Neanderthal

Entire Neanderthal genome finally mapped – with amazing results

shareThis

The results of an extensive analysis of a 50,000-year-old toe bone belonging to a Neanderthal woman, which was unearthed in a cave in 2010, have been long awaited. Now, after much anticipation, the findings have finally been released by the journal Nature, and they have not disappointed. For the first time ever, researchers have completely sequenced the fossil’s nuclear DNA to the same extent and quality as that of genomes sequenced from present-day people.

All around the world, news headlines shout out about incest and inbreeding and other sensationalistic statements. Sadly, they are missing the most amazing results of all.

This incredible research has revealed the following:

  • There is now conclusive evidence that Neanderthals bred with Homo sapiens – a fact disputed for many years.  Some scientists claimed the two species had never even met.
  • Ancient human species, including Neanderthals, Denisovans and Homo sapiens mated with each other, resulting in an incredibly complex family tree.
  • The Denisovans share up to 8 percent of their genome with a “super achaic” and totally unknown species that dates back around 1 million years.
  • The results conflict with the theory that modern humans arose completely from one “out of Africa” migration more than 60,000 years ago that spread worldwide without mating with other early humans.
  • About 1.5 to 2.1 percent of the DNA of all people with European ancestry can be traced to Neanderthals.
  • Proportions of Neanderthal DNA are higher among Asians and Native Americans, who also have small percentages of Denisovan DNA.
  • 6 percent of the genome of Australian Aborigines and indigenous Papua New Guineans belong to the Denisovan species.
  • The Han Chinese, native to East Asia, and the Dai people of southern China are related to both Neanderthals and Denisovans.
  • Some indigenous people from Brazil, such as the Karitiana, are not only related to both Neanderthals and Denisovans, but they show relatively high genetic contributions from the Denisovans.
  • Only 87 genes responsible for making proteins in cells are different between modern humans and Neanderthals. Intriguingly, some of the gene differences involve ones involved in both immune responses and the development of brain cells in people.
  • Somewhere within these 87 genes may lay the answer to why Neanderthals and Denisovans became extinct.
  • And least consequential of all, the Neanderthal woman’s parents were related, possibly half-siblings, or an uncle and niece. As evolutionary biologist Mattias Jakobsson stated, the incest finding “is more of an anecdote”. The results from one individual cannot be applied to an entire species, in the same way that the recent discovery of an incest family in Australia does not apply to the whole of the human race.

The study really highlights that no race of people on earth belongs to one ancestral group, rather we all have “proportions of ancestral groups," said computational biologist Rasmus Nielsen of the University of California, Berkeley. What’s more, we can begin to contemplate the fact that we are all “connected to other species - extinct smart bipeds”.

So many answers have been provided from just one study and yet so many questions remain.

By April Holloway

Comments

I wonder what the unknown species is.

Maybe it's some alien species, Pleaidians?

You might be right Jamey.

If you look at what the pleaidians claim,all of this makes sense.

This is why reputable science journals are disabling comments. You have a better chance of breeding with an Octopus than an alien. At least you share some DNA similarity.

That argument only holds in one's own eyes if one is ignorant of the fact that all life everywhere in the galaxy is initially seeded by others of that same evolutionary tread at a more evolved stage of evolution. And this one will really bake your noodle; this very planet teems with humans at this time that are in real contact with their higher dimensional brethren. The ones here, not yet visible to most humans due to frequency differences, say that a large percentage of this galaxy's higher lifefoms are humanoid. The other higher evolved beings in this galaxy are the result of the descrete evolutionary threads of birds, reptiles, amfibiums, dinosaurs, insects and many others. All animals on this planet are seeded by that higher spieces higher evolved family and cared for from their higher dimensional vintage point. Vibrational rate of consciousness is what binds a being to a specific dimensional experience. Higher dimensions can not be sensed from a lower dimesional vinagepoint but the lower ones can be fully observed from the ones above it. If you don't know these things I guess you went to the wrong
university. If this contains spelling mistakes please excuse me, this is my tertiary language.

Oh, man... where to start?
Look... I'm open to the Panspermia Theory...but...
'frequency differences'...' higher dimensional vintage point'...'Vibrational rate of consciousness'..etc.,etc.'
Really?
Please forgive my obvious ignorance, but with all of this New-Ager Ungulate feces stuff floating about, I'm having a hard time figuring out which soundtrack is more apropriate for the situation.
Do I go with the ever popular Twilight Zone theme... or shall I go with something a wee bit more USSA centric.. like the intro to 'Dueling Banjo's'? Hmm.. decisions....

Show me one single human on this planet that is connected to a "higher dimensional brethren"
You want us to believe that you're an extraterrestrial entity?

