Neanderthal genes 'survive in us'

Post Reply New Topic

Full article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8660940.stm

Old news, but yeah. There were thoughts about Neanderthals having cross-bred with sapiens before they were wiped out. I guess confirmation is always good though.

Calling rdos!

So...the French are a separate species?


Did you notice in the side article on Neanderthal genes and red hair, the redheaded Neanderthal looked uncannily like Shaun White?

You need proof that humanoids are constantly horny and would do anything that moves? I'm more surprised we dont have hooves and monkeyhair...

I have read that the Basques are probably from the Neanderthal line. They have surviving traits and a language that does not have any similarities to any other spoken language today. They also have a high incidence of Rh negative blood (35% of basque Vs 15% in the entire world). I believe the Basque live between Spain and France somewhere as a fairly isolated group- as isolated as you van be in Europe.

DNA shows it was the girls who did the Thals, Mt DNA is all modern.

Part two, Neanderthal was just one of the early species that were everywhere, and the Multi Regional view is, early modern girls did them all.

Our DNA is and has been, Mutt.

Of the 22 Haplogroups out of Africa, each could have gotten some local action, much easier that mutation through evolution, and a lot quicker, since it has only been 50,000 years.

In the same time, genetic divergence in Africa seems to be zero.

rdos was right, and right about a lot more

Actually the new evidence strongly supports the Out of Africa model rather than the Multi-Regional Model. Only the most conservative Out of Africa theorists have been shown wrong (aka those who insisted that there was absolutely no inter-breeding between divergent populations after the emergence from Africa). The evidence from this latest research indicates a period of genetic isolation prior to emergence from Africa, with populations that left Africa receiving some contribution from Neanderthalic ancestors which is the Out of Africa Model. The Multi-Regional model posits limited intermittent isolation with frequent gene flow back to the pre-emergence African population, (and predicts that African populations would have the same contributions from Neanderthalic ancestors as Eurasian and Oceanic populations) which is not what this new research is indicating.

I would describe the Mbuti as divergent from the !Kung.

The Mbuti and !Kung were divergent long before out of Africa, and that is counting the early lines, like Neanderthal, who got a 150,000 year head start.

If it started before leaving Africa, the migration east would show the same in India, but that is missing, and a northern route is shown by reaching the Han Chinese.

We know the Neanderthal better, more to work with, but there were others, and until we find DNA samples, there is no telling how many centers were involved in Multi Region, that then spread and mixed.

What we know of Sapiens, some turned back into Africa, spread the traits, without Neanderthal or any other mix. Sapiens went through two bottlenecks, where the entire population was 5,000-10,000, before leaving Africa. So Africa gets Sapien, but not Neanderthal.

Gene flow is a lot less likely from a cold adapted northern species, Neanderthal, back to the Tropics, where only a few tropical lines adapted to the cold, most going east, and without Neanderthal genes.

Oceanic populations trace back to northern people, the Hairy Aniu are likely, but come much later.

This shows a pattern across the most northern cold adapted people, and no one else.

The !Kung do consider Southeast Asians to be real people, and the gene flow back from South Asia did reach back into Africa,

40,000 years ago Australians crossed 100 kilometers of deep ocean to reach Austraila. Boat traffic along the India-Africa coast would be expected, bringing other Multi Region mixes back. The !Kung are likely, seeming different from other Africans, and identifying south Asians as real people.

Native Americans do have some Erectus traits, and are likely another Multi Region. Erectus had a long time to spread.

Until we have DNA from the rest, The Hobbits, other early lines, nothing more can be proven.

It does prove a Neanderthal related group, and several non related. Native Americans, South Asians, and African, India, most of Europe.

DNA is not minor, it is what we are, sub species, not breeds like dogs.

Multi Region only predicts DNA spreading, it did, through cold adapted people. There is no driving force to send it back to the tropics. Neanderthal mixing was only 40,000 years ago. While they did live in the Middle East 125,000 years ago, an ice age, Sapiens were a minor sub species then, to the south, and do not seem to have migrated north for another 75,000 years.

Just as tropical species migrate north durning warming periods, so do the cold adapted, following the animals they feed on.

Contact most likely first happened in Europe, which rdos places at a genetic mutation of 34,000 years ago. The first cold adapted Sapiens, meet the long cold adapted Neanderthal. The result spreads east and west, but not south.

I am also waiting for confirming which Neanderthals, there were at least three groups, Atlantic, North of the Black Sea, the line we know mixed, and Asian, out to the Altai Mountains.

The Han Chinese come long after the Neanderthal are gone. I think we will find that they are not from the Altai branch, but from the Black Sea mix.

In Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond documents an early culture that spread east west through northern lands from the Atlantic to the Pacific. They had herds, domesticated grains, weaving, pottery, metals, rode horses, used the wheel, long before anyone else.

Colin Renfrew and Richard Rudgley are saying this culture rose about 35,000 years ago. 20,000 years later the rest of the world was still Paleolithic hunter gathers.

One small DNA group does seem to have produced most technology.

I have a friend who everyone says looks like a caveman. And now I know why!

Out of respect for our "Cro-Magnon" foremothers, as well as scientific precision, I don't believe any research nails down the consensuality, or lack thereof, of the intercourse between them and Neanderthal men or any other non-Cro-Magnon men. In fact, given the sexual attractiveness of neoteny, especially in women, especially in Cro-Magnons vs. others, as well as Cro-Magnons' physical weakness compared to the others, rape seems to me as likely if not more likely. Especially gang-rape -- presuming the CM foremothers were at least smarter than individual non-CMs.

And out of respect for the San and Yoruba volunteers in the current research, as well as of scientific precision, science seems to continue to consider all humans living today to be 'scientifically' the same. IOW, it seems the 1-4 pct. Neanderthal genes in Eurasians are not adequate to make Eurasians, i.e., 'part-cavemen'(! !), anything scientifically different from today's Subsaharan Africans, or 50,000 years ago's Cro-Magnon common ancestors. "Technological innovation" may be a sign of intelligence ... or of a tendency to overshoot; IMNSHO lately there's more evidence of the latter than of the former in it.

As Cro-Magnon had larger bodies, heads, brains, they are the result of breeding two lines long apart.

It could be as you think, the first Europeans had smaller brains, were weaker, so killing the men, keeping the women, would lead to the result.

Also, from human history, just giving the neighbors some women could have happened.

What ever happened, the resulting hybrid replaced everyone.

4% different is a lot, we are not that far from chimps. 4% covers all the divergence since the line split some 250,000 years before.

The male line in the north was replaced.

They say that Neanderthals had white skin and red hair.

Turn the clock back 10,000 years. The Neanderthals were living in Europe at that time.

Then in come the Caucasians from Russia.

The Neanderthals said "Oh god. There goes the neighborhood!"

Perhaps they were right.

Neanderthal had a slightly larger brain than Cro-Mag.

ruveyn

it is do with the distribution of the brain mass. Grasing mammals have little more than brain stem but very elongated (depending on how you define it you can say they still have brain mass), hence don't come up with many ideas, just react to things. Homo sapiens very bulbous brain, Neanderthal slightly less bulbous, less complex lobes. there is a reason why we have more of a forehead, and lack a prominent brow.

I'm not completely convinced. It could be that we share DNA with Neanderthals because of a common ancestor.