Artist's impression of a Neanderthal hunter. New evidence suggests the Neanderthals and modern humans interbred.
Credit: American Museum of Natural History
SYDNEY: Modern humans contain a little bit of Neanderthal, according to a new theory, because the two interbred and became one species.
The theory is the latest addition to the ongoing debate about what happened to this early species of human.
In a paper published this week in the U.S. journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a team of European researchers report a "mosaic of modern human and archaic Neanderthal features" in 30,000 -year-old human fossils from Romania.
Co-author Erik Trinkaus from Washington University explains: "[Some] closely related species of mammals freely interbreed, produce fertile viable offspring, and blend populations." This is what appears to have happened with Neanderthals and modern humans, he says.
Shorter and stouter than modern humans, but with larger brains, Neanderthals lived in Europe, central Asia and the Middle East for about 170,000 years before disappearing between 33,000 to 24,000 years ago.
Their extinction coincided with the migration of modern humans out of Africa and across Europe. Few mysteries in the history of human ancestry have been as hotly debated as what caused the extinction of the Neanderthals.
Some scientific theories have Neanderthals dying out because they were less well-adapted to the climate changes that occurred across Europe at that time. Others cite evidence of a more brutal end, in which Neanderthals were slaughtered by modern humans.
This new study helps to settle the controversy. According to the researchers, the populations probably blended together through sexual reproduction. "Extinction through absorption is a common phenomenon," says Trinkaus.
The human remains were found in Pestera Muierii ('Cave of the Old Woman'), an elaborate cave system in Romania. First uncovered in 1952, the fossils remained poorly dated and largely ignored until recently.
Using carbon dating techniques, Trinkaus and colleagues found that the remains were 30,000 years old. Their analysis of the bones revealed diagnostic skeletal features of modern humans, including smaller eyebrow ridges, very narrow holes where the nostrils join the skull, and a shin bone that is flat on one side and concave on the other.
However the mostly human skeletons also possessed distinct Neanderthal features; features that were not present in ancestral modern humans in Africa. These include a large bulge at the back of the skull, a more prominent projection around the elbow joint, and a narrow socket at the shoulder joint.
Further analysis of one skeleton's shoulder showed that these humans did not have the full set of anatomical adaptations for throwing projectiles, such as spears, during hunting.
According to the researchers, this mixture of human and Neanderthal features suggests that a complicated reproductive scenario existed as humans and Neandertals interbred. The hypothesis that the Neanderthals were simply replaced should therefore be abandoned, they suggest.
Trinkaus says we may carry some of the genetic legacy of the Neanderthals within us. However it would be difficult to determine which of us are more closely related to the Neanderthals: "there has been 30,000 to 35,000 years of human evolution since then," he says.
It's quite obvious isn't it?
Evidence it is, that is beyond merely suggestive.
Science is not a guessing
Science is not a guessing game.
Dude!
"Neandertal Claims Are Unscientific"
Dude there is no preserved tissue from Neanderthals to determine their DNA and Chromosome count. So we don't know if they were part of our species or not. At least not from DNA, bones are a different matter.
"The whole proposition of trying to decide the Neandertal controversy--as to whether they interbred with modern humans or became completely extinct--on the basis of subjective, skeletal analyses is improper. This is not science!"
What is science? Science is looking at something (Observation) [Remains with Neanderthal and Human mix characteristics], then creating a question concerning the observation [Why do these humans have Neanderthal characteristics], creating a hypothesis [Perhaps these humans are an interbrid with Neantherthals], then working out that hypothesis with an experiment [Perhaps we can determine if this a crossbrid through an anaylsis of cross-gene manipulation of other animals that are relative to this example such as Dogs and Wolves].
If dogs and wolves possess skeletonic difference comparative to Humans and Neanderthals then it is possible to conclude through deduction that Neanderthals and Humans could possibly reproduce together. But without a DNA example to verify it, it simply becomes a quite contested theory or well supportable hypothesis yet to become a true factual theory. Then again no theory is factual, dude.
Science is all inductive, you have to use philosophy from logic to make things from science into facts. Science doesn't make facts, it just introduces more information that could make facts through a process we call deduction.
The thing though is I don't believe you know what science is. However almost everything in regards to evolution cannot be tested for validity, because much of what we do need for an anaylsis is not available for our own use.
"In a more objective approach, genetic studies by Paabo Svante have concluded that the Neandertals were not capable of interbreeding with Homo sapiens because they were a different species"
And his proof is?
