×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

20% of Neanderthal Genome Survives In Humans

Soulskill posted about 10 months ago | from the long-term-data-storage dept.

Science 202

vinces99 writes "A substantial fraction of the Neanderthal genome persists in modern human populations. A new analysis (abstract) of 665 people from Europe and East Asia shows that more than 20 percent of the Neanderthal genome survives in the DNA of this contemporary group, whose genetic information is part of the 1,000 Genomes Project." Another study published today (abstract) finds that Neanderthal genes are present in some parts of our genome that we've found to be important. Some of the genes influence fertility and skin pigment, and others actually increase our susceptibility to diseases like diabetes and lupus. The researchers are now taking these known genetic markers and seeing if they correlate with any other health conditions.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"fertility skin pigment"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104503)

I thought they meant "fertility skin pigment" to mean coloration of certain reproductive parts.

But they probably just forgot a comma.

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104561)

A quick Google search due to my own confusion seems to have turned up nothing. I second the missing comma.

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104987)

It is interesting to me that pale skin and straight hair are throwbacks to Neanderthals and demonstrate a more primitive origin in Europeans

Particularly since that same group attempted to use dark skin and curly hair to prove that Africans were more primitive

o teh lulz

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (4, Interesting)

shaitand (626655) | about 10 months ago | (#46105079)

There's no such thing as more primitive in a genetic sense which makes it ridiculous in both cases. Anything alive today is the result of all the evolution that has taken place since the first bits of life and is therefore equally evolved.

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (2)

buswolley (591500) | about 10 months ago | (#46105227)

Thank you.

Also, 20% is a lot, so we might as well call it human DNA. We own it now, its shapes us.

...and whatever homosapiens mingled lines with the Neanderthals cannot really claim to be *more human* than we are now...they were something else. If we call them homo-sapiens, then we are not homo sapiens, but the hybrid.

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (4, Informative)

shaitand (626655) | about 10 months ago | (#46105667)

Not that I disagree but it's worth pointing out that the summary is a bit misleading. Europeans share these genes but africans do not and it's 20% of the .15% of the neaderthal genome that is distinct, obviously humans share a lot more than 20% of their DNA with neaderthals, we share a lot more than that with primates!

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (1)

buswolley (591500) | about 10 months ago | (#46106249)

I wonder what other groups of primates we share DNA with that we know nothing about?

Re:"fertility skin pigment"? (4, Interesting)

Immerman (2627577) | about 10 months ago | (#46105891)

Not entirely. Evolution is most meaningfully measured in generations, not years. Those species that have averaged a more rapid average reproductive cycle since their ancestors parted ways with ours will have undergone more evolutionary iterations than us. Mice are in the lead pack among mammals. And bacteria leave even mice in the dust, even before you factor in the fact that for them sex is more like performing limited genetic engineering on themselves, allowing useful mutations to spread through the population without any reproduction occurring. Granted they also lack the chaotic genetic roulette of sexual reproduction that the "higher" organisms benefit from, so their average evolution/generation is probably somewhat different than ours.

Yes but (4, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | about 10 months ago | (#46104521)

You replicate those genes by 3d printing, and offer them for bitcoins, and that's how you end up on slashdot.

As someone who works in tech support... (4, Funny)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about 10 months ago | (#46104533)

I'm surprised it's not higher.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 10 months ago | (#46104545)

I'm surprised it's not higher.

I agree based on my neighbor Kevin. He looks exactly like reconstructions of Neanderthals.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104591)

Does he sell insurance for GEICO?

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (3, Interesting)

rolfwind (528248) | about 10 months ago | (#46104635)

But who says Neanderthals were dumber though? They managed to survive the cold climate for much longer than we have (which takes considerable more resources and planning than surviving tropic temperatures), and my knowledge is rudimentary, but from what I seen in documentaries, them dying off/merging may simply have been a matter of a warming earth. They were more barrel chested and not able to withstand the warmer climates as well.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (3, Funny)

nospam007 (722110) | about 10 months ago | (#46104939)

" them dying off/merging may simply have been a matter of a warming earth. They were more barrel chested and not able to withstand the warmer climates as well."

