Jeff
On Mon, 24 Aug 1998 10:44:42 -0400, Jeff Pratt wrote:
>JP>When I signed up for this list, the intro message said to say a litt=
le
>about myself in my first post: Right now I work as a computer
>programmer in rochester, ny. My background is in electrical engineering=
,
>physics and math. I probably would consider myself old-earth/theistic-
>evolutioniary friendly, although right now I am very hesitant to make a=
ny
>sort of definitive statement about what I think/believe. I guess I am
>interested in the question of evolution and the bible because of my fai=
th
>and a need to think through some of the tough questions that come up
>after a reading of the bible.
Welcome Jeff.
JP>I read some time ago about dna extracted from neanderthal bones
>shows no common-ancesteral link between them and humans. Does
>anyone know if this has been confirmed?
Yes. An article in _Cell_ of July 11, 1997 showed that on the basis of
mitochondrial DNA sequence divergence, Neandertals and modern humans
had a last common ancestror 550,000 to 690,000 years ago. The abstract
of the article says:
"DNA was extracted from the Neandertal-type specimen found in 1856 in
western Germany. By sequencing clones from short overlapping PCR
products, a hitherto unknown mitochondrial (mt) DNA sequence was
determined. Multiple controls indicate that this sequence is endogenous =
to
the fossil. Sequence comparisons with human mtDNA sequences, as well
as phylogenetic analyses, show that the Neandertal sequence falls outsid=
e
the variation of modern humans. Furthermore, the age of the common
ancestor of the Neandertal and modern human mtDNAs is estimated to be
four times greater than that of the common ancestor of human mtDNAs.
This suggests that Neandertals went extinct without contributing mtDNA
to modern humans." (Krings M., Stone A., Schmitz R.W., Krainitski H.,
Stoneking M. & Paabo S., "Neandertal DNA Sequences and the Origin of
Modern Humans," Cell, Vol. 90, July 11, 1997, p19)
Here is a web page article from SCIENCE summarising the find:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, 10 July 1997, 8:00 p.m.
Neandertal DNA
MUNICH, GERMANY-A stunning, first-ever analysis of DNA from a
Neandertal bone supports the view that Neandertals were an evolutionary =
dead end rather than our ancestors and gives a major boost to the field =
of
ancient DNA. Scientists in Germany and the United States report in today=
's
issue of Cell that the DNA data lend a new kind of support to the now-
favored view that Neandertals were a side branch of the human family tre=
e.
Researchers familiar with the new work are convinced that this Neanderta=
l
sequence is the real thing. It's "the most rigorous ancient DNA study I'=
ve
ever seen," says evolutionary biologist and ancient DNA researcher Blair=
Hedges of Pennsylvania State University.
The international team had to overcome vast difficulties to get their re=
sults.
DNA begins to degrade from the moment of death, and in most cases all is=
probably gone after 50,000 to 100,000 years. It's also tough to tell anc=
ient
human DNA from the modern DNA that so often contaminates a sample.
But Matthias Krings and Svante P=84=84bo OF the University of Munich and=
Anne Stone and Mark Stoneking of Pennsylvania State University
succeeded with a sample from the upper arm bone of the prototype
Neandertal skeleton, discovered in Germany in 1856.
Krings used a number of careful-and expensive-laboratory techniques to
guard against contamination and extract his sample. With the polymerase =
chain reaction, he amplified part of a particular sequence called the co=
ntrol
region in the DNA of mitochondria, cellular organelles that have their o=
wn
tiny genome and are inherited only from the mother.
The team found mutations in stretches of the DNA that never vary among
modern humans, which pegged the DNA as ancient. When they compared
the Neandertal sequence with 986 distinct sequences from living humans, =
they found that the ancient DNA was three times more different than
modern human sequences. That puts the Neandertal sequence outside the
statistical range of modern human variation and, says P=84=84bo, makes i=
t
"highly unlikely that Neandertals contributed to the human mtDNA pool."
In fact, it suggests a deeply rooted split in the human family tree, say=
s
paleoanthropologist Christopher Stringer of The Natural History Museum
in London. The finding implies that the two lineages diverged before the=
first known Neandertal at about 300,000 years ago, and long before the
first modern humans at less than 200,000 years ago. That, he says, suppo=
rts
the "Out of Africa" hypothesis-that modern humans arose recently in
Africa and then replaced existing human populations around the world,
including the European Neandertals, without interbreeding with them.
Others, such as paleoanthropologist Milford Wolpoff of the University of=
Michigan, Ann Arbor, aren't convinced that DNA from one individual
settles the long-standing debate over modern human origins. But most
anthropologists are thrilled to see that recovering ancient human DNA is=
feasible. Says paleoanthropologist Dan Lieberman of Rutgers University, =
"The fact that they managed to find DNA from a region of prime
importance is proof that there is a God who likes paleoanthropology."
c 1997 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970710a.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Theologically, the find underlines the uniqueness of Homo sapiens, since=
it
shows that Homo neandertalensis is a separare genus, and not a sub-speci=
es
of Homo sapiens as evolutionists once thought.
