genetic changes that distinguished modern humans from our Neanderthal cousins. Among other advantages, this might help answer the most persistent mystery of all: Why did Neanderthals become extinct?

In addition, said Rubin, “Reaching into the Neanderthal genome library will facilitate future sequence-based scientific explorations of Neanderthal biological features, features that could never be explored based on the few bones and associated stone artifacts that are left for anthropologists to identify.”

Co-authors Smith, Alessi, Chen and Platt are affiliated with the JGI. Co-authors Pritchard, Coop and Kudaravalli are affiliated with the Department of Human Genetics at the University of Chicago. Co-author Krause is a member of Pääbo’s research group at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.

This research was supported by Berkeley Lab and funded in part by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The U.S. Department of Energy provides operational support for the JGI user facility.

Berkeley Lab is a U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory located in Berkeley, California. It conducts unclassified scientific research and is
managed by the University of California.

Source
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/Genomics-Neanderthal.html

There´s also a Study done by the University in Leipzig about the Neandertal Genoms which founds traces in Modern Man.

Liffrea
05-07-2010, 01:08 PM
A PART of us is still pure caveman, researchers have revealed.

Neanderthal man interbred with modern humans and is responsible for up to four per cent of our DNA.

The astonishing finding is the result of the completion of a unique scientific task lasting four years.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/173639/Cavemen-why-we-re-all-just-a-little-bit-Neanderthal

Allenson
05-07-2010, 01:21 PM
Aye! This is a pretty big story for those of us interested in such matters. I haven't yet delved into this latest article but will today.

I've attached the article for everyone's reading pleasure. :)

Toni
05-07-2010, 01:29 PM
A PART of us is still pure caveman

Neanderthal man interbred with modern humans and is responsible for up to four per cent of our DNA.

Yes, that part of the population are racialists. It is also characterized by a tiny brain-size.

Arne
05-07-2010, 01:30 PM
hey liffrea. did you noticed ?
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=206981#post206981

Allenson
05-07-2010, 01:42 PM
hey liffrea. did you noticed ?
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=206981#post206981

We'll get the two threads merged. :)

Liffrea
05-07-2010, 01:51 PM
Originally Posted by Ead
hey liffrea. did you noticed ?

Nope, I checked in anthropology and genetics, didn’t think to look in science.

Now I will have to take a contract out on your head.:D

Saruman
05-07-2010, 02:07 PM
Ah, looks like Coon was right after all. :p And since he considered Borrebies most neanderthal and with me being good part Borreby that means I am neanderthal as well!:thumb001: :eek:
We need a neanderthal bill of rights! :cool:

Arne
05-07-2010, 02:11 PM
Me, more Neandertal than you, ugh

Allenson
05-07-2010, 02:18 PM
Well, we'll see. These things have a way of swinging back and forth with regard to what the conventional wisdom is amongst the researchers.

I'm of the mind though that the various human species (Sapiens, Neanderthals, Erectus, etc.) overlapped for long enough in both time and place for there to have had to be some intermixture. It's only human, naturally. ;)

It's quite possible that modern racial groupings are at least partially the result of different admixture levels of the various Hominids that fanned out across the globe before we did and the subsequent blending of these different human groups (Erectus in east Asia, Neanderthals in Europe/west Asia).

Here's an excellent book on the subject:

http://www.oupcanada.com/catalog/9780199239184.html

http://www.oupcanada.com/documents/Image/Jackets/l/9780199239184.jpg

Beorn
05-07-2010, 02:19 PM
It didn't mention it on the two articles, but I have read some articles which refer to it being only found in non-Africans. Is this to say it points to a striclty Neanderthal and European (or should I say Eurasian?) phenomenon?

Allenson
05-07-2010, 03:07 PM
It didn't mention it on the two articles, but I have read some articles which refer to it being only found in non-Africans. Is this to say it points to a striclty Neanderthal and European (or should I say Eurasian?) phenomenon?

