Jovialis
Advisor
- Messages
- 9,313
- Reaction score
- 5,876
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-PF7566 (R-Y227216)
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H6a1b7
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That first picture was produced on MS Paint.
Basically ancient altai people clusters with UP type and cromagnon. So their skull seem to have rectangular orbit like this:
but their eye shape seems to like this with really large mouth. This kind of artifact was found in Hongshan neolithic and sanxingdu in china:
So I think modern data could not be applied to ancient people in case of reconstruction. Maybe modern genetic tool also
They're not saying this is exact; it's just probabilities.
Totally subjective comment, butt she looks less "brutish" to my eye than do the Neanderthals.
As for the "conflict" about the pigmentation of Sintashta, the scuttlebut is that the first tested samples were contaminated. I doubt Razib Khan would make that up. We've come a long way since those early days in making sure we're getting only the ancient alleles.
The study says that, according to their genetic analysis (they compared the gene variants found in the Denisovan DNA sample to similar gene variants that are linked to abnormal physical features in modern humans, if I understood correct), the Denisovans had a wide skull and also a wide jaw. Going by those pictures, it looks like they had very big mouths, too. I know this will sound extremely speculative and even controversial, but I do now wonder if the very distinctive looks of some Papuans and Australian aboriginals, in which big wide mouths are a highlight, have something to do with the inherited Denisovan traits, given that they are the modern humans with highest Denisovan DNA ancestry, reaching IIRC as much as 6%.
What abt. the mtDNA of Papuans and Aboriginees?note that both Papuans and Aboriginees all have C1b or K2 Y-DNA, with TMRCA 45 ka, younger than the 1st admix event
it means these C1b and K2 males drove the other males to extinction and mated with their daughters, who in turn carried the Denisovan admix
What abt. the mtDNA of Papuans and Aboriginees?
Summary
Denisovans are an extinct group of humans whose morphology remains unknown. Here, we present a method for reconstructing skeletal morphology using DNA methylation patterns. Our method is based on linking unidirectional methylation changes to loss-of-function phenotypes. We tested performance by reconstructing Neanderthal and chimpanzee skeletal morphologies and obtained >85% precision in identifying divergent traits. We then applied this method to the Denisovan and offer a putative morphological profile. We suggest that Denisovans likely shared with Neanderthals traits such as an elongated face and a wide pelvis. We also identify Denisovan-derived changes, such as an increased dental arch and lateral cranial expansion. Our predictions match the only morphologically informative Denisovan bone to date, as well as the Xuchang skull, which was suggested by some to be a Denisovan. We conclude that DNA methylation can be used to reconstruct anatomical features, including some that do not survive in the fossil record.
Discussion
Interestingly, many of the Denisovan traits we reconstruct were identified in Middle and Late Pleistocene fossils from China. These fossils display various Neanderthal-like characteristics, but their phylogenetic classification remains undetermined (Bae, 2010, Li et al., 2017). Probably the most Neanderthal-like are the 100,000- to 130,000-year-old crania from Xuchang, eastern China. The similarity of these crania to those of Neanderthals, together with their eastern geographical location, raise the possibility that they might belong to Denisovans. However, without DNA, this could not be confirmed. The bones include the skull cap and base, but not the face or the jaws, and exhibit the following ten directional morphologies: (1) lateral expansion of the temporal bones; (2) low cranial vault; (3) lateral expansion of the parietal bones, outside the range of Neanderthals and MHs (Suzuki and Takai, 1970); (4) wide cranial base; (5) cranial gracility; (6) prominent supraorbital tori; (7) reduced thickening (restricted nuchal torus) of the occipital bone; (8) sagittal flatness; (9) short inward-sloping mastoid process; and (10) small anterior semicircular canal radii and more superior lateral versus posterior canals. Traits 1–8 have equivalent phenotypes on HPO and could thus be examined against our reconstructed profile. Strikingly, seven of them were identified as divergent traits in our reconstructed Denisovan profile (Figure 4; Table S7).
https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(19)30954-7.pdf
This thread has been viewed 19518 times.