Human/Neanderthal DNA 99.9% identical

[UM-Bot]

We may like to think we're far superior to the Neanderthals species that us humans beat in the evolutionary battle. But analysis of DNA from a 38,000-year-old bone has revealed Neanderthal and human DNA is actually up to 99.9 per cent identical. In contrast, humans and chimps only share 95 per cent of their genetic material. The discovery came as scientists work on decoding the entire Neanderthal genome from a perfectly-preserved artefect. Found in a cave in Croatia, the bone could hold the key to many of the secrets of evolution. Dr Edward Rubin, one of the US and German researchers who have started to sequence the ancient DNA, said: 'We are at the dawn of Neanderthal genomics. 'This data will function as a DNA time machine and tell us aspects of biology we could never get from bones or associated artefacts. Fossil remains have already shown that Neanderthals looked different from us, with heavy brows, low foreheads, and receding chins. They were also much more robustly built than modern humans.

A full blueprint of Neanderthal DNA - due to be produced in two years' time - could provide information on eye colour and hair colour, intelligence and language. The partial sequencing completed so far has confirmed the theory that humans and Neanderthals split from their common ancestor between 400,000 and 500,000 years ago, studies published in the journals Nature and Science report. The two then co-existed for many thousands of years before Neanderthals became extinct around 30,000 years ago, perhaps beaten by their more innovative cousins in the race for food, clothing and shelter, It is thought they were unable to compete with the more innovative and adaptable Homo sapiens for food, clothing and shelter.

View: Full Article | Source: Daily Mail

[truethat]

This is so interesting to me. The idea that Humans and Neanderthals existed at the same time fighting it out. Why would the the Neanderthals have become extinct?

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Why would the the Neanderthals have become extinct?

Changing conditions. The Neanderthals were far better suited to ice age conditions than we were, however with the end of the ice age conditions changed in our favour.

The were for stronger but less agile than us. The were also for more carnivorous. Their hunting tactics were perfect for hunting on the edge of forests, but as the forests receded their hunting grounds grew smaller and smaller. Homo sapiens were more suited to survival in the open plains that replaced the forests. We were more omnivorous and more capable of running prey down in a long hunt.

A BBC Horizon programme explored this issue a little while ago. A summary of that programme can be found here: Horizon summary

[truethat]

cool thanks

[IronGhost]

And another thing to add to Waspie's -- It may be that Neanderthals were very poor at symbolic communication -- they probably were not oriented toward language. The shape of their throats, larnyxs, etc., suggest they would have difficulty developing a complex spoken language. This is huge in terms of survival when you're going up against a species with advanced communications techniques.

On another note: Wouldn't it be great if we could clone a Neanderthal? Or does this make me sound like a sicko -- I mean, it's a human being, not a mammoth, or anything.

[Ravinar]

99.9% i don't find this to surprising. we did branch off from the same common ancestor after all.

[Johns spirit]

Neanderthals are living and very much alive in the town where I live.

[Lord Umbarger]

99.9% the same? Isn't that about the same amount of genetic difference between the modern races of humans?

I read somewhere that Neandrathals were, genetically, more similar to people of african decent And Europeans were more similar to CroMagnon. I don't remember where I saw that though. It's been a long time.

[frogfish]

Isn't that about the same amount of genetic difference between the modern races of humans

No, modern races are much more closer...like 99.999999%

[ShaunZero]

How is that much more? That's not even a full percentage more.

[IronGhost]

That .01 can make a huge difference in the final product, however.

But here's another thing: Neanderthals are always depicted as more or less Caucasion, that is, white-skinned people. Could they have been black, or of some other color?

[Mr. Spock]

Fascinating bit of news. Thanks!

[secondhand]

99.9% isn't that great considering humans share 87% of our DNA with lettuces.

[noyritus]

We're all made from the same sh!t - known it for years!

On a side not no one can claim we share 80%, 90% or even a 100% similiar to another creature's when we haven't mapped their genome, including chimps.

[Cebrakon]

Neanderthals are living and very much alive in the town where I live.

Heh Heh. I guess I could say that about the town where I live as well. All my close friends are on the Net, and some live in the UK or Denmark (DK). A slight digression.