Or they were 80% more tasty.

Time to repost (someone else's) old comment (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105067)

From God's Roadmap:

Beta
Release version: Homo neanderthalensis
Build name: Adam
Release date: 4,569,770,000 years after cooling
Deprecated: 4,569,971,000 years after cooling

Stable
Release version: Homo sapiens
Build name: Eve
Release date: 4,569,800,000 years after cooling
Deprecated:
[Sigh] Still deciding. I mean, the codebase is starting to look a bit creaky in a few places, and they're starting to tinker with it themselves (they think it's open source - hah!). Inquisitive little so-and-so's can't leave well enough alone... They've noticed the legacy code from the previous build too - ick, some cruft in there. Very tempting to trash the lot and start again using AOP. Mind you I mightn't have to lift a finger if they don't stop blowing each other to smithereens.
[sigh] TODO: Take oort cloud inventory - look for something nice and big...

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104955)

I also remember reading that Neanderthals and shorter legs and arms, so they were more awkward in running and walking then Homo Sapiens. Also less Dexterous. whether that translated into lower physical strength I am not sure.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

tie_guy_matt (176397) | about 10 months ago | (#46105063)

Remember their brains were the same size, if not a little bigger, than ours. And we know they also had the genes that give us the ability to communicate complex information verbally. So no, I do not think we can say for sure that they were dumber -- not unless we were able to say clone a pure neanderthal and then talk to them to see how smart or dumb they really were.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1, Interesting)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 10 months ago | (#46105397)

They didn't leave cave paintings or anything that indicates capacity for symbolic reasoning.

Cro-Magnon man on the other hand, left shitloads of evidence like art and jewelry. Those cave painting in France are very extremely well done, probably better drawn than 95% of current human population could do.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 10 months ago | (#46105605)

They didn't leave cave paintings or anything that indicates capacity for symbolic reasoning.

"Billy, stop that drawing! Your father and I don't provide a warm comfortable cave for you to live in just so you can scribble all over the walls like a proto-hominid or one of those low-class Egyptian pyramid dwellers. Now clean that off before your father gets home, and go wash your hands for dinner. The brontosaurus steaks are almost ready... I mean 'uggh, food hot, eat now'."

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106039)

A quick Google search suggests that it's still an open question whether Neanderthals left cave paintings. I suppose it could be a contrived controversy, but until an anthropology professional chimes in (are you one?) I'm going to assume it's not settled.

Party "Animal" (4, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | about 10 months ago | (#46106307)

For a good long time, anatomically modern humans didn't make cave paintings and jewelry either, at least not often enough to be detected. Nobody knows what triggered the use of art in humans.

The best theory I've heard is it's not that humans became smarter, but rather more social. Neanderthal brains were big if not bigger than ours, so they were potentially pretty smart. However, they may have been relatively anti-social.

The most successful humans were probably those who used trade to get the resources their area lacked. For example, your area may have good arrow-head rocks, but not a lot of prey during the dry season. If you encounter another tribe whose area has a lot of prey but poor rocks, you can trade rocks for meat, and both groups benefit and give birth to more traders instead of making war with neighbors.

Normally mammals battle neighboring groups because they compete with resources, so trade requires a different mentality: socializing with strangers. It may have taken several thousands of years to evolve this tendency. (Slashdotters are still working on it :-)

Neanderthals may just have been slower to take advantage of trade. This is possibly because the human population was greater, magnifying the benefits of trade.

Cave paintings and jewelry may have been an early form of advertising of your goods and services, and serving as social gestures of good will.

Re:Party "Animal" (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 10 months ago | (#46106695)

Neanderthal brains were big if not bigger ... so they were potentially pretty smart. However, they may have been relatively anti-social.

Now I know who programmers and engineers descended from.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106475)

Modern Equivalent:
They didn't paint funky shiz everywhere or bust master rhymes.

Modern man on the hand makes all kinds of worthless music, video, etc., wears lots of bling, and has spinning, chrome rims.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (3, Interesting)

InsectOverlord (1758006) | about 10 months ago | (#46106481)

They didn't leave cave paintings or anything that indicates capacity for symbolic reasoning.

