Slashdot Mirror
Neanderthal Genome to be Sequenced
Aneurysm writes "A project launched by the Max-Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology will sequence the genome of Neanderthal man. The sequencing project may find out important information, such as whether they cross-bred with modern humans. Previous DNA tests have tested this theory, and found it unlikely. Could this be the start of a Pleistocene park?"
I could have easily supplied the necessary sample for testing...
----------------------------
Esobofh - Currently drinking fresh mango juice.
Three guesses why they are gone and we aren't? It would be truely ironic if we did indeed clone a Neanderthal and thus bring back a sentient species that most likely was wiped out in large part because of us.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
July 06, 2005: Project to sequence genome of Neanderthal Man begins.
September 3, 2009: Genome of Neanderthal Man sequenced.
March 21, 2012: Neanderthal Man cloned.
April 4, 2015: Neanderthal Man reaches the point of being able to form, in a grunting, slurred speech, individual english words.
April 5, 2015: Neanderthal Man starts blog
"Could this be the start of a Pleistocene park?"
Nah my nephew has been working on a pleistocene park for a while now. He's got the swings, sandbox, and slide done (he had the see-saws done too but he accidentally stepped on them). If you want to pitch in he could use some help with the merri-go-round I'm sure.
He was originally using playdough but I caught him eating it one too many times so I switched him over to pleistocene.
- Toby
What if they find it's the same DNA we have and it tuns out they just had some serious back problems?
Evolution or ID?
Some scientists believe that homo sapiens replaced Neaderthals, with the Neanderthals dying off completely.
Some believe we interbred with them and "absorbed" them.
This may be able to tell us which is true. I wonder though, if we do find out that we absorbed them through interbreeding, will this eventually lead to discrimination against those of us who still harbor "caveman genes?"
This space available.
What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
http://houndwire.com
The genome is ALL the genetic material, both transcribed genes (which make RNA molecules and then proteins) and the so-called "junk DNA". The latter, it turns out, is not remotely "junk", but contains important regulatory sequences which control gene activation/deactivation and the physical structure of the chromosomes.
Freedom: "I won't!"
President Bush expressed considerable interest in the Neanderthal Genome sequencing project. The president expressed hope the project would be completed quickly enough that a living person whose DNA most closely matched that of a Neanderthal could be identified and nominated to the Supreme Court.
That is SO condescending...
Ahem! Lucy was not a hoax!
Try this link, I believe the doctor is in . . .
http://www.asu.edu/clas/iho/lucy.html
Back in their day, all they had were AMP and ADP; ATP hadn't been invented yet. In those times, glycolysis took two glucose for every one ADP produced, and they were proud of it! Back then, everything ate up that precious ADP - even the Calvin cycle. Oh, sure, it violated their ability to continue on as lifeforms indefinitely, but it was all they had to work with.
Back then, oxygen didn't end up making it into the bloodstream and then to the cells and mitochondria through diffusion from concentration differentials across membranes; they had to put it in manually. It got tiring after a while, all of the precision injection work, but it gave them exercise - a good muscle builder, it was. And, boy, did they need that muscle tone to hunt, what with only being able to synthesize two of their amino acids on their own.
We've come a long way, my friend. A long way.
"99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
There is a big difference between knowing how to do something and doing it well. Monkeys (APES!!!) can throw stuff, but they don't really hit their targets often. For apes, it is more of a bluffing technique - "look, I'm thowing this towards you".
There has been a lot of research into the theory that one reason we made it out of our ancient roots is because we threw so well. Not only could we throw rocks and later spears, but we could actually hit our targets. Of course we weren't always that great, and those who weren't died... you know the rest.
Basically, one author put it like this 'Is pitching an evolved skill?'
Get your Unix fortune now!
Andre the giant suffered from a disease called acromegaly, which caused him to continually grow, such that the proportions of his body took a constant toll on it. Near his death he was in constant pain, and eventually died of heart failure because the muscle simply couldn't keep up with the size of his body. Most people who were diagnosed with the disease in his time didn't live to 40. Saying he was like a neanderthol just because he had a funny shaped head is incredibly stupid and closed minded. The man suffered from an illness which gave him a short, painful life. That he was able to capitolize on the outward appearance given to him by the disease to make his life into a positive one is a testament to Andre's spirit.
'Thals don't figure prominently until the fourth book in the series, "Something Rotten," where they turn out to be instrumental in a high-stakes world cup croquet tournament.
All four books are a hell of a lot of fun, and approach the level of wit and humor of Douglas Adams. Recommended.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
The latter, it turns out, is not remotely "junk", but contains important regulatory sequences which control gene activation/deactivation and the physical structure of the chromosomes.
actually, known regulatory sequences comprise only a small fraction of the junk....
a much bigger fraction is mobile DNA of various kinds (transposons, satellites, etc.) which may (or may not) be evolutionarily important.....
some more may be unannotated genes, e.g. small ORFs or noncoding RNAs... basically the content of intergenic DNA is still an open question...
Our "Junk" DNA is somewhat interesting in that it often contains functionality of our close (and sometimes even distant) relatives that is no longer active. You get neat atavisms when it reactivates.
"99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
I predict if Neanderthals are cloned:
A) Geico will offer them car insurance, but they won't buy because of their Caveman commercials.
B) Neanderthals will be pissed to find out were replaced by people on the B Ark.
C) Sales of backrazors will double.
D) Grunthag and Duna will top Neanderthal baby names lists just above Rena, Gort, Bob, and Winona.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
I thought gravity was a Law, not a theory.
Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don't really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.
Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, the law of thermodynamics, and Hook's law of elasticity.
Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.
Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.
In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.
The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
12345
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I read somewhere (Sci. Am.?) about someone trying to teach primates flint-knapping and throwing skills. Turns out that they understand the usefulness of the blade fine and try to create them when they need one, but they're hampered by the skeletal structure of the wrist, which is much stouter because of the need to support body weight while walking. They can't get the little wrist flick that we can that ads so much to throwing. The best an ape can hope for is chucking a rock hard against another one, and looking for sharp edges in the resulting random fragments.
So our ability to walk upright gave us the ability to use projectile weapons (i.e., hunt things faster than we are) AND create edged tools/weapons AND spark fires. Not a bad deal, IMO.
6. Audible Alarm (not shown)
-from a Cuisinart product owner's manual.
In general, Homo Sapiens pretty much will wipe out anything that looks like a competitor/threat, including other Homo Sapiens.
This has extended itself to the modern times, though it's been toned down somewhat by the various mores and moralities.
Things wouldn't be any different for our ancestor Homo Sapiens. I'd guess that they'd be even more aggressive towards Neanderthals, due to the larger size and bigger heads (and brains) of the Neanderthals.
If they weren't so big, they probably would've been domesticated or enslaved.