New Study: Man Possibly NOT Related to Neanderthal

[MOESAN]

Homo Sapiens Sapiens may have gone through similar genetic shifts as Neanderthals for adaptive purposes 40ka, and this is why Otzi has more Neanderthal like genetics than modern humans (as he is older). I would expect a 10kyo Otzi like person to have even more similar Neanderthal Genetics. After thousands of years of migration and population replacement (plus new technologies) Neanderthal like genetics were not selective anymore for survival and slowly polymorphed out of our genome. We see an interesting anthropological trait amongst Neanderthal bodes; the oldest look more Neanderthal and the youngest look more modern. This could of been because of interbreeding, but my guess is polyphenism of two similar species adapting to a changing European Environment.

you made a point here - good remark -

[MOESAN]

generally speaking, 'race' has no limit: we, humans, are LIKE THE ANIMALS/ We underwent sometimes some process of raciation (it is not a malediction, it is not a "nazi credo", nor obsolete -the difference with animals is that we recrossed: we are not part of world global big circle of marriages where everybody crosses with everybody! so some structures in phenotypes (caused by of genotypes) and genes exist in humanity whatever think the politically correct persons... we are "imparfect races" elements for some of us (less and less today, it is true) - every evolution can lead or can not lead to race, according to environment and life events - man do what e want, according to his conscience, it is an other debate, but conscience is not science

[Kardu]

Humans can have some neanderthal in them ( but I agree we are different species) because they can impregnate a human woman, but a human cannot impregnate a neanderthal woman. ........some say, we have between 2 and 10% of neantheral genes running around

Then which one is the Neanderthal YDNA haplogroup among modern humans?

[Kardu]

If cranial/skeletal classifications are biased/wrong then on what do you base your claim that 200k years ago we looked like apes? :)

[oriental]

If cranial/skeletal classifications are biased/wrong then on what do you base your claim that 200k years ago we looked like apes? :)

Hg R1b is very high Cameroon. Cameroonians look African but they have "European" genes. I am sure they migrated back to Africa with their female mates. So how come the genes didn't dictate their phenotype?. It is the culture and environment that dictates what one looks like. There are Chinese Jews and Ethiopian Jews that claimed Jewish ancestry but they don't look like the modern JEWS but very Chinese and Ethiopian. Their looks were determined by the culture they lived in for thousands of years.

[Kardu]

Hg R1b is very high Cameroon. Cameroonians look African but they have "European" genes. I am sure they migrated back to Africa with their female mates. So how come the genes didn't dictate their phenotype?. It is the culture and environment that dictates what one looks like. There are Chinese Jews and Ethiopian Jews that claimed Jewish ancestry but they don't look like the modern JEWS but very Chinese and Ethiopian. Their looks were determined by the culture they lived in for thousands of years.

People from Cameroon look pretty different from Bantu Africans.

[ebAmerican]

"They calculated the common ancestor to be about 353,000 years ago, and a complete separation of the ancestors of the species about 188,000 years ago." Interesting quote from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

It has a complete separation date that equals the founding of mtDNA Eve.

It only took 165,000 years to fully separate neanderthal from sapiens. Sapiens mtDNA Eve is thought to have originated around 190,000 years ago. How long would it take to separate a new species from mtDNA Eve, or has it already happened? Are Eurasians on a path of full separation from Africans? Could there be two species that could be classified now or maybe 10 or 20ka in the future? Most likely humans will continue to evolve in different paths and some time in the future we will see different species again.

[Kardu]

"They calculated the common ancestor to be about 353,000 years ago, and a complete separation of the ancestors of the species about 188,000 years ago." Interesting quote from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

It has a complete separation date that equals the founding of mtDNA Eve.

It only took 165,000 years to fully separate neanderthal from sapiens. Sapiens mtDNA Eve is thought to have originated around 190,000 years ago. How long would it take to separate a new species from mtDNA Eve, or has it already happened? Are Eurasians on a path of full separation from Africans? Could there be two species that could be classified now or maybe 10 or 20ka in the future? Most likely humans will continue to evolve in different paths and some time in the future we will see different species again.

Although if technological development will continue like this, most probably natural evolution processes will be affected by genetic engineering...

[oriental]

"They calculated the common ancestor to be about 353,000 years ago, and a complete separation of the ancestors of the species about 188,000 years ago." Interesting quote from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

It has a complete separation date that equals the founding of mtDNA Eve.

It only took 165,000 years to fully separate neanderthal from sapiens. Sapiens mtDNA Eve is thought to have originated around 190,000 years ago. How long would it take to separate a new species from mtDNA Eve, or has it already happened? Are Eurasians on a path of full separation from Africans? Could there be two species that could be classified now or maybe 10 or 20ka in the future? Most likely humans will continue to evolve in different paths and some time in the future we will see different species again.