We aren't so sure [bbc.co.uk] about that.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

HiThere (15173) | about 10 months ago | (#46106125)

From one study of quite awhile back, one reason for Neanderthals dying out was that the heads of Cro-Magnon babies were shaped differently, meaning that Neanderthal mothers with Cro-Magnon fathers tended to die in childbirth, while the reverse wasn't true. There have also been some studies that suggested that their shoulders weren't as well adapted to throwing, so they needed to get close-in with spears, which was more dangerous.

I can't recall any studies that found that they were stupider than Cro-Magnons which didn't start out by assuming the conclusion. (There have been a few that concluded that their range of vocalizations was smaller, but that's not intelligence, per se.)

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106227)

Indeed; talking isn't everything. A great deal of evidence seems to show that crows are smarter than parrots, at least when it comes to tool use and problem solving.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106447)

i agree. i think i may have more than 20% in me. i've read that they were not very social or as good with language as we are but they were very keen in the vision department and at recognizing patterns. i don't think they were dumber. i think the males were killed off by early humans. think of all the myths from the different cultures - the myths about giants, ogres, etc. as their male numbers dwindled, human males took the more comely females as mates. (see mythology; Odin) i know i like a tall, well-built woman!

if anything, our Neanderthal DNA is probably what makes us smarter and less violent.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106551)

also, if you think 'giants' invaded our DNA by impregnating the smaller, female humans...think about how likely the mother and child would be to survive that. males humans took neanderthal women as mates. the survivability would be greater.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106557)

From my understanding they died off because of cross-breeding, not because they were all slaughtered by homos. I read that on a much older slashdot article which stated that white people tend to have neanderthal genes while africans tend not to and that neanderthals were far smarter and such. l can't exactly argue against science but I wasn't really interested in reading TFA at the time so I dealt with the snippet and moved on. It's possible all of what I said was wrong heh.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

westlake (615356) | about 10 months ago | (#46104651)

I'm surprised it's not higher.

The Neanderthals were not The Flintstones.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about 10 months ago | (#46104683)

Isn't that about what the market share is for network TV?

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (-1, Troll)

Eravnrekaree (467752) | about 10 months ago | (#46104713)

This may be a surprise but the racial groups, such as Europeans and East asians, that carry the Neanderthal fragments, have much higher average IQs than African populations where they are not present. For instance an average European has an average IQ of 105 compared to 70 in Africa. Though, the higher IQ is likely due to divergent racial evolution that occured well after the insertion of neanderthal genes, particularly the cold winters theory, that the groups that left africa had to evolve rapidly larger, more advanced brain capacity to cope with the more difficult, complex survival challenges of cold weather environments, such as the long term planning for winter and the skills needed for making of the clothes needed to survive the cold. The cold weather environment of the north provided the challenges that pushed evolution of specific racial groups to a higher level and explains much of the IQ differences between racial groups.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104779)

IQs

IQ != intelligence. The very idea that you can measure someone's intelligent with a simple number and simplistic, specific, one-size-fits-all tests is pseudoscience at best.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105051)

Then we have to consider how much of intelligence doesn't come from genetics, but from other factors, such as nutrition and even disease exposure. Even gestational development would be enough of a factor that you couldn't just test babies out of the womb for their intelligence and rest it all on genetics.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105523)

Research has pretty well shown that about half of intelligence comes from genetics.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105893)

Really, can you show us this research, and whether it covers entire racial groups, or just individual heritability?

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106241)

You could start with the references on the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] . The article claims it's more around 80% for adults, though. No idea where he got the 50% figure from.
While I'm at it, try this: Count the number of mentally retarded persons with IQ at least two deviations above the average. Do the same for two deviations below.

Now to try to gain a PC point, although it's probably too late: there's some kind of Jew, whose name escapes me, who have IQs much higher than the average.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105495)

IQ correlates pretty well with g which itself is a strong indicator of most of the differing types of "intelligences" In other words IQ != intelligence, but if the two concepts were venn diagrams they would be lying almost on top of each other.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

starcraftsicko (647070) | about 10 months ago | (#46105651)

IQ != intelligence. The very idea that you can measure someone's intelligent with a simple number and simplistic, specific, one-size-fits-all tests is pseudoscience at best.