The Neandertals were perfectly capable of adapting to changing conditions. After all they lived most of the way through 2 Ice-Ages, about 200,000 years in all. It appears that they adapted by changing latitudes. When it was extremely cold in Europe, they may have abandoned it for the Near East, or even Africa. There are caves in Israel with alternating layers of Sapiens and Neandertals, and some indication that at times some caves may have had Sapiens and other caves Neandertals, at the same time. There is no evidence of warfare between them, not in Israel, and not in Europe.

But perhaps 30K ago, those warmer places were all occupied by Sapiens.

The period of 30K to 25K BCE was very cold, slowly sliding into the coldest period about 18K BCE. And then a rapid warmup to the present interglacial. But Neandertals had lived through interglacials before. The last one was actually quite a bit warmer than the present one.

No doubt Sapiens was very adaptable and inventive. They were us, in fact. They had art, shamanism, needles and thread, harpoons, spear-throwers, and in the Steppes of Russia, in the coldest part of the glacial period, they built above-ground homes of Mammoth bones that washed up in the nearby streams, covered with thatch and clay, finished with a very hard layer of pure clay. They also hunted Mammoth. And they could keep it frozen in their freezers, until they needed the meat or hides. Very much like the books by Jean Auel, such as The Mammoth Hunters.

No doubt the greatest advantage that sapiens had was very long distance trade relationships. And that meant long distance travelers and marriage between very different groups. We know about these relationships from the jewelry worn by all Sapiens. Sea shells from the Atlantic. Amber from the Baltic. Mammoth bones from the Steppes. Species can die out simply from interbreeding. We need to keep outbreeding from distant places to maintain genetic diversity. The individual tribes of Neandertals seem to have been self-sufficient, and may not have had any long distance connections, except at special clan meetings every 4 years, as Jean Auel imagines it.

Another advantage of those long distance relationships by Sapiens is that distant tribes could help take in survivors from earthquakes or other disasters. That may not have been true for Neandertals.

~~~Cebrakon, master of the forbidden sciences

[Daluni]

Neanderthals are living and very much alive in the town where I live.

Funny but food for thought. In today's world there's only one human race (sorry racists, a different skin color doesn't make a different race). But at any time a subspecies can evolve, like we once evolved. It only takes 0.1% difference in DNA, probably less. You see subspecies come to existence when there are changing conditions, new niches to be filled. Look at the world today, the society is changing enormously.

Neanderthalers were strong, but not agile enough. Maybe the modern day man will get a cousin that is more agile of mind, to cope with quickly changing circumstances, able to dig his way through huge amounts of information, fast decisionmaking etc.

[GreyWeather]

Funny but food for thought. In today's world there's only one human race (sorry racists, a different skin color doesn't make a different race).

uh... A different skin colour Does make you a different race. There's only one human species, but 5-6 races. Due to the fact we evolved separately over vast area's and adapted ourselves to suit our environment.

edit. Typo.

Edited November 18, 2006 by Leliel

[zukie&jim]

ok--where does the 95% chimp come in at ?

[Shuriken]

Funny but food for thought. In today's world there's only one human race (sorry racists, a different skin color doesn't make a different race). But at any time a subspecies can evolve, like we once evolved. It only takes 0.1% difference in DNA, probably less. You see subspecies come to existence when there are changing conditions, new niches to be filled. Look at the world today, the society is changing enormously.

Neanderthalers were strong, but not agile enough. Maybe the modern day man will get a cousin that is more agile of mind, to cope with quickly changing circumstances, able to dig his way through huge amounts of information, fast decisionmaking etc.

But they will come about not by any ordinary evolution process. It will be the technology that will create these post humans, not time...

[Bella-Angelique]

ok--where does the 95% chimp come in at ?

Edited November 18, 2006 by Bella-Angelique

[frogfish]

On a side not no one can claim we share 80%, 90% or even a 100% similiar to another creature's when we haven't mapped their genome, including chimps.

But we have.

[diggs6979]

They couldn't compete because............ they were friggin retarded!!! Yep that's the answer folks.... right here for ya.....read it again.

[Bigfoot_Is_Real]

99.9% identical 0.1% dead

[frogfish]

I would love to read the actual paper.

[Silentom]

So we are almost identical in genes to a club toating, half witted brute?

Interesting to say the least!