"And, currently, other genetic studies are under way to either validate or refute Svante's research."
Without any DNA sample no doubt. Figures. You don't know what science is and you and Paabo Svante are no different than that Korean guy who lied about being able to clone something. It is a disgrace to science to falsify information to conclude with desirable results. You should be ashamed of yourself.
"Considering this, why is Erik Trinkhaus so eager to end the controversy on the basis of some subjective analyses, ruling in favor of interbreeding?"
Why is Paable Svante in favor of ruling out Neanderthals as part of the Human species so eager to end the controversy on the basis of a rejection of subjective analysis and zero presentable evidence?
"Is it borne out of sympathy for the Neandertals?"
Is your hypothesis borne out of disolution of a superiority complex that Homo Sapien Sapiens are superior to Neanderthals?
Get real man. Until you find PROOF, you have nothing to argue about either way.
"Is it a desperate attempt to undermine the Out-of-Africa theory of modern human origins."
Neanderthals still come from Africa, you imbecile.
"Like his co-conspirator, Milford Wolpoff, in this matter, Trinkhaus has no only lost respect and credibility, but he seems to have lost his mind."
So says you who wants to prove the very opposite without any contestable data nor resources on your side. You have and Svante have not only lost respect from me, but from the entire world. Especially in your lack of intelligence in establishing a legitimate argument and a humble critique.
What makes you pathetic is misusing the word "conspirator" in your statement. You make me sick. And hope someday you'll actually take a science lab course at a community college so you can finally know what Science really is, because they obviously pass you through school like Bush from the money granted by your ever so rich daddy who continues to spoil your rotten ass.
Know this: I'm not defending Wolpoff or Trinkhaus, but they stand on a much better argument that supports scientific findings base on actual evidence (remains) than yourself, who is just a continuation of failed psuedoscience crafted from the abusive government.
Come back when you've got something to prove, dude.
My theory
I am willing to believe that the species interbred due to the fact that the neanderthals were too intelligent to go extinct. They shared at least 99.5% of our dna sequence and were seperated from modern humans for at most 500000 years. Canines are completely differently physically but can still interbreed. Furthermore the basques in the iberian peninsula were a mesolithic culture that could have interbred with the neanderthal and basques share over 90% genetic similarity with the indigenous people of the british isles mainly the scottish, welsh and cornish. Maybe the interbreeding of the groups produced the new gene of red hair and freckles between 20-40000 years ago.
Interbreeding
All dogs belong to the same species. The many different breeds of dogs is akin to the many different races of humans. We are different in height, stature and robustness but can still interbreed because we are all one species. The same principle applies for dogs. Genetics determines speciation. All races of humans are nearly genetically identical as are all breeds of dogs. Neanderthals were too genetcially dissimilar to humans to produce viable offspring. 99.5% of the human genome is still a difference of 15 million base pairs. The differences from human to human are about 3 million base pairs or less.
On interspecies breeding.
I present the following, as found on in my internet reaserch. (from www.ratbehavior.org/Hybridization.htm)
Matings between these species usually fail, but a few viable, sterile offspring are on record:
* Goats and sheep: Goats and sheep tend not to produce offspring, but in a single case a sterile goat-sheep hybrid was produced in Botswana.
Matings between these species tend to produce viable, sterile offspring:
* Lovebirds: Fischer's lovebirds (Agapornis personata fischeri) and Peach-faced lovebirds (Agapornis rosecollis) can interbreed and produce sterile offspring. Interestingly, the lovebird hybrid displays intermediate nesting behavior. Fisher's lovebirds carry single strips of nest material in their beaks. Peach-faced lovebirds tuck many pieces of nest material between their rump feathers. The hybrids show a poorly organized mixture of the two strategies: they tuck nest material between their feathers but fail to let go, pull it out again, and start over. After several months, they can become partly successful, managing to transport some material back to the next site, but not in a manner that resembles either parent species. Sometimes they just turn their heads toward their rumps without tucking, then fly off with the material (Dilger, 1962).
* Lion-leopard crosses produce viable but sterile offspring called leopons. The most famous leopons were five cubs born in Hanshin Park in Japan (two in 1959, three in 1962). The last one died in 1985 (Doi and Reynolds 1967).