We measure virtually everything with a simple number these days. What's your credit score?

It helps when Europeans design the tests... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104977)

It would be like /. designing tests for literature majors.

Re:It helps when Europeans design the tests... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105289)

Europe pretty much conquered the entire world by 1900 and European culture still completely dominates the world - with no end in sight. China's current ascendency is based on emulating European culture.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

buswolley (591500) | about 10 months ago | (#46105253)

trolling now, are we? With all we know about the limitations of that measure of cognition? Please.

feeling itchy lib.com ? (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about 10 months ago | (#46105375)

Our knowledge of cognition is quite good vis racial differences.  Steel-it-up my man! Why do you think we call them Bantu savages ?  Because Detroit, Oakland and Harlem brighten the worlds intellectual path  or because Liberian shitewholes is the best they can do !

Hoo boy, scientific racism again. (5, Interesting)

Valdrax (32670) | about 10 months ago | (#46105265)

For instance an average European has an average IQ of 105 compared to 70 in Africa. Though, the higher IQ is likely due to divergent racial evolution that occured well after the insertion of neanderthal genes...

Or it could be a matter of education, relative stress in childhood, and diet. Or it could be a matter of a cultural upbringing that doesn't value and train people in the types of reasoning favored by IQ tests. I'd like to see a test cataloging our relative abilities to navigate vast terrain, to remember and recite oral histories, to perform pattern recognition based on ability to identify wild plants, or just a simple ability to navigate complex social situations, for example. Or it could be a function of languages, since we already know that languages can affect things like the ability to recognize and categorize colors.

Have you ever read letters from American Civil War soldiers to their families back home? We're not talking a college education demographic by a long shot, but the eloquence and care of language in these letters is often breathtaking. Are we "dumber" than them as a populace for not being able to write like an average farm boy could 150 years ago? Or are we just trained for different uses of our brains.

IQ is a crappy measure of genetic superiority, because it fails to account for environment & upbringing, and it's heavily biased towards one particular culture's most valued intelligence traits.

Re:Hoo boy, scientific racism again. (1)

at_slashdot (674436) | about 10 months ago | (#46106493)

Has anybody designed a test that measures intelligence (not necessarily standard IQ tests) in which Africans can beat or at least equal Europeans or Asians in a systematic manner? Navigation, pattern recognition, memory, that you mentioned but not something that measures memorized knowledge, something that uses abstract ideas.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105335)

This may be a surprise but the racial groups, such as Europeans and East asians, that carry the Neanderthal fragments, have much higher average IQs than African populations where they are not present. For instance an average European has an average IQ of 105 compared to 70 in Africa. Though, the higher IQ is likely due to divergent racial evolution that occured well after the insertion of neanderthal genes, particularly the cold winters theory, that the groups that left africa had to evolve rapidly larger, more advanced brain capacity to cope with the more difficult, complex survival challenges of cold weather environments, such as the long term planning for winter and the skills needed for making of the clothes needed to survive the cold. The cold weather environment of the north provided the challenges that pushed evolution of specific racial groups to a higher level and explains much of the IQ differences between racial groups.

How the fuck did this 1930s vintage race theory crap get modded interesting?

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (4, Interesting)

tie_guy_matt (176397) | about 10 months ago | (#46105465)

Despite the fact that the I in IQ stands for intelligence, the standard IQ test is, by design, a measure of how well a person is likely to do in a tradition western school setting. It isn't, and was never meant to be, a measure of a person's worth as a human being or even ones true intelligence. Changes in environment and upbringing can change a person's chances of doing well in school and thus will also change their measurable IQ. So it is likely that certain ethnic groups score differently on their IQ tests, not because of genes or whatever, but because of their environment. Your genes might say that you should be the smartest person in the world; however if you do not get proper nutrition growing up, have parents that are too busy getting what little food is around on the table to read to you, and your early eduction system sucks, then your IQ is going to suffer and you are not going to seem as smart as you could be. Of course this won't stop racists from pointing to tests scores they don't understand in order to peddle their BS.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105519)