In short, yes. The latest paper that just came out yesterday basically says that modern Eurasians more closely match the Neanderthal genome than do modern Africans.

Here's a quote from a good anthro blog:


1. If Neandertals contributed no genes to living populations, then they should be equally related to all living people, no matter where in the world those people live.

Green and colleagues show that the Neandertal genome is closer to some humans than others. People whose ancestry lies outside Africa are significantly more like Neandertals than are people who live in Africa today. In this study, the authors include whole genomes from people in France, China and Papua New Guinea outside Africa, and Yoruba and San inside Africa. The Africans are not as close to the Neandertal as any of the non-Africans.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/neandertals-live-genome-sequencing-2010.html

lei.talk
05-07-2010, 04:02 PM
Yes, that part of the population are racialists.
It is also characterized by a tiny brain-size.

actually, you have that backwards:


http://i67.tinypic.com/2nizoxs.gif (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=481#post481)


ample evidence is provided (http://www.white-history.com/index.htm)

:levitate:

would this be easier (http://beo.sk/pochod-titanov)

:icon1:
*

Loddfafner
05-07-2010, 04:03 PM
So I take it multiregionalism is back on the table.

SuuT
05-07-2010, 04:07 PM
Is this conclusive? - As Allenson says, it seems to go back and forth.

Allenson
05-07-2010, 04:23 PM
So I take it multiregionalism is back on the table.

Was it ever off? Amongst rational people, that is? ;)



Is this conclusive? - As Allenson says, it seems to go back and forth.

We'll see. I haven't had time yet today to really pour through the literature but hopefully over the weekend I can digest it some.

Dienekes isn't convinced, I can tell ya that.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/05/tales-of-neanderthal-admixture-in.html



Yes, that part of the population are racialists. It is also characterized by a tiny brain-size.

Cranial capacity of Neanderthals was as large as, and in many cases, larger than, that of "anatomically modern" humans. :)

Agrippa
05-07-2010, 04:50 PM
The only thing which was really proven so far is that Eurasians-East Africans share genes with Neandertaloids which the Subsaharan Africans, which are others genetically quite variable and archaic in comparison, don't have.

They used a very limited number of modern human variants for comparison and they only used the Neandertal genome for looking at genetic traits Homo sapiens evolved and Homo (sapiens?) neanderthalensis didnt.

So they found out that (big surprise :rolleyes2: ) genes for brain development and the skull might be different and were positively selected in modern humans, not in Neandertaloids.

They also dealt with a very small amoung of potential Neandertal DNA in the samples so far, namely 1 to 4 percent.

Thats actually close to nothing, phenotypically completely irrelevant and the respective Neandertal traits indeed were largely bred out.

But the real interesting question, which they didnt answered, is whether, regardless of how small the genetic contribution overall might have been, genes of the Neandertaloids were positively selected!

THATS the real question!

Because that would mean, regardless of how backward and primitive the Neandertaloids were overall, that probably SOME genetic traits they had were advantageous and were positively selected in those which came into contact with them - at least in some of those races - but are absent among others.

Additionally, since they just compared genomes and found out that "Afrasians"/Eurasians + East Africans have more genes in common with these Neandertaloids than Subsaharan Africans, which are the Palaeafrican bunch which is more primitive and some said would have become almost a new species without later intermixture, not anything else.

So there is still this possibility, which they recognised by themselves:

Although gene flow from Neandertals into modern humans when they first left sub-Saharan Africa seems to be the most parsimonious model compatible with the current data, other scenarios are also possible. For example, we cannot currently rule out a scenario in which the ancestral population of present-day non-Africans was more closely related to Neandertals than the ancestral population of present-day Africans due to ancient substructure within Africa (Fig. 6). If after the divergence of Neandertals there was incomplete genetic homogenization between what were to become the ancestors of non-Africans and Africans, present-day non-Africans would be more closely related to Neandertals than are Africans. In fact, old population substructure in Africa has been suggested based on genetic (81) as well as paleontological data (86).

