Neanderthals, Humans Interbred—First Solid DNA Evidence

G

Geriatrix

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
6,554
Reaction score
3
Location
Right here
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/
Ker Than

for National Geographic News

Published May 6, 2010

The next time you're tempted to call some oaf a Neanderthal, you might want to take a look in the mirror.

According to a new DNA study, most humans have a little Neanderthal in them—at least 1 to 4 percent of a person's genetic makeup.

The study uncovered the first solid genetic evidence that "modern" humans—or Homo sapiens—interbred with their Neanderthal neighbors, who mysteriously died out about 30,000 years ago.

What's more, the Neanderthal-modern human mating apparently took place in the Middle East, shortly after modern humans had left Africa, not in Europe—as has long been suspected.

"We can now say that, in all probability, there was gene flow from Neanderthals to modern humans," lead study author Ed Green of the University of California, Santa Cruz, said in a prepared statement.

That's no surprise to anthropologist Erik Trinkhaus, whose skeleton-based claims of Neanderthal-modern human interbreeding—previously contradicted with DNA evidence—appear to have been vindicated by the new gene study, to be published tomorrow in the journal Science.

"They've finally seen the light ... because it's been obvious to many us that this happened," said Trinkaus, of Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, who wasn't part of the new study.

Trinkhaus adds that most living humans probably have much more Neanderthal DNA than the new study suggests.

"One to 4 percent is truly a minimum," Trinkaus added. "But is it 10 percent? Twenty percent? I have no idea."

Surprising Spot for Neanderthal-Human Mating

The genetic study team reached their conclusion after comparing the genomes of five living humans—from China, France, Papua New Guinea, southern Africa, and western Africa—against the available "rough draft" of the Neanderthal genome. (Get the basics on genetics.)

The results showed that Neanderthal DNA is 99.7 percent identical to modern human DNA, versus, for example, 98.8 percent for modern humans and chimps, according to the study. (Related: "Neanderthals Had Same 'Language Gene' as Modern Humans.")

In addition, all modern ethnic groups, other than Africans, carry traces of Neanderthal DNA in their genomes, the study says—which at first puzzled the scientists. Though no fossil evidence has been found for Neanderthals and modern humans coexisting in Africa, Neanderthals, like modern humans, are thought to have arisen on the continent.

"If you told an archaeologist that you'd found evidence of gene exchange between Neanderthals and modern humans and asked them to guess which [living] population it was found in, most would say Europeans, because there's well documented archaeological evidence that they lived side by side for several thousand years," said study team member David Reich.

For another thing, Neanderthals never lived in China or Papua New Guinea, in the Pacific region of Melanesia, according to the archaeological record. (See "Neanderthals Ranged Much Farther East Than Thought.")

"But the fact is that Chinese and Melanesians are as closely related to Neanderthals" as Europeans, said Reich, a population geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard University.

Neanderthal-Human One-Night Stand?

So how did modern humans with Neanderthal DNA end up in Asia and Melanesia?

Neanderthals, the study team says, probably mixed with early Homo sapiens just after they'd left Africa but before Homo sapiens split into different ethnic groups and scattered around the globe.

The first opportunity for interbreeding probably occurred about 60,000 years ago in Middle Eastern regions adjacent to Africa, where archaeological evidence shows the two species overlapped for a time, the team says.

And it wouldn't have taken much mating to make an impact, according to study co-author Reich. The results could stem from a Neanderthal-modern human one-night stand or from thousands of interspecies assignations, he said.

More DNA Evidence for Neanderthal-Human Mating

The new study isn't alone in finding genetic hints of Homo sapiens-Homo neanderthalensis interbreeding.

Genetic anthropologist Jeffrey Long, who calls the Science study "very exciting," co-authored a new, not yet published study that found DNA evidence of interbreeding between early modern humans and an "archaic human" species, though it's not clear which. He presented his team's findings at a meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists in Albuquerque, New Mexico, last month.

Long's team reached its conclusions after searching the genomes of hundreds of modern humans for "signatures of different evolutionary processes in DNA variation."

Like the new Science paper, Long's study speculates that interbreeding occurred just after our species had left Africa, but Long's study didn't include analysis of the Neanderthal genome.

"At the time we started the project, I never imagined I'd ever see an empirical confirmation of it," said Long, referring to the Science team's Neanderthal-DNA evidence, "so I'm pretty happy to see it."
Click to expand...
Interesting.
 