A squirrel have enough brain to plan for the winter. Put a squirrel brain inside a human and send her off into the woods and she'll do great. It's not challenging at all, if it was, we'd grow fur. Your entire understanding of evolution is completely wrong.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (3, Interesting)

anagama (611277) | about 10 months ago | (#46105977)

Cold Winter Theory? That seems ridiculously simplistic. How about a dry summer theory? If cold winters make people evolve because they need to figure out how to survive the winter, then the exact same argument would apply to people living in the middle of a massive desert. The harsh summers would push them to technology or whatever. Or what about peoples who live near the Arctic Circle -- they should be time travelers by now considering the harshness of their winters.

I think you are confusing technological knowledge with intelligence, and I'm willing to bet that the first appearance of a technology is due much more to some wild confluence of necessity, chance, state of the technology available prior, and resources to put it into practice. Once discovered, it spreads the easy way, via communication. But for people to pat themselves on the back and call themselves "more evolved" because they live in a place where some clever person was born, saw a need, a solution, and had the resources to make it work -- well, that could happen almost anywhere. You just won the tech lottery -- that doesn't make you evolved, it makes you lucky.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106139)

Given that races do not exist as a scientifically valid categorization (unless you're an historian or sociologist) your contention is prima facie false.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106219)

Also, https://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/the-average-african-iq-is-70/, which debunks the whole 70 IQ thing. The fact that so many commentators took it for granted, or that they attacked the very notion of IQ itself, seems incredibly racist to me.

There are lots of criticisms of IQ as a notion (disregarding testing details), but it's not nearly as bereft of value as people seem to think.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (2)

hey! (33014) | about 10 months ago | (#46106411)

Let us assume for the moment that intelligence is a single thing that can be precisely described by a single number.

Now imagine nobody has invented a way of measuring that number yet, so you set out to create an IQ test. You put together a number of tests and tasks, and assign various weights to each question and score. You administer the test to a bunch of people and the results seem reasonable.

Here's the question: how do you know you are actually measuring intelligence, and not something else that approximately correlates with it?

Alfred Binet, when faced with this problem, validated his test by correlating it with school achievement. This, at least, ensured that the test was at least somewhat useful in predicting school achievement. But it should be obvious that different kinds of people thrive in different kinds of schools, so at best tests calibrated this way are imprecise. We've all known underachievers and overachievers in school.

At their very best, IQ tests tell us what we expect to hear. That's actually more useful than it sounds, as long as we remember that we've calibrated the test to do just that. Test results must be *contrived* to correlate with things we're interested in. That mightinclude stuff like algebra and geometry, and arguing as in a legal brief, which are all valuable mental tasks. But it might not correlate to stuff like finding food in a forest during an unseasonable drought, or negotiating with a neighboring group, or evaluating the motives of strangers, all of which are tasks requiring mental acuity, and at which people differ in talent.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 10 months ago | (#46106449)

This may be a surprise but the racial groups, such as Europeans and East asians, that carry the Neanderthal fragments, have much higher average IQs than African populations where they are not present. For instance an average European has an average IQ of 105 compared to 70 in Africa. Though, the higher IQ is likely due to divergent racial evolution that occured well after the insertion of neanderthal genes, particularly the cold winters theory, that the groups that left africa had to evolve rapidly larger, more advanced brain capacity to cope with the more difficult, complex survival challenges of cold weather environments, such as the long term planning for winter and the skills needed for making of the clothes needed to survive the cold. The cold weather environment of the north provided the challenges that pushed evolution of specific racial groups to a higher level and explains much of the IQ differences between racial groups.

We know nutrition, culture, and education have huge effects on IQ, and these all factors covary by race both between countries and within countries.

If you look at charts of countries by IQ [photius.com] you see huge variations across regions with a similar ethnic profile.

We know non-genetic factors are clearly playing a huge role in these countries, could genetics play a role as well? Sure, but what's our evidence? We already know that IQ varies heavily according to non-ethnic factors within ethnically contiguous regions, it's obviously playing a role in ethnically diverse regions as well.