Thats absolutely an option!

And even if they mixed, it most likely happened, like always suggested, rather with the more progressive Near Eastern Neandertals, which is also more likely because all non-Subsaharans seem to show it, so an early sapiens-group in the Near East might have acquired it, so it was spread around the rest of the globe.

Bloodeagle
05-07-2010, 05:09 PM
Bryan Sykes, a professor of human genetics at Oxford University, says the last of the real Neanderthal bloodline could have been carried by a pair of Mid Wales twins who died in the 1980s. It could make the brothers the missing link between ancient and modern man.
In his new book Blood of the Isles, which traces the ancestry of the British, Prof Sykes says he first heard of the Tregaron Neanderthals while visiting the 13th Century Talbot Hotel in Mid Wales during a research trip. The twin bachelors lived behind the ruins of a Cistercian monastery at nearby Strata Florida, where they were apparently visited every year by school pupils eager to learn about human evolution.
The boffin spent 10 years taking samples from 10,000 people around Britain and Ireland and he found people in parts of Mid Wales whose bloodlines stretch back 10,000 or even 12,000 years, to when man first began repopulating Britain after the last Ice Age. He said: "In Mid Wales, around Tregaron, I found the oldest ancestry. We were looking at modern descendants of the oldest ancestors in Britain. There are pockets of people in Mid Wales whose ancestors go right back 10,000 years. They would have been hunter-gatherers. The fact that Wales and Mid Wales is hilly and mountainous is one of the reasons it has been undisturbed and we can see some of the oldest DNA here."
While some may accuse his claims as crackpot, Prof Sykes is a respected academic, whose book also reveals the Welsh have the oldest DNA in Britain and Ireland.

Source: icWales (24 september 2006)

Agrippa
05-07-2010, 05:48 PM
Just assume such a situation for the second option I mentioned:

- Blue: Classic Neandertals, eliminated by Homo sapiens with very few traces if any at all
- Cyan: Progressive Neandertaloids which had contact to Homo sapiens, some genes left in Afrasians but not Subsaharans because:
a) genflow with Homo sapiens
b) closer relation to Afrasians, which split off from the Palaeafricans earlier than from Neandertaloids

Because of that, Afrasians are closer to Neandertals, even classic ones, than Palaeafricans. BUT I would really like to see the results if looking at the Near Eastern Neandertaloids, BECAUSE they might share even MUCH more genetic variants!

- Red: Modern Homo sapiens, ancestors of modern Afrasians
- Khaki: Palaeafricans, branched off early but got genflow from Afrasians (one author can be quoted with "almost two species" because of a possible isolation of these two Afrasian and Palaeafrican populations)

Allenson
05-07-2010, 05:51 PM
The only thing which was really proven so far is that Eurasians-East Africans share genes with Neandertaloids which the Subsaharan Africans, which are others genetically quite variable and archaic in comparison, don't have.

Frans and I emailed a bit last night about this latest development and he wrote this:


I hope Agrippa can stomach the sheer atrocity of the news, otherwise pour him some strong coffee and give him an asperine on my behalf!

:p

Agrippa
05-07-2010, 06:07 PM
Frans and I emailed a bit last night about this latest development and he wrote this:
:p

He visited me on my German online place already, its nice he thinks about my health and well being :thumbs up

Liffrea
05-07-2010, 06:58 PM
Originally Posted by Agrippa
Because that would mean, regardless of how backward and primitive the Neandertaloids were overall, that probably SOME genetic traits they had were advantageous and were positively selected in those which came into contact with them - at least in some of those races - but are absent among others.

Hmmm the MC1R gene (rufosity) perhaps? Though, as far as I am aware, it offers no adaptive advantage so perhaps modern human males had a thing for Neanderthal women with red hair!?



Originally Posted by Loddfafner
So I take it multiregionalism is back on the table.

Probably not, at least not in its original form, some meld of anatomically modern human development in East Africa and interbreeding with archaic human populations globally seems plausible to me.

