Submitted by Waspie Dwarf: Humans have moved into the evolutionary fast lane and are becoming increasingly different, a genetic study suggests. In the past 5,000 years, genetic change has occurred at a rate roughly 100 times higher than any other period, say scientists in the US. This is in contrast with the widely-held belief that recent human evolution has halted. The research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Professor Henry Harpending, an author of the study from the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, US, said: "The dogma has been these [differences] are cultural fluctuations, but almost any temperament trait you look at is under strong genetic influences. "Genes are evolving fast in Europe, Asia and Africa, but almost all of these are unique to their continent of origin," he added. "We are getting less alike, not merging into a single, mixed humanity." This is happening, he said, because "there has not been much flow" between different regions since modern humans left Africa to colonise the rest of the world. And there is no evidence that it is slowing down, he added. "The technology can't detect anything beyond about 2,000 years ago, but we see no sign of [human evolution] slowing down. So I would suspect it is continuing," he told BBC News. New gene selection: Researchers found evidence of recent selection in 7% of all human genes, including lighter skin and blue eyes in northern Europe and partial resistance to diseases, such as malaria, among some African populations.

"Five thousand years is such a small sliver of time," said co-author Professor John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin, Madison. "It's 100 or 200 generations ago. That's how long since some of these genes originated, and today they are [in] 30% or 40% of people because they've had such an advantage." The researchers propose that there are two factors causing human evolution to speed up.

View: Full Article | Source: BBC News

oh my.. this means that we will be divided into sub-species of the species human.

yes, but it won't be because of natural causes like evolution. Technology (augmentations) or bioengineering will change us...

To put this as simply as possible, these are not actually new genes. The African dark-skinned population has the same genes for pigmentation as the European light-skinned population, just that in the darker skinned population the switch for extra melanin is turned on. We all have the genetic code for it.

If you take this information from an evolutionist perspective, it looks like rapid (extremely, far faster than any previous estimate, in fact ridiculously fast) evolution. If you come at it from a Mendelian Genetics background, it looks more like natural selection.

Place sample populations in various climates and social structures and within a very short time you will see the 'selecting out' of certain characteristics. This is very easy to see and has been documented many times. Originally when it was documented it was called evolution, but as we've learned more about genetics and technology has improved, we came to understand that instead of an addition of information, these adapted populations actually had lost information which was not helpful to their specific circumstances.

Quite the opposite of evolution, it's really devolution. Information is rapidly being lost.

Some examples of this are the Peppered Moth (an example we studied in Genetics in college - all the information for dark and light has been in the population the entire time), the fruit fly (both species contain Nup96, just the different populations have different information 'selected out'). There are many others where you can see this natural selection and rapid speciation in isolated populations (the smaller the population the more rapid the speciation).

Anyway... it'd be nice if more of these writers had a better understanding of basic genetics... AaBb vs AABB is not evolution, evolution would be AaBb vs AaBbCc (to put it in Mendelian terms).

JS

First these scientists say evolution has halted. Next they say we are in the fast lane. AH Hahahahahaaaaaaaa.

ahem...excuse the laughter but I just can't help it. As time passes more people reject what the Bible says even though it never changes and was written thousands of years ago. These same people that reject the Bible listen to and believe modern man who can't seem to make up their minds. One other thing...if we evolved from monkeys how come we still have monkeys?

we all also evolved from see animals, how come there still are fish n such...?

Yes. That's why people reject it.



We didn't evolve from monkeys, we evolved from a common ancestor.



There was one group of animals, it split up(cladogenesis) and branched down different evolutionary paths. Some became modern day monkeys, others became humans.

Same thing with fish and mammals, only you'd need to go much further back down the evolutionary tree to see the branch.

Maybe they will qualify for sub-prime mortgages.

Maybe. I should point out that all vertebrates have about the same genes. The difference lies in which ones are turned on and in which order. This can happen very fast......Cebrakon

Please allow me to join and have a hearty laugh as well at your expense, because you are bafflingly uninformed.

We share a common ancestor with apes, we did not evolve from them. Apes went one way, we went the other.

That is one of the most simple and basic concepts of evolution.

EDIT: Oops, didn't see that Raptor beat me to it .