Just because race becomes available as a variable in some comparisons doesn't mean it takes the credit from the non-racial factors we know are playing a role.

Re:As someone who works in tech support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105457)

I'm looking to start a Neanderthal Pride Parade. We'll flaunt our Neanderthal bits and spread our propaganda.
Anyone with me?

Just in time (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 10 months ago | (#46104551)

Fitting article for SuperBowl week.

Re:Just in time (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 10 months ago | (#46105077)

Fitting article for SuperBowl week.

WTF! I thought it was Super Bowel "weekend", or Sunday. It's now been extended into the entire week?

It's always Bowel weekend! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105207)

The "bowels" have it!

Re:It's always Bowel weekend! (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 10 months ago | (#46106025)

Wheel of Unfortune

In whom? (1)

hooiberg (1789158) | about 10 months ago | (#46104563)

In some more than in others. ;)

Coincidance? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104567)

20% of people are nigger's. Coincadanse I think not.

Re:Coincidance? (0)

mendax (114116) | about 10 months ago | (#46104665)

20% of people are nigger's. Coincadanse I think not.

Apparently your have more Neanderthal genes than the average. You obviously are too stupid to know how to spell or turn on your OS's spell checker.

Re:Coincidance? (1)

fatphil (181876) | about 10 months ago | (#46105177)

GIven that neanderthals were the pale-skinned ones, that's probably a good bet. We can only hope that he does all he can to prevent his own shameful neanderthal genes from being propagated to future generations.

And thank you for following Skitt's Law.

Trying to offset... (2)

bob_super (3391281) | about 10 months ago | (#46104569)

I may be 20% neanderthal, but I'm statistically 0.5% Genghis Khan...

Re:Trying to offset... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 10 months ago | (#46106361)

Khaaaaaan! is definitely more intense-sounding than Thaaalll! or Neeaaaannn!

Neanderthal Percentage Competition! Post yours! (1)

Bleek II (878455) | about 10 months ago | (#46104579)

I'm 3.2% according to 23andme.

Re:Neanderthal Percentage Competition! Post yours! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105055)

Im only 2.5%. However this is wrong, or at least somewhat confusing.

  We apparently have 98% in common with a chimp.
  I would imagine modern humans have ~99.99% in common with Neanderthals. Of the sequencing that 23 and Me do ,you may have 3.2% that matches a classic Neanderthal sequence.

  There are some pretty weird stuff going on at 23andme.

* There race gene thing, doesn't seem to classify Aboriginal Australians, who are one of the most clearly unique races, having been isolated completely for around 10,000, and effectively for 100,000 years
* All the sequencing is wrong. Well everyone will have atleast one error http://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2013/11/30/23andme-genotypes-are-all-wrong/
* What are they actually doing with all this data?
* Why am I 30% "undefined" race.

Re:Neanderthal Percentage Competition! Post yours! (1)

tipo159 (1151047) | about 10 months ago | (#46105195)

2.5% according to the Genographic Project.

Re:Neanderthal Percentage Competition! Post yours! (1)

tipo159 (1151047) | about 10 months ago | (#46105201)

And 2.3% Denisovan

Re:Neanderthal Percentage Competition! Post yours! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105547)

2.9%, IQ = 145

Your fire isn't working? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104585)

Have you tried turning it off then on again?

Not found in "humans" in general (4, Informative)

Eravnrekaree (467752) | about 10 months ago | (#46104633)

These genes do not exist in humanity in general, only specific racial groups. They are completely absent from African populations. Similar to milk digestion. Being able to digest milk in adulthood is a feature found almost only in European race populations, because it is allowed by a genetic mutation that occured in these populations 10,000 years ago. Most other racial groups are lactose intolerant after early childhood. Milk digestion in adulthood is certainly a huge advantage and became much favored with cattle domestication in Europe.

The insertion of neanderthal genes happened around 30,000 years ago immediately after early humans left africa, after that there were 30,000 years of divergent evolution and branching that gave us the geographically distinct racial groups.