Extraterrestrial

Nope. The chance that an alien species would be able to breed with humans is virtually zero. There's no guarantee that aliens would even use DNA for their genetic code, and if they do it's unlikely that it's the same code. It would simply have been a different branch of the human family tree.

It is a FACT that aliens have interbred with humans. While I do not think aliens can physically bred with humans, non-physical sex IS possible. It is called Mergence. It is fact because I have done it!. Not all of their genetic code is physical DNA, There is also a higher coding for the 'soul' or spirit made up of flickers of light energy. Also, certain aliens use genetic engineering and/or cloning techniques.

Stop lying.

Is this the cult you are part of?

WHAAAA???? You've done it???

Thanks for the laugh. I needed that.

You dont think its possible for an alien species to have knowledge of genetic engineering?

How is there no way? When did you meet an alien to confirm this?

easy..Aliens from outer space.  I saw it on Fox..it has to be true.

Just found your site. VERY interesting.

I AGREE just found this site fascinating

why did the artist give the man such a goofy smile? when we smile, we pull our cheeks up which makes the upper lip very tight. We'd get a better idea of the face if he was smiling realistically.

I don't think he is smiling.

maybe it is 'his' wtf face?

How do we know its really a 'he'?

Dunno. Maybe it was the beard and balding pate?

maybe bitches had beard back then?. Things change man get with the ancient times bro!.

They probably did a DNA based sex determination.

Many researchers believe smiling and laughing are traits in Homo Sapians that Neanderthals didn't share.

that is one high dude

Incest is a cultural category, not some sort of universally common thing. That her parents were related is nothing particularly special or interesting - there are many societies in which cousins are the preferred marriage partners and if her parents were "double cousins" (where two sets of siblings intermarry), then genetically it would look even closer.

I most totally agree with computational biologist Rasmus Nielsen of the University of California, Berkeley, who quoted " What’s more, we can begin to contemplate the fact that we are all 'connected to other species - extinct smart bipeds', So many answers have been provided from just one study and yet so many questions remain." .../end quote. Many people draw conclusions from such a study without knowing what it encompasses. In the list of findings we need to read the fact that this is One Specimen's DNA and we can't generalize on the human race as a result of the DNA sampling of this one Specimen. We need to set the study in the scope of the limit, 'all things being equal elsewhere" and reason that to speculate origins would be very premature at this point in time.

...Is that Neanderthals were just another kind of person.

Well said. If the populations can interbreed, why do we use the term "species"? If the genes of the populations are alive and kicking, why do we call those populations "extinct"? What is apparently meant is that a certain inbreeding population (which all relatively isolated populations are) became less bounded, filtering in with a larger population. If we had had genome mapping when the first "Neanderthal" skeleton was found, we probably wouldn't have designated them a separate species. The first Neanderthal remains were found in the 19th century at a time when scientists and many others were arguing, with great political consequences, that our "races" were separate species, i.e., were created separately. The use of the term species in the present context seems a holdover from polygenism.

Wow, what incredible news.

Why do people find inbreeding in this situation so upsetting ? Is it that difficult to realize that at that time of human development, we most likely lived according to our natural instincts instead of social mores? How many animal species are there that do not breed with their own relatives?
No, it's not acceptable behavior now, but at that point in time who was to tell them that it was taboo? It's a learned behavior, isn't it? It doesn't bother me a bit to know that distant ancestors were inbreeding. I mean, I would prefer that they did not if I could make the choice, but it was just ...part of evolving.

I think that too many people have a hard time accepting that we are just 'animals' who evolved into civilized human beings.

Lets put it this way...
1/ There weren't as many people then. Also, travel took much longer.
2/ We lived in family groups that likely splintered off and moved away if they became too big.
3/ The need to pair off and reproduce.
= pairing/reproducing within the family group being probably more of the norm back then.
Does that change anything? No. The fact that there were 4 different species of Humans living all at once is friggin' amazing. Does that mean we need to take up what our ancestors did? No. We know the consequences. We have plenty of healthy, unrelated people of the opposite sex within an easily accessible area, and the ability to meet them and travel to them with ease. Things change, and ancient Humans rocked! No Alien-o.

Where have you been living ? If you think you are an animal so be it ! :) Be one ! oh , I meant civilized one.

I suspect this statement from the article is incorrect. "About 1.5 to 2.1 percent of all people with European ancestry can be traced to Neanderthals." Does the author mean that about 1.5 to 2.1 percent OF THE DNA of all people with European ancestry can be traced to Neanderthals. It was my understanding that all people of European ancestry carry some Neanderthal DNA.

ancient-origins's picture

Yes Teresa, thank you. Amendment has been made. 

The correction on the meaning of those percentages is still unclear because a correction has not really been made.

aprilholloway's picture

What do you mean Curiously, the correction has been made? What is unclear?

