CARTA: The Genetics of Humanness: Ed Green - The Neandertal and Denisovan Genomes

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 4 лип 2011
  • (Visit: www.uctv.tv) Richard "Ed" Green, Assistant Professor of Biomolecular Engineering at UC Santa Cruz, explains how and what we know about our relation to Neandertal Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 21981]

КОМЕНТАРІ • 20

  • @uctv
    @uctv  9 років тому +4

    New CARTA shows will be uploaded in December 2014.

  • @simicvukan1
    @simicvukan1 12 років тому

    Very good explained, i enjoyed watching!!!

  • @sidimightbe3246
    @sidimightbe3246 9 років тому +1

    The beginning music would make a great trap beat

  • @brianmurphy7012
    @brianmurphy7012 2 роки тому +1

    Jeff Tweedy is our final evolutionary form

  • @charlesrobbins2208
    @charlesrobbins2208 3 роки тому

    Neandertal has a rib cage more akin to an ape rib cage than Homo Sapiens Sapiens. The rib cage would indicate that Neandertal had huge upper body strength. Also, the bipedal motion of Neandertal might have been a more clumsy locomotion. The density of the Neandertal and Denisovan bones indicates that the strength of those two would allow them to break our ancestors in two if angered.
    48 vs. 46 is the key difference. Hairy hominids more closely resembling apes physically versus nearly hairless Homo Sapiens with very little strength comparatively. Isn't it likely that the genes from those two which helped us were placed/inserted into our genome sideways at nearly the same time that our chromosomes were fused resulting in a new creature, us? Another explanation escapes me, but then, I am no scientist.

  • @GrenadeChick99
    @GrenadeChick99 10 років тому

    Obviously this is completely "over my head," but I participated in National Geographic's Geno 2.0 project. I have 2.8% Neanderthal and 4.7% Denisovan, yet I am a green-eyed, freckled red head with AB RH-. Is this a conflict? A mistake, perhaps? Or is it true that a people will simply adapt to a new environment/climate in 10,000 years?.Why don't I have brown skin and dark eyes? If anyone can help me I will be grateful. Thanks.

    • @GrenadeChick99
      @GrenadeChick99 9 років тому

      Thank you!

    • @xr6turbo324
      @xr6turbo324 6 років тому

      GrenadeChick99 strange you have Deniosivan. What nationality or ancestry are you?

    • @albrolake7787
      @albrolake7787 5 років тому

      @@xr6turbo324 looks like she has a Web site. .

  • @jasonjudd4
    @jasonjudd4 9 років тому +1

    Holes in the admixture hypothesis.
    1. Green shifted the errors until they matched with sapiens. Moving them either direction would have resulted in more Pan like. He admits this on the UCSC channel.
    2. No Y chromosome found in Neanderthal. This means that a male Neanderthal could not breed with a female sapiens.
    3. If a male sapiens could breed with a female Neanderthal, the offspring would have an EXACT copy of the Neanderthal mother's mtDNA. Since European Cro Magnon did not have ANY Neanderthal mtDNA, the hypothetical interbreeding did not take place there. However, Siberian Cro Magnon did have the minimal 2-6% shared Neanderthal coding 48,000 years ago--for hybridization to occur, this should be a much higher percentage--much higher--like 90%. Not even genetic drift could account for such a loss of mtDNA diversity in a mere 20,000 years. Sapiens, who love to breed, cannot displace 29 mtDNA differences in 180,000 years. How could we lose 202 of the MT differences in just 20k? We can't even with quadrillions of mating successes.
    4. Neanderthal Chromosome 2 (nuclear) is not the archaic fusion of 12 & 13 repositioned to # 2.
    5. Communication. The severity of this difference would imply a physical rape between the two. No way could a male sapiens rape a robust animal with nearly twice the strength, unless she wanted him to--circles back to hole #2.
    6. The hybrid offspring would not survive, nor would it be fertile to carry on the lineage.
    7. Genetic zoologists, the people responsible for successful speciated hybridization, also believe that 202 different mtDNA base pairs between two species of the same genus (with identical chromosome count) is not possible. Note: with no Y chromosome, Neanderthal has 48 compared to our 46--this furthers the problem.
    8. Body hair. Barefoot footprints found all over the place and accepted as Neanderthal. These prints mean no shoes in the cold. Since extremities freeze before limbs, then this means without shoes, there were no clothes. If they could survive in those conditions without clothes, then they were covered in full body hair. Would a sapiens mate with something hairy? Would a Neanderthal in heat force herself onto a male sapiens? Possible, then we are at problem (hole) number 2. THEN add a half & half sapiens baby in the freezing cold.....? Will not survive.
    These holes must be filled in order for the hypothesis to be considered theory. Genetic zoologists must also be on board with it too. These 2-6% differences are one of three things. Shared ancestor, merely similar instructional coding plans for bipedalism, or a missing hominid that could mate with both sapiens and Neanderthal should exist--which also means shared ancestor.
    I have asked these questions to both Paabo and Green. I've been waiting for quite some time.

    • @duckmanjoel
      @duckmanjoel 9 років тому +2

      Jason Judd Where did you get your info about Neanderthal being 48 instead of 46? Seems fairly obvious to me too that there would have been no mixing between the sapiens male and Neanderthal female. The male sapiens would be something similar to todays Bushman. Small and unassuming to a Neanderthal female. Also seems obvious that the Neanderthal had hair like the Wooly Mammoth had hair. Any primate evolution that started 500,000 years ago in the cold north before the brain had evolved would sculpt a body built for cold. That would include warm fur. Most studies I have read put the Neanderthal genome at 99.7% identical to Homo sapiens. The 1 to 4% that is discussed is used in terms of 'ancestry' (like my daughter is 50% related to me, my grandchild 25%, etc). But I have heard your argument that that similarity could be explained away with 100,000 years of convergent evolution. Also, couldn't those humans still in Africa be admixing with Homo erectus or other Homo species? How would that change the interpretation?

    • @NickanM
      @NickanM 6 років тому

      Jim Johnson *Sources?*

    • @mickelodiansurname9578
      @mickelodiansurname9578 6 років тому +1

      Actually its a genetic sequence narrative... we call such narrative 'facts' because there are precisely 'zero' alternative explanations.
      So unless you think the average genetic sequencing machine is 'out to get you' then you are wrong. Political ideology has nothing to do with this at all and doesn't affect the way gene sequencing works.

  • @WolfGrrl1
    @WolfGrrl1 8 років тому

    You should google 'aboriginal skull' ( you know, the aboriginal people that live in Australia) and compare it to a Neanderthal skull. You'll be amazed.

    • @christianlingurar7085
      @christianlingurar7085 6 років тому

      you'd be amazed comparing the other skulls, too... there's more difference among humans nowadays than among different homo chronospecies, our whole model works lesser and lesser the more we know

    • @xr6turbo324
      @xr6turbo324 6 років тому

      WolfGrrl abo has Denosivan DNA