Treffie
05-07-2010, 07:04 PM
Bloodeagle

Adrian Targett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddar_Man) has the longest recorded lineage in the world (so far) :thumb001:

Liffrea
05-07-2010, 07:05 PM
I've seen worse (where's the mouthwash)....:D

http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll54/Liffrea66/_Neanderthal_redhead-1.jpg

Agrippa
05-07-2010, 07:07 PM
Hmmm the MC1R gene (rufosity) perhaps? Though, as far as I am aware, it offers no adaptive advantage so perhaps modern human males had a thing for Neanderthal women with red hair!?

Well, if we assume that blond hair is younger and more progressive (its more adaptive for sure) than rufosity, rufosity might have been the "first & fast" adaption to the European habitat's low UV levels.

So regardless of sexual preference, which would be an option too, it could have served as the fasted way of depigmentation in the mixed ones. That way establishing itself among the earlist Europeans, which were then replaced by blonds and brunettes, which needed longer to get a more balanced result, higher tan ability, which in turn slowly but steadily replaced the rufous earlist Europoids.

Actually there are many possibilties, even if Neandertalers had it, who says that the same mutation couldnt have happen twice, independently in Neandertals and sapiens?

I really dunno. Speculations can be just more or less reasonable based on what we know, so far I would be really careful, even more so if the admixture would be limited to the Near East and all Afrasians "on the move", because other Afrasians dont have the rufosity gene neither.

The admixture level in various populations would be really interesting too - whether there is a difference or not, how big and where etc.

But this is really just the start, now the real interesting work begins...

Tony
05-08-2010, 09:09 PM
Wow I wonder how John de Nugent will cope with this , one of his theories (but he's no way a scholar) was that the modern Jews are the descendants of Sapiens-Neanderthal miscegeneation , and he took this idea by a Jew author (whose name I can't remember right now)




Just assume such a situation for the second option I mentioned:

- Blue: Classic Neandertals, eliminated by Homo sapiens with very few traces if any at all
- Cyan: Progressive Neandertaloids which had contact to Homo sapiens, some genes left in Afrasians but not Subsaharans because:
a) genflow with Homo sapiens
b) closer relation to Afrasians, which split off from the Palaeafricans earlier than from Neandertaloids

Because of that, Afrasians are closer to Neandertals, even classic ones, than Palaeafricans. BUT I would really like to see the results if looking at the Near Eastern Neandertaloids, BECAUSE they might share even MUCH more genetic variants!

- Red: Modern Homo sapiens, ancestors of modern Afrasians
- Khaki: Palaeafricans, branched off early but got genflow from Afrasians (one author can be quoted with "almost two species" because of a possible isolation of these two Afrasian and Palaeafrican populations)
Sounds to me that Afrasians (or could we just call 'em Semites?) are the ones who mostly show Neanderthal traits , just like you said.

BTW I found out a certain similarity in patterns between the areal of Neanderthals and that of IE according to the Kurgan hypothesis , could be there any link between the two?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Range_of_Homo_neanderthalensis.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/IE_expansion.png

Agrippa
05-08-2010, 10:22 PM
Wow I wonder how John de Nugent will cope with this , one of his theories (but he's no way a scholar) was that the modern Jews are the descendants of Sapiens-Neanderthal miscegeneation , and he took this idea by a Jew author (whose name I can't remember right now)

That would only make sense if they find out that Armenids/Caucasian people have more Neandertal-admixture, whats not really likely ;)


Sounds to me that Afrasians (or could we just call 'em Semites?)

No, because Afrasians would be all humans except the Subsaharan ones, or even more precise the Subsaharan base, because there was a backflow into Subsaharan Africa from Eurasia, like f.e. R1b in West Africa proves.

Interestingly those which branched off earlist and being least influenced by Afrasians (= Eurasians + East Africans) are also genetically and physically more primitive inside the Subsaharan spectrum, because the most influenced are Nilotid, Kafrid and Sudanid, less Palaenegrid (which have more primitive traits), least Khoisanid (Bushmen) and Bambutid (Pygmy).