Matings between these species produce viable offspring that are usually sterile, but a few fertile female hybrids are on record:
* Whales: Several naturally occurring crosses between blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) have been identified. One male hybrid was sterile, and of the two female hybrids, one was sterile while the other was pregnant, though it is unknown whether her fetus would have been viable (Arnason et al. 1991, Spillaert et al. 1991, Bérubé and Aguilar 1998).
* Horse species: Crosses of horse species within the genus Equus tend to produce viable but sterile offspring. Zebra-horse, zebra-donkey and zebra-pony crosses produce sterile zorses, zedonks and zonies. Horse-donkey crosses produce sterile mules. Very rarely, a female mule may be fertile.
* Lion-tigress crosses produce sterile offspring called ligers. Tiger-lioness crosses, tigons, are more rare. In some cases, female ligers and tigons have proved to be fertile.
Matings between these species produce sterile male and fertile female hybrids:
* Cattle and bison: Domestic cattle (Bos taurus) and American bison (Bison bison) can be crossed to produce beefalo. Female hybrids are usually fertile, while males are sterile (Steklenev 1995, 1997).
* Domestic cats (Felis catus) can breed with their close wild relatives. Typically, the female hybrids are fertile while the males are sterile. For example, domestic cats crossed with servals (Felis serval) produce hybrids called Savannah cats; with Asian leopard cats (Felis bengalensis) produce hybrids called Bengal cats, and with jungle cats (Felis chaus) produce hybrids called chausies.
* Dolphin and false killer whale: There has been one case of a female bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and a male false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens) producing a fertile female hybrid, called a wolphin. She went on to breed with a dolphin and produced a daughter.
Matings between these species produce hybrids of unknown fertility:
* Bobcat and lynx: Bobcats (Lynx rufus) and lynxes (Lynx canadensis) may cross; several such crosses have happened naturally in the wild (also Q&A on Minnesota bobcat-lynx crosses (pdf)).
* Porpoises: Dall's porpoises (Phocoenoides dalli) and harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) can conceive offspring. Many individuals with intermediate pigmentation have been observed, indicating that such offspring may be viable (Baird et al 1998).
im a neanderthal
my brow pertrubes just the same as our lost relative, im 5"6 tall &dark complexion as was my father and my son
Come on Guys
Guys, lets stop running around a taboo subject. Neanderthal fossils were in Europe and Middle East. Neanderthals had big noses like Europeans/Mid East. They didn't survive several ice ages, have bigger brains, 1500cc etc, were great hunters, and just die out around 40k years ago, thats insane. It seems to me its pretty clear SOME interbreed with Europeans and Middle Easterners. This probably gave them more intelligence, which may have led to advanced societies (fertile crescent, Rome etc) I am not completely disregarding Jared Diamonds theory, but come on its obvious.
I do concur that the
I do concur that the "replacement" theory regarding Neandethals is flawed (and too reminiscent of the Victorian fascination with a "master race",) but the larger brain of the Neanderthal may have provided protection against microcephaly, not greater intellgience. The first art was discovered in southern Africa and Australia, areas that never saw a single Neanderthal. Not ot nmention the illustrious civilization of Egypt, that was raised up by Africans, not Europeans or Middle Easterners. In fact, it was Egyptian knowlege washing upon the shores of the Grek mainland that fueled what we And more "advanced" societies are not necessarily a good thing. Rome was built on the backs of slaves so overworked they could not even reproduce to fill their own ranks, and their treatent of women is some of the worst on record.
It would be fascinating to find out that I can trace my lineage to Petralona or La Chappelle (I am very big-boned ans 5'3 with a very wide face and I build up muscle very rapidly, so I wouldn't be suprised), but it is hardly worth getting so upest about. So just hold your breath until we know for sure, and even then, it's not such a big deal. At this poiint, I don't care whether or not they were an evolutionary "dead end"; it's when people imply that "race" determine one's capabilites that ticks me off.
DNA schmeeNA
I think the proper thing to respond to this taboo subject is, so what? If indeed we do have folks of European and Middle Eastern geographic extraction who might have as great...-great-grandmother the character Iza, so what? Does that make that family less worthy? No. Is it thrilling to think that we have descendants of the best of Neanderthal survivors among us? Yes! Anecdotally, I have observed barrel-chested, huge proboscis endowed and red-haired people among us, and I wonder if that phenotype has more to it than just what I see. And if someone said to me, well, pal, you have some _____ [enter your racist stereotype here] "blood" in ya, I would say, oh, well, wow, that's nice. What's the difference? ;-) Cheers, all!