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ senojes@hotmail.com
Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, West Australia v "Test everything." (1Thess 5:21)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4820800=_=_=_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jeff
On Mon, 24 Aug 1998 10:44:42 -0400, Jeff Pratt wrote:
>JP>When I signed up for this list, the intro message said to say =a little
>about myself in my first post: Right now I work as a computer
>programmer in rochester, ny. My background is in electrical engineer=ing,
>physics and math. I probably would consider myself old-earth/theisti=c-
>evolutioniary friendly, although right now I am very hesitant to mak=e any
>sort of definitive statement about what I think/believe. I guess I a=m
>interested in the question of evolution and the bible because of my =faith
>and a need to think through some of the tough questions that come up=
>after a reading of the bible.
Welcome Jeff.
JP>I read some time ago about dna extracted from neanderthal bones
>anyone know if this has been confirmed?
Yes. An article in _Cell_ of July 11, 1997 showed that on the basis of <=BR>mitochondrial DNA sequence divergence, Neandertals and modern humans
"DNA was extracted from the Neandertal-type specimen found in 1856 in
products, a hitherto unknown mitochondrial (mt) DNA sequence was
determined. Multiple controls indicate that this sequence is endogenous =to
the fossil. Sequence comparisons with human mtDNA sequences, as well
the variation of modern humans. Furthermore, the age of the common
ancestor of the Neandertal and modern human mtDNAs is estimated to be
Here is a web page article from SCIENCE summarising the find:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------<=BR>Thursday, 10 July 1997, 8:00 p.m.
Neandertal DNA
MUNICH, GERMANY-A stunning, first-ever analysis of DNA from a
Neandertal bone supports the view that Neandertals were an evolutionary =
dead end rather than our ancestors and gives a major boost to the field =of
ancient DNA. Scientists in Germany and the United States report in today='s
issue of Cell that the DNA data lend a new kind of support to the now-
Researchers familiar with the new work are convinced that this Neanderta=l
sequence is the real thing. It's "the most rigorous ancient DNA study I'=ve
ever seen," says evolutionary biologist and ancient DNA researcher Blair=
Hedges of Pennsylvania State University.
The international team had to overcome vast difficulties to get their re=sults.
DNA begins to degrade from the moment of death, and in most cases all is=
probably gone after 50,000 to 100,000 years. It's also tough to tell anc=ient
human DNA from the modern DNA that so often contaminates a sample.
But Matthias Krings and Svante P=E4=E4bo OF the University of Munich and=
Anne Stone and Mark Stoneking of Pennsylvania State University
succeeded with a sample from the upper arm bone of the prototype
Neandertal skeleton, discovered in Germany in 1856.
Krings used a number of careful-and expensive-laboratory techniques to <=BR>guard against contamination and extract his sample. With the polymerase =
chain reaction, he amplified part of a particular sequence called the co=ntrol
region in the DNA of mitochondria, cellular organelles that have their o=wn
tiny genome and are inherited only from the mother.
The team found mutations in stretches of the DNA that never vary among <=BR>modern humans, which pegged the DNA as ancient. When they compared
the Neandertal sequence with 986 distinct sequences from living humans, =
they found that the ancient DNA was three times more different than
=modern human sequences. That puts the Neandertal sequence outside the
"highly unlikely that Neandertals contributed to the human mtDNA pool."<=BR>
In fact, it suggests a deeply rooted split in the human family tree, say=s
paleoanthropologist Christopher Stringer of The Natural History Museum <=BR>in London. The finding implies that the two lineages diverged before the=
first known Neandertal at about 300,000 years ago, and long before the <=BR>first modern humans at less than 200,000 years ago. That, he says, suppo=rts
the "Out of Africa" hypothesis-that modern humans arose recently in
=Africa and then replaced existing human populations around the world,
=
Others, such as paleoanthropologist Milford Wolpoff of the University of=
Michigan, Ann Arbor, aren't convinced that DNA from one individual
settles the long-standing debate over modern human origins. But most
feasible. Says paleoanthropologist Dan Lieberman of Rutgers University, =
"The fact that they managed to find DNA from a region of prime
importance is proof that there is a God who likes paleoanthropology."
=A91997 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970710a.ht=m
-----------------------------------------------------------------------<=BR>
Theologically, the find underlines the uniqueness of Homo sapiens, since= it
shows that Homo neandertalensis is a separare genus, and not a sub-speci=es
of Homo sapiens as evolutionists once thought.
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
=Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejo=nes@ibm.net
3 Hawker Avenue =; / Oz \ senojes@hotmail.com
Warwick 6024 &=nbsp;->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, West Australia =; v "Test everything." (1Thess 5:21=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4820800=_=_=_--