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (0)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 10 months ago | (#46104813)

I bet we can trace the insertion to Great^32 Grandpa Gronk's famous "hey you drop spearhead" trick stupid Cro-Magnon chicks always fell for.

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106097)

"Hold my spearhead and watch this"

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105081)

This map distribution show African milk tolerant populations:
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-08/infographic-day-where-people-can-digest-milk

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 10 months ago | (#46105259)

Several African peoples are traditionally big herders, and rely heavily on dairy for their diets. Same with many in India. IIRC the current theory is that the lactose tolerance mutation occurred (and thrived) independently in several different places.

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (5, Informative)

smellsofbikes (890263) | about 10 months ago | (#46105153)

Lactose intolerance is complex. The Tuareg of Saharan Africa have lower lactose intolerance rates than Finnish people, for instance. It mostly has to do with whether a group has spent a long time as nomadic herders or not, and adult persistence of lactase activity appears to be caused by several different mutations, that arose spontaneously. http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthr... [zetaboards.com] has a nice list of adult lactase activity in different ethnic groups.

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (1)

FirephoxRising (2033058) | about 10 months ago | (#46106161)

I understood that the Masai drink cattle milk (and blood), how's their digestion?

Re:Not found in "humans" in general (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106525)

could explain the recent findings that europeans many thousands of years ago were dark-skinned and the light-skin was a recent development. perhaps neanderthals were light-skinned and contributed to european myths calling them 'frost giants'...they were white like the driven snow.

Cumulative Evolution is Cumulative (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104689)

Not surprising really. Human fetuses have tails in the early stages.

and before taoils, gills (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104865)

tada!

Why so low a commonality? (4, Interesting)

trims (10010) | about 10 months ago | (#46104807)

Neanderthals are barely a separate species.

They're homo neanderthalensis, while modern man is homo sapiens sapiens. The immediate predecessor to modern humans is homo sapiens idaltu, which is minutely different than us. While a simple majority of paleontologists classify Neanderthals as a separate species, there's a significant minority that advocate them as merely another subspecies (home sapiens neanderthalensis) being more correct.

Given that the ENTIRE Neanderthal genome differs from ours by 0.15% or less (we're about 2% different than our closest modern primate relative), I'm very surprised that the Homo-specific genome part is only 20% in common between Neanderthal and Modern Human. Particularly since it's now commonly accepted that they interbred with modern humans.

I think the 20% commonality (if it bears out) probably reinforces the "separate species" theory more than the "distinct subspecies" theory of the Homo genus family tree.

-Erik

Re:Why so low a commonality? (2)

Karellen (104380) | about 10 months ago | (#46105723)

Yup, given that I've read elsewhere that we share about 90% of our genome with fricking cows - all that data for building animal cells, and vertebras, and hearts, and livers, and kidneys, and mammary glands, and hair, and eyes, and nerves, and skin, etc..., having only 20% of the Neanderthal genome in common with us is setting off my bullshit alarm big time.

Human-specific part is 20% common... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105935)

I think they're referring to the section of our DNA which is specific to the Homo genus.

That is, DNA for the Homo genus is probably about 99.5% or more in common, across all species of Homo. You can tell where the Homo DNA starts by comparing it to other members of the subfamily Homininae, and looking for differences.

So, in the Homo-specific portions of our DNA, TFA is claiming that 20% or so is common to modern humans and Neanderthals. That still seems low, given the interbreeding of Neanderthal and Modern Humans, and the fact we both share a direct common ancestor.

As someone with an ASD (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | about 10 months ago | (#46104847)

I've always found the neanderthal theory of autism interesting. Like, I know there's little to no actual evidence, but I can totally see it happening!

Re:As someone with an ASD (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 10 months ago | (#46104917)

I've always found the neanderthal theory of autism interesting.

Never heard of it. Do you have more info?

Re:As someone with an ASD (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | about 10 months ago | (#46105065)

Yes, but don't expect any lazors to be shooting out of any asses for science or anything. All evidence provided is anecdotal at best, but it's the kind of thing where we'll know just how crazy it is as soon as gene sequencing drops to about $100/person. http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperg... [rdos.net]

Re:As someone with an ASD (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105095)

Look, that "theory" is the sole brain-child of this one Swedish guy that makes no scientific sense whatsoever. His nick is Rdos, and while it sounds nice it's basically the kind of story you'd write up as fluff for your D&D races. Nothing else.

