The Human Mutation

eldavojohn writes "Scientists in China have announced finding the gene that makes us human. The article explains that prior work has shown that humans, as compared with the great apes from which we diverged over 5 million years ago, have a longer form of a protein (type II neuropsin) located in the pre-frontal cortex of the brain. From the article: 'Gene sequencing revealed a mutation specific to humans that triggers a change in the splicing pattern of the neuropsin gene, creating a new splicing site and a longer protein. Introducing this mutation into chimpanzee DNA resulted in the creation of type II neuropsin. "Hence, the human-specific mutation is not only necessary but also sufficient in creating the novel splice form," the authors state.' The team is urging further analysis of the extra 45 amino acids in type II neuropsin since they believe that chain may cause protein structural and functional changes. The research didn't link anything with this protein, simply identifying it as a very distinct difference between us and our closest cousins."

Comments

Re:So lemme get this straight....

[jd]

One obvious impact would be to look and see if this gene has undergone any further mutations - however trivial - or whether the associated junk DNA has. Of particular interest would be polyglots or other people with exceptional ability in communicating and understanding. Also of interest would be archaeological DNA where the relevant protein has survived. (It's rare for Y chromosomes to survive hundreds or thousands of years, but every so often it happens. Maybe this gene can also survive.)

I'm assuming here that the mutation is involved in communication, as I know that the wiring in the front of the brain is linked to autism, which impacts the brain's I/O channels, and I/O is a major difference between apes and humans. However, this is an assumption and should be taken as such.

We know that the ability to filter information has changed over time. Some of that has been changes elsewhere in the brain, but there is no advantage in a brain adapting to process information it hasn't got. Whereas, we already know from tetrachromats and synesthetes that there IS a usable advantage in getting information that would not normally be processed. If this gene is responsible for improving I/O bandwidth, then we should see a series of minor mutations over time that correspond to known I/O improvements within the brain.

Could this be useful in some other way? Well, provided (a) it is involved in I/O enhancements, and (b) we can understand the relationship between changes within it and those enhancements, it should be possible to induce mutations that can improve the brain further, provided the change did not exceed the brain's ability to adapt.

Re:Obligatory Planet of the Apes

[networkBoy]

Actually this really worries me.
What if we produce a subspecies (I think that line is awfully close), are responsible for its care and preventing its extinction?
Now:
What if we create a subspecies with limited intellect and self awareness, but capable of simple tasks: dig here, carry this from here to there, turn the red lever sideways, turn the blue lever up and down, etc.
What now? What rights do they have? do we allow them to work in mines and nuclear plants? are they disposable? or better yet: are humans (homo sapiens) less disposable?
This worries me no end and has nothing to do with religion.
-nB

Underpeople

[Stephen Ma]

The auther Cordwainer Smith had exactly your thought and wrote some stunning stories about the Underpeople (as he called them). See "The Ballad of Lost C'Mell", "The Dead Lady of Clown Town", and "Norstrillia".

Also see "The Time Machine" by H. G. Wells, and "The Last Castle" by Jack Vance.