tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post8813217708614318871..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: Neandertal admixture vs. Ancient African structureDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-26294003263048672512012-04-22T06:23:35.470+03:002012-04-22T06:23:35.470+03:00If I understand correctly this means that many of ...If I understand correctly this means that many of the ancient hominids that existed at the same time were about as different as wolves, coyotes, jackals and domestic dogs.<br /><br />They can mate and create fertile hybrids, but they prefer not too and are more likely to kill each other than breed with each other.El Lurkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13542765792516291356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-62352884572725896562012-04-22T02:55:38.345+03:002012-04-22T02:55:38.345+03:00To use an analogy; if we use correct chronological...To use an analogy; if we use correct chronological methods (eg germline mutation), we'd conclude that all European DNA is derived from Neolithic and susequent; with only little Palaeolithic due to being overwrittenl but ofcourse some Palaeolithic DNA remains. Now, the same must be with Neanderthal; but even farther removed back in time and more difficult to demonstrate. <br /><br />The ROA scenario has several issues; including for the mtDNA evidence to make sese, 100 thousands years ago, the world would have to have been populated by some 500 people (!) leaving Africa. This number just seems way to meagre to be realistic. <br /><br />And fancy models showing ancient African sub-structure to account for such discrepencies (eg in autosmoal DNA SNPs which date back over 800 kya; even a million) ; some of which (eg b -globin) show maximum diversity in Asia, not AfricaRobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07166839601638241857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-79737216824267869462012-04-21T21:23:50.744+03:002012-04-21T21:23:50.744+03:00I actually tend towards the belief in various Afri...<i>I actually tend towards the belief in various African and non-African admixture events, it's the simplest explanation that fits best with the evidence.</i><br /><br />That is also my belief. We've seen that two ancient archaic hominins had their DNA sequenced, and in both cases modern humans were not symmetrically related to the ancient samples. So, the default position is that all archaic hominins that co-existed with modern humans in spacetime should have contributed _some_ DNA material to the dominant lineage that survives today. <br /><br />The issue is how to combine the evidence from ancient DNA with that from full genomes to find out what really happened in cases where archaic DNA is unlikely to be recovered.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-3436537812453948362012-04-21T21:14:49.616+03:002012-04-21T21:14:49.616+03:00Does the morphological difference between Neandert...Does the morphological difference between Neanderthals and AMHS, including modern Africans, make the simple ancient structure explanation less probable? Wouldn't we expect more radical morphological variation in African populations if they had extensively admixed with a pre-neanderthal split-off branch?<br /><br />I actually tend towards the belief in various African and non-African admixture events, it's the simplest explanation that fits best with the evidence. After all, we've actually found the bones of people who look like Sapiens-Neanderthal hybrids, and we've found near certain evidence of the Denisovan hybridisation event. Why complicate matters?Belenoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15576215104931708232noreply@blogger.com