Black and white (2)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 10 months ago | (#46104971)

What I find interesting is the only group that doesn't have Neanderthal genes are Africans. It almost sounds like Caucasians got their light skin and ability to handle the cold from Neanderthals and are hybrids while Africans are the only pure humans. Ironic.

Re:Black and white (4, Interesting)

tie_guy_matt (176397) | about 10 months ago | (#46105221)

Evidence shows that homo erectus left Africa and then evolved into homo neanderthal. Later early modern humans followed the path of their ancestors and once again migrated out of Africa. It seems that when they met what had evolved from homo erectus -- well let's just say that when the cave is a rockin you shouldn't go a knockin. So it isn't surprising that modern Africans do not have many Neanderthal genes because it doesn't look like they ever migrated back into Africa.

Of course one definition of two groups being in the same species is if they can mate and have fertile offspring. Since we know early modern humans and neanderthals mated and had fertile offspring you could make a good argument that us, early modern humans, homo neanderthal, and homo erectus were/are all the same species.

Re:Black and white (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 10 months ago | (#46106115)

one definition of two groups being in the same species is if they can mate and have fertile offspring

But that can be relative or continuous because it may be a matter of probability of a successful birth and life. The more remote the genes, the higher the risk of problems.

For example, if the chance of viable offspring between two groups is 5%, would you still call them the "same species"? Where is the "official" cut-off point percent? "Zero" would be an easy answer, but 0.1% may be enough to effectively separate them because successful intermixing would be too rare to affect future genes.

Re:Black and white (1)

dryeo (100693) | about 10 months ago | (#46106197)

We don't know how fertile their offspring were. There have been cases of Mules getting pregnant (only by male donkey) though very rare and there are other hybrids where depending on the sex of parents the young hybrids are more or less fertile. Also to consider is how vigorous the F2 (second generation) offspring is, sometimes breeding happens but all the offspring are very weak. In a human society during plentiful times those offspring may still survive to adulthood.
There's also differences in what is found attractive, where 2 different species are capable of breeding but it almost never happens as the sexual cues or even timing aren't there. Probably not true for humans.

Re:Black and white (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106209)

My understanding was that the inclusion of Neanderthal DNA to account for some of European traits was already known. Given the variety of genetic traits that are seen across Europe (blue or green eyes; blonde and red hair, etc), it was postulated human evolution wouldn't have had enough time to diverge that much since we left Africa to Europe.

But if there was another hominid sub-species that had it's own genetic drift timeline prior to homo sapiens arriving, it could provide enough time for these differences to arrive and be fed back into our lineage

Only 20% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46104979)

How do they know this conclusively? Mightent the other 80% be identical to human genome?

your mom (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105027)

20% of Neanderthal Genome Survives In Your Mom

A full 15% of it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105777)

A full 15% of the 20% is in Ozzy Osbourne's family tree.

As far as Uncle Neander is concerned (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46105867)

Papa was a rolling stone.

relationship of neanderthal genes and IQ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106275)

Africans have no neanderthal DNA while Northern Europeans and East Asians have the most...trouble in paradise, comrade?

Monkey Laws and Nonsense (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106319)

Don’t expect this “science” to sneak its way into the classrooms here in the South. Our Lord and Savior made it very clear there is no way we evolved from these savages. Tennessee has passed the Monkey Law legislation which ensures teachers can challenge these so-called scientists and their twisted research funded by the liberals in Washington. Read about how we’re keep Christ in the Classroom at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2012/04/pulpit-in-classroom-biblical-agenda-in.html

Didn't exist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#46106393)

There were no neanderthals. Just ancient people who lived a lot longer so their bones look different. God created everything 6000 years ago. Watch Kent Hovinds videos.

Some of the genes influence fertility skin pigment (1)

flopsquad (3518045) | about 10 months ago | (#46106467)

...which is why, son, your dink
is neanderthal pink.
--flop
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?