I was reading somewhere that someone had hypothesized that we got our larger craniums and brains from Neanderthals
 
It never did that is why i put a question mark. Interbreeding though could explain the similarities that have so far been put down to evolution if i am not mistaken which i very well could be.
 
I knew it - there is no doubt that my neighbour is a Neanderthal !!! Of course, I'm not :D
 
Looks like you were spot on but where does this leave the human evolution i wonder? Does it change it dramatically or not at all?
 
killadoob said:
Looks like you were spot on but where does this leave the human evolution i wonder? Does it change it dramatically or not at all?
Click to expand...

I don't believe that it changes anything, even this interbreeding is very recent (60 000 years).

Probably some oke had too much too drink one Friday evening, and met this cool Neanderthal chick while walking to his cave ....

You know, something like in this Avatar movie ...
 
Last edited:
Jola said:
I don't believe that it changes anything, even this interbreeding is very recent (60 000 years).

Probably some oke had too much too drink one Friday evening, and met this cool Neanderthal chick while walking to his cave ....

You know, something like in this Avatar movie ...
Click to expand...

My concern is that the original Humans (Homo sapiens) and Neanderthals must have died out then. As a 1/4 of our DNA says we are then decendents from that Drunk caveman who knocked up that Neanderthall woman ;) Which means that night of passion helped us to survive what ever took out the others. Kinda interresting.
 
whats the fuss about, we knew this all along.

the gods made Neanderthals to work the mines and fields here on earth and one day they, let's say Adam and Eve, and after awhile the gods saw the women and came down to get it on with them and Homo Sapiens were formed.
 
So it is very possible now we may not have evolved but simply interbred?

Surely this shakes the foundation quite a lot. Where are those heavy evolutionists that seem way more clued up than me?

Pitbull so it's possible we are just interbred and have not evolved or what?
 
killadoob said:
So it is very possible now we may not have evolved but simply interbred?

Surely this shakes the foundation quite a lot. Where are those heavy evolutionists that seem way more clued up than me?

Pitbull so it's possible we are just interbred and have not evolved or what?
Click to expand...

Well it's not beyond our train of thought. However we could still assume that evolution still happened before that. All it does is show that "Humans" interbred with Neanderthals. And somewhere along the line, those "Humans" and Neanderthals then became extinct. So their offspring is the superior being we see as Human today. This is how I see it. I might be completely wrong though. And it also doesn't exclude the possibility that Species interbred before that to get the Evolution like development. Honestly anything is possible currently :o
 
Didn't the neanderthal come from an ape? I mean they keep finding ape remains that are considered to be early humans and not apes.

You could ask the same about all the creatures on this planet, where did the polar bear come from? What Did the big five look like before they were the big five?
 
Why can interbreeding between the two groups not be viewed as evolution? They interbred, and humanity as a whole was better off for it in the end. Evolution doesnt stipulate that you can only breed with your own species. All you need is two or more species to be alive at the same time that share a compatible reproduction system. That opens a whole lot of doors for either species to evolve. By interbreeding you get a much larger mix of genes/dna which allows for much quicker/drastic evolutionary paths.
 
Archer said:
Why can interbreeding between the two groups not be viewed as evolution? They interbred, and humanity as a whole was better off for it in the end. Evolution doesnt stipulate that you can only breed with your own species. All you need is two or more species to be alive at the same time that share a compatible reproduction system. That opens a whole lot of doors for either species to evolve. By interbreeding you get a much larger mix of genes/dna which allows for much quicker/drastic evolutionary paths.
Click to expand...

I don't think ToE as such covers interbreeding. I might be wrong though.
 
Pitbull said:
I don't think ToE as such covers interbreeding. I might be wrong though.
Click to expand...

Why shouldnt it? Its a mixing of different genes/dna, its just that the differences are more pronounced.

edit: from this wiki:
The main cause of variation is mutation, which changes the sequence of a gene. Altered genes, or alleles, are then inherited by offspring. There can sometimes also be transfer of genes between species
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Archer said:
Why shouldnt it? Its a mixing of different genes/dna, its just that the differences are more pronounced.

edit: from this wiki:
Click to expand...

From my understanding the whole idea behind ToE is the gradual changes that takes place over a prolonged time frame. Where interbreeding is forced changes in a very short time frame. Well that is my understanding anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X