The most primitive people out of Africa are among the Palaemelanesids and Australids, which come, especially individually, most often closer to a Neandertaloid primitve traits.


BTW I found out a certain similarity in patterns between the areal of Neanderthals and that of IE according to the Kurgan hypothesis , could be there any link between the two?

The link is the habitat. Because Indoeuropeans or generally the herder-warriors and herder-farmer/mixed farming warriors of the temperate climate, Neandertals lived in the same climate, but with a very different cultural and biological base of course.

Europids of the temperate climate (Nordoid, Cromagnoid, Mediterranid) formed the Indoeuropean people which spread the most successful in those areas which fit them best.

As they did in America I might add. Just look where the European settlers flourished the most, its the temperate climate which fits their race, animals, plants and way of life the best.

ikki
05-08-2010, 10:44 PM
So I take it multiregionalism is back on the table.

Nor to forget various cultural thingies that exist everywhere but africa.. like the swastika. Guess we know now who liked to craft them ;)

Tony
05-22-2010, 10:24 AM
http://johnhawks.net/weblog

John Hawks answer about implications of new findings...

If you had to sum up in a few words, what does this mean for paleoanthropology?

What did they sequence?

What is the evidence for interbreeding?

Could the results have been caused by contamination?
How much Neandertal ancestry do we have?

Can we please take off our skeptics' hats? It's getting in the way of my Neandertal victory dance.

etc...

here (http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/neandertals-live-genome-sequencing-2010.html)

Tony
06-09-2010, 08:46 PM
05/18/2010: Italian Gene Study Weakens Neanderthal-Modern European Link


(ANSA) - Florence, May 17 - An Italian study out this week lends fresh weight to the theory that today's Europeans are not descended from Neanderthals, despite a recent study indicating Neanderthal DNA is common in many modern humans. The research, which appears in the international Public Library of Science journal, compared modern human DNA with that of Neanderthal man, focusing on a gene responsible for a condition known as microcephaly, microcephelin.

A variant of the gene appears in a specific genetic grouping known as Haplogroup D, which is one of the categorizations used by scientists to map the early migrations of population groups. Haplogroup D appeared around 37,000 years ago and is now common throughout the world but is extremely rare in Sub-Saharan Africa. "Until now, this particular distribution had been interpreted as evidence that Haplogroup D had originated with Neanderthals," explained a statement by Florence University, which produced the study in collaboration with the universities of Siena and Ferrara, as well as the Milan Institute of Biomedical Technologies and the Verona Natural History Museum. "It was hypothesized that this variant had then been incorporated into the genome of modern humans by admixing between Neanderthals and the ancestors of modern Europeans and Asians, after they had already left Africa."

However, the Italian experts, who were joined by scientists from Marseilles and Lyons universities for the research, have now proved this was not the case. The sequencing of the Neanderthal genome indicates Neanderthals did not have the Haplogroup D gene and are no genetically closer to Europeans than modern Africans.

"The study does not prove there was no mixing between different human forms in Europe," the study's coordinator David Caramelli, acknowledged. "However, it certainly shows that speculation over a possible Neanderthal origin for the most widespread variant of the microcephalin gene in European populations is not supported by evidence obtained from ancient DNA. In other words, we cannot exclude that a tiny fraction of our DNA is of Neanderthal origin but we can say for certain that this was not the case with microcephalin."

The study appears just days after research published in Science grabbed worldwide headlines after concluding that many modern humans possess some Neanderthal ancestry. Overturning previously held beliefs that Neanderthals had made little or no contribution to our inheritance, the study suggested that between 1% and 4% of modern European and Asian genomes appeared to have come from Neanderthals.


http://www.phillipsdnaproject.com/the-phillips-dna-project-news/447-05182010-italian-gene-study-weakens-neanderthal-modern-european-link