That's what you think! Humankind could be extinct from our political squabbles in maybe a few years.

[ebAmerican]

Possibly, and the only one left would be the little jungle tribe in New Guinea, lol, and they would of known no different!

[JFWR]

It basically shows that Ötzi is more Neanderthal than modern Eurasians, who are more Neanderthal than modern Africans.

Thank you.

I think the evidence is strong to support Neanderthal admixture.

[skaheen15]

It's true that ultimately we are all Africans, it's well known that the direct ancestors of Homo Sapiens Sapiens left Africa for Europe and Asia about 60,000 YBP, give or take a millennium or two, and our relationship with Neanderthal is so close in any case that it seems like hair-splitting to ponder this question too much. These are the sort of issues that creationists and ID people use to promulgate the myth that there's some sort of dispute amongst scientists about man's ancestry.

Not saying it isn't worth discussing, but, the press makes far too big of a deal out of it.

[JFWR]

Polyphenism could explain why Eurasians have ~5% similar Neanderthal genes. We see it in the wild all the time where a species will morph a trait of a stronger similar species for survival. I don't believe that humans ever sexually mingled with Neanderthals. I think they have a common ancestor and similar survival genetic traits became similar because of environmental effects to survive in MP/UP Europe. Same goes for Denisova and South East Asians. Africans never left and didn't need to genetically adapt to different climates. What we are seeing are cousin species adapting in similar ways to their environment. This would explain why we don't see any mDNA or yDNA of Neanderthals in modern humans.

Parralel evolution never constitutes the same genes, but different genes with similar effects that result from them. Eurasians have Neanderthal-associated genes. These are absent in Africa. This implies descent, not evolution alongside.

MDNA and YDNA can easily be lost over thousands of years, especially in the absence of Neanderthal men and women around to keep mating.

[JFWR]

We are all Africans ultimately. The climate, diet and surroundings or environment changed us. Among the respectable genetists 'race' is a bogus issue. It is only good for identifying a person from a certain culture. All those skeletal and bone analyses only reflect old outdated 19th century science. If you go back 200,000 years we all looked like apes!

No, it is only amongst Standard Social Scientists that race is a bogus issue. There are hundreds of distinctive mutations associated with race, vast forensic differences, historical cultural differences, and other matters that separate the racial groups of the world from one another. It takes someone wilfully blind to ignore the reality of race, and that is why it has such horrifying prevalence in the political nonsense of the SSS paradigm.

Most people in the world are not in any meaningful sense "African". They are tens of thousands of years departed from Africa!

[JFWR]

Hg R1b is very high Cameroon. Cameroonians look African but they have "European" genes. I am sure they migrated back to Africa with their female mates. So how come the genes didn't dictate their phenotype?. It is the culture and environment that dictates what one looks like. There are Chinese Jews and Ethiopian Jews that claimed Jewish ancestry but they don't look like the modern JEWS but very Chinese and Ethiopian. Their looks were determined by the culture they lived in for thousands of years.

So you discount centuries of interbreeding because of a maintained paternal line? Okay...Apparently, only Y-dna causes changes in racial makeup for you.

Same with the Jews in Ethiopia, China, and elsewhere. You discount centuries of interbreeding? You discount that Ethiopian Jews might even be a massive cultural conversion around the time of the Queen of Sheba? Or hell, even more historically at the apex of Jewish power in the region? That Jews didn't take Chinese wives or Chinese husbands?

Your thesis only works if these people maintained absolute homogeny amongst the populations.

[ebAmerican]

Our genes and Neanderthal genes are 99.9% the same. It is the .1% difference that geneticists show around ~1-5% similar genes in that .1%. We share 99% of our genes with chimps. It's crazy what 1% can due.

"Parallel evolution never constitutes the same genes, but different genes with similar effects that result from them." JFWR are you sure about this? Can you give me a source for this claim? Neanderthals are currently classified as homo sapiens neanderthals. We are not talking about a far removed species, but one very closely linked with modern humans by a common ancestor 160,000 years removed (a very short time in evolutionary times). It also could be the genes that are represented as Neanderthal genes mutated out of existence in Africans, which is possible. It is possible that modern humans have shared genetic material with many archaic humans from a common ancestor, and those have not been identified yet or have been polymorphed out over the last 200,000 years. At the end of the day we need more genetic information from older samples to be sure.

[JFWR]

"Parallel evolution never constitutes the same genes, but different genes with similar effects that result from them." JFWR are you sure about this? Can you give me a source for this claim?