I believe that this article is referring to the molecular level of genetics more so than physical appearances because it mentioned the Central Dogma (DNA>RNA>Protein)

The human genome consists of about 2.9 billion nucleotide bases, therefore; we hardly all have the same basic DNA. These bases are a combination of C-G & A-T which are subdivided into around 21,500 genes. Nucleotide bases are the foundations of nucleic acids, these acids construct DNA.

DNA polymerases are involved in DNA repair. When DNA replicates it does by the process of semiconservative replication. The original DNA unwinds; one strand infuses with a new straind and forms a double helix. However, sometimes the new strand of DNA does not code right. The old strain detects the damage and repairs it. If the polymerase is unable to fix the damaged DNA strain, it becomes a mutation. Thus, a change in the gene entirely. Could these such gene mutation be passed onto the offspring?

Punctulated Equalibrium is the theory that most evolutionary changes occur in bursts. This theory seems to be more correct than the theory of divergence. In a nut shell, divergence is the theory that new species emerge through many small changes over long spans, sometimes called gradualism. Perhaps these scientists are not far off in thinking that Human evolution is "speeding up" if Punctulated Equalibrium is correct.

I dunno, I find it quite fascinating.

Oh, and one last thing... we didn't evolve from Apes, we evolved from a different species entirely. It's like saying a cat and lion are the same species or that dogs and wolves are the same species. They may look similiar but aren't.

When my wife wears her genes something gets turned on in mine very fast. Oh, wait a minute, that's jeans, never mind.

While you are quite right as regards the genome itself, my point was to the practicality, which is easy to see with a basic understanding of Mendelian genetics and a little study of some populations through history.

I'll give a little more detail on my point...

The gene is not merely as string of information, it is structured and organized. We all have the same basic genetic structure, with a maximum variation of information around 7.5% (if I remember correctly). Imagining a single set of information as a switch turned either on or off is typically an easy way for people to understand it. It's really either one specific pattern or one of several other specific patterns. And it's not really just one string of information, but the interaction between two, one from each parent (typically ). You may carry one pattern twice or two different patterns, but the area for the pattern exists in everyone. Only a pattern that you possess can be passed on to your children, unless something goes wrong. If one of these patterns is 'selected out' of a population (as light hair and light skin were for some African populations) there is still a pattern there, but the information for light skin has been lost.

As far as the mutations: typically the mutation ends up replacing a patterned area with gibberish. In a case where this is noticable, the creature usually dies and the mutation isn't passed on. If a strand is lengthened or shortened (which makes the pairings of the two strands more difficult) it's even more dangerous and you end up with some really wierd stuff. In almost all mutations, the area around the mutation is significantly damaged and the connection points. Over time this general damage adds up and causes trouble.... this is why interbreeding of people groups is extremely good for the population, the damage in one people group rarely matches the damage in another people group and the damage can sometimes be 'selected out' of the population naturally.

JS

There are enzymes in the cell to detect mutations in the DNA. Sometimes it can be fixed by using the equivalent part from the other (mostly identical) strand of DNA. If not, the cell (not the organism) is commanded to commit apoptosis. This is something like Hara-kiri for a cell. It is chopped up and put in a bunch of little bags.

Only a severe scrambling of the chromosones can make the organism die. We call that cancer. Even then, it may be decades later. There are some odd things about cancer cells. Not only do they have scrambled chromosones, they do not live by respiration. They use a more ancient and primitive technique similar to fermentation. They also ignore all orders to commit apoptosis.

Cebrakon, loyal reader of Scientific American

I won't ever accept it if it never changes. It never made sense a long time ago, doens't now, and never will.

And you can't really say it never changed. I'm sure something was edited once or twice when it was being passed through so many hands for so many years.

That is true for individual cell replication (Mitosis). That is not true for reproductive cells (Meiosis). Mutants that are non-viable are pretty well documented. In the case of Mitosis, a single cell is expendable. In Meiosis, small 'errors' can survive in an egg or a sperm without causing it to die. When this cell is then attempting to join with it's mate, typically the result is non-viable. Some survive and are 'mules' unable to reproduce. Some manage to pass on the damage to some or all of their offspring. And this is where Mendelian genetics allows us to have a little fun looking at different populations and the patterns and prevalence of certain genetic codes and errors.

JS