The original wording seemed to imply that only 1.5–2.1% of people of European ancestry have some Neanderthal DNA, rather than all of them having about 1.5–2.1%.

all evidence points to the fact that all humans were racial "black" until about 5,500 years ago, and than you have a the first split in the Dravdian Indian genetic line. The first evidence of white and tanned skinned humans can be traced to this split, creating what was the first populations of modern europeans and modern asians. I am a white person and the only reason this bothers me is that there is this racially biased insistence to try and show non-black people as being in existence since the start of homosapien development. I do not understand why scientists feel the need to continue this emotional based racial biased. Even the data above shows that non-white populations have a higher rate of neandrathal DNA. Really, the emergence of race in humans is a hugely perplexing mystery. Albinism is easily explained, buy albino africans can still produce black children. The only other animals that show this level of selective breeding to produce new consistent "races" of a species has been in livestock and is through the process of artificial selective breeding. Also, the fact that african homosapiens were mating with neadrathals does not show that the out of Africa theory is incorrect, it simply means that black people were in eurasia before white and asian and latin people existed...Stone henge was most likely created by ancient homosapiens that were racial black.

Tsk tsk. Stonehenge was almost certainly not created by black people, sorry to burst that particular fantasy, we pretty much know who built stonehenge and when it was built in 3000 BC, sorry your claims are total nonsense.

There are many thousands of human remains that date back to its construction and we know that to be true because they are included in structural elements of the henge. The DNA of these people is identical to the current inhabitants of the British Isles with some evidence of migration from mainland Europe.

Stone henge was most likely created by ancient homosapiens that were racial black. This is crazy for why you think apes and monkey are in UK was used to move the big stones.

Where did you get the idea that all evidence points to humans being black until 5500 years ago? That is an incredibly short time for all the genetic mutations to start for white people to all of a sudden show up. Homo sapiens left Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago. Some mixed with Neanderthals, others with denisovans in Asia and Siberia and others mixed with a different unknown species presumably from Europe. Now we are all pretty much a mix of all of these. But instances of Caucasians have existed for well over 5 thousand years, even if you meant 5000 b.c. You would still be wrong. There are even preserved humans with white skin.

People were black until when? What if people started out white, and the ones living along the equator slowly increased the Melanin in their skin? Or maybe we were red first? I know, we were green. Just another ET seed colony. None of this bothers me. But the sheer arrogance of deciding what is known fact when the entire fossil base will fit in a shipping crate does. Nobody knows. Everything fails to satisfy even the definition of a theory. This is all pure hypothesis, just one step above speculation. If you want to change this,I suggest you build a time machine so you can go back and hang out.

Can't zoom or enlarge text on site, unfair to old eyes.

ancient-origins's picture

That's strange because the zoom feature has been tested on all main browsers and appears to be functioning normally.  Could you please let me know what browser you are using? And what device you are using to view the page e.g. iPhone, android, laptop? Thanks.

I wonder just when in history people came to realize how babies are made... Incest is seen as wrong because of the close family relationship between the people involved, but also because we now know that close inbreeding can reinforce negative traits and increase the probability of birth defects and other problems. Just my guess, but chances are that all those years ago, people didn't know the mechanics of recreation - for all we know they saw the two events of sexual intercourse and a woman becoming pregnant and giving birth as completely unrelated, which means they would have had no reason to prohibit close family members from being intimate together, or for that matter, they wouldn't have had any sure way of knowing who all was related to whom, outside the matriarchal line.

Pages

Register to become part of our active community, get updates, receive a monthly newsletter, and enjoy the benefits and rewards of our member point system OR just post your comment below as a Guest.

Ancient Places

Dispilio Tablet
According to conventional archaeology, writing wasn’t invented until 3000 to 4000 BC in Sumeria . However, an artefact was found over a decade ago which contradicts this belief – and perhaps this is...

Our Mission

Ancient Origins seeks to uncover, what we believe, is one of the most important pieces of knowledge we can acquire as human beings – our beginnings.

While many believe that we already hold such knowledge, our view is that there still exists a multitude of anomalies and mysteries in humanity's past that deserve further examination.

We therefore wish to foster an open community that is dedicated to investigating, understanding and explaining the origins of our species on planet earth. To this end, we aim to organize, support and even finance efforts in this direction.

Our aim is to move beyond theories and to present a thorough examination of current research and evidence and to offer alternative viewpoints and explanations to those currently held by mainstream science and archaeology.

Come with us on a journey to explore lost civilisations, sacred writings, ancient places, unexplained artefacts and scientific mysteries while we seek to reconstruct and retell the story of our beginnings.

Ancient Image Galleries

Vessel in the form of a man on a reed raft
Administrative tablet showing the early development of cuneiform writing
The Great Pyramids