I should probably not have said -never-. There are rare cases where the genetic mutation is so specific that it has to be the same gene reproduced multiple times by several species. However, in many of those cases it is a sort of "standing genetic variation" that is the source of this multiple origins of the same gene. That is, the gene was already existent in a population, but its prominence did not arise until the natural selective pressure was exerted. Think of how rare it is, for instance, that an entire population of insects should be killed by a single poison, on the account that it is almost certain that at least one of them has some degree of resistance which is then strongly selected for when they are the only remaining mating pairs.

They speak about it around here: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress...over-and-over/

Neanderthals are currently classified as homo sapiens neanderthals.

I'm pretty sure that Neanderthal man is Homo neanderthalensis. Neanderthal is not considered a subspecies of Homo sapiens from what I gather.

We are not talking about a far removed species, but one very closely linked with modern humans by a common ancestor 160,000 years removed (a very short time in evolutionary times). It also could be the genes that are represented as Neanderthal genes mutated out of existence in Africans, which is possible.

Neanderthal man left Africa way before Homo sapiens. Why would the Eurasians maintain the genes shared by Neanderthals, then? And how would the entire group of genes be lost in Africa?

[ebAmerican]

A tidbit from http://dienekes.blogspot.com/; Mitochondrial Eve may be older

"If the earlier Pan-Homo split is accepted, it would appear that Mitochondrial Eve may have lived earlier than commonly thought, perhaps by a substantial amount relative to the current 177ky estimate. If that is the case, then she may very well have not been an anatomically modern human, perhaps a late H. heidelbergensis individual in a population that was on its way to becoming H. sapiens."

A possible link to shared genetic material between hominid species. mtDNA Eve may have been a great grandmother to both Neanderthal and Sapiens.

[sparkey]

A possible link to shared genetic material between hominid species. mtDNA Eve may have been a great grandmother to both Neanderthal and Sapiens.

That doesn't seem likely, since the outlier is L0, which is just about the most African haplogroup there is. It's African on down the tree for a while after that. I would expect some indication of a Neanderthal outlier haplogroup or haplogroup cluster if mtDNA Eve's matrilineal descendants included both Neanderthals and Sapiens.

[ebAmerican]

Neanderthal was never in Africa. It diverged from homo heidelbergensis in Eurasia. Homo sapiens diverged from homo heidelbergensis in Africa. Because both species are from a common ancestor, it's not a far cry that both would develop similar genes for environmental adaption. This explains why Eurasians have neanderthal like dna and Africans do not. The process is called genetic polyphenism. Because of shared lineage with a common ancestor Sapiens have the ability to converge into neanderthal and vice versa.

If mtDNA Eve out dates (a new study proposing an older linage for L) the archeological time frame for modern humans and puts her in an archeological time frame for an archaic hominid, then she may not have been sapiens but a possible heidelbergensis.

[ebAmerican]

Sparky your right about neanderthal if it's heidelbergnesis grandmother was far removed from sapiens heidelbergnesis grandmother. We need a heidelbergnesis sample from where early sapiens in Africa lived to be sure. Heidelbergnesis is dated to 600,000 years ago, which is a lot of time for genetic drift compared to both Neanderthal and modern Sapiens. mtDNA is not the best for testing consistencies in the genome because of their volitility for mutation, so LO really doesn't tell us the whole story.

[zanipolo]

Then which one is the Neanderthal YDNA haplogroup among modern humans?

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/07/26/...erthals-mated/

1 to 4%

However, in August 2012, a study by scientists at the University of Cambridge has questioned this conclusion, hypothesising instead that the DNA overlap is a remnant of a common ancestor of both Neanderthals and modern humans.^[14][15]

[LeBrok]

Neanderthal was never in Africa. It diverged from homo heidelbergensis in Eurasia. Homo sapiens diverged from homo heidelbergensis in Africa. Because both species are from a common ancestor, it's not a far cry that both would develop similar genes for environmental adaption. This explains why Eurasians have neanderthal like dna and Africans do not. The process is called genetic polyphenism. Because of shared lineage with a common ancestor Sapiens have the ability to converge into neanderthal and vice versa.

If mtDNA Eve out dates (a new study proposing an older linage for L) the archeological time frame for modern humans and puts her in an archeological time frame for an archaic hominid, then she may not have been sapiens but a possible heidelbergensis.

Sounds logical, but Neanderthals spent almost a million years in Europe, Home Sapiens about 50 thousand. Which one, do you think, was better adapted to Eurasian climatic conditions? Other question is, is 50 thousand years enough to develop full adaptation?
We should also mention that it is much easier to piggy back on already developed adaptational traits of Neanderthals, then wait for mutations to happen spontaneously. Off course, as long as they could produce hybrid offspring, it was the easiest way to use some Neanderthal genome to conquer north faster.