Slashdot Mirror


Genome of Neandertals Reveals Inbreeding

sciencehabit writes "In a report on the most complete genome of a Neandertal ever sequenced, an international team of researchers has found that the parents of a Neandertal woman from Siberia were as closely related as half-siblings. The genome also shows that at some point the Neandertals interbred with other human groups, including their cousins the Denisovans, and our own modern human ancestors. There are even signs of Denisovans interbreeding with a mysterious archaic species. In all, the study suggests very close encounters among the several kinds of hominins living in the past 125,000 years. The detailed genome of the extinct Neandertals—our closest relatives—also offers a new look at the genetic differences that set our species apart from all the others."

25 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Not surprising by JasoninKS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not a surprise really. There weren't exactly large groups running around to intermingle. You want to procreate and expand the species you had to look within your own local group.

    1. Re:Not surprising by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      Not a surprise really. There weren't exactly large groups running around to intermingle. You want to procreate and expand the species you had to look within your own local group.

      They probably didn't have intolerant idiots telling them who they could mate with, either.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Not surprising by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. What is so surprising about some inbreeding? The human animal is an animal after all. Take any animal, and set a limited population apart. They're going to mate, and that population will continue mating, until something happens to reintroduce that limited population back into the larger population. It isn't a matter of preference - it's a matter of necessity.

      Once reintroduced into the larger population, some limited inbreeding may or may not continue. But, interbreeding is going to happen as well.

      Life. What a concept. Life struggles to continue, under all conditions.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:Not surprising by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      inbreeding drastically increases the probability of recessive genes becoming expressed

      Not just that, but copy errors, but the thing is that while the relative increase is drastic (> 5x) the absolute occurrence is still small enough (~ 1/20) that enough people "get over" the taboo and the results aren't terrible.

      Anecdotally, I know that the renters across the street had a kid with "those problems" but I also don't know who the people are that I meet everyday who don't have them.

      Anyway, the Neanderthals probably got by OK, if not ideally this way. Well enough to merge back into the mainline lineage anyway.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:Not surprising by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Taboos against inbreeding are hardly the result of intolerance since inbreeding drastically increases the probability of recessive genes becoming expressed. Since recessive genes are rarely expressed they're not exposed to the same selection pressure and tend to be less fit as a result.

      So your claim is that by engaging in inbreeding, we are putting evolutionary pressure on the recessive genes, thus removing them from the gene pool, and that this is beneficial?

      Beneficial for the species possibly, but not for the poor individuals who are tasked with the job of carrying those genes out of the pool.

      (though it might be bad of the species as you'll lose some diversity too, recessive genes still get selection without inbreeding)

      You are aware that, if you have a single gene for sickle cell anemia, rather than coming down with the disease, you're effectively immune to Malaria, since the blood cells will sickle in the presence of Malaria, but not otherwise, right?

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110428123931.htm

      Recessive genes are less fit on average, that doesn't mean in some instances they can't be as or even more fit than their non-recessive counterparts.

      The sickle cell gene example, aside from being fascinating, actually proves my point. It would not have survived as a dominant gene in that form since the side effects of full expression are too harmful, it either would have been removed from the genepool, mutated to only go sickle with Malaria, or another gene would have popped up that made it only go sickle with Malaria. It's the fact that it's recessive that's allowed it to retain such poor fitness.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    5. Re:Not surprising by RockDoctor · · Score: 2

      There weren't exactly large groups running around to intermingle.

      Precisely. At this time the entire humanoid population of Europe was under a hundred thousand. Less than a football (any shape or rules) stadium full, spread over an entire continent.

      At which sort of population density, almost everyone you meet has at least one great grandparent in common with you (a modern definition of "incest") ; most people you meet on a daily basis have a grandparent in common with you.

      So, for both Neander-boys and Neander-girls, you get what you can get. If they hadn't, then they'd have become extinct within a couple of tens of years, instead of a couple of myriads (10^5) of years. Seen in that light, it wasn't an unsuccessful strategy.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    6. Re:Not surprising by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      Taboos against inbreeding are hardly the result of intolerance since inbreeding drastically increases the probability of recessive genes becoming expressed.

      This is an urban myth, happily kept alive by those on higher moral grounds (sarcasm intended). The chance of the offspring of 2 full cousins having diseases from recessive genes is between 2 and 3 percent higher than the chance for 2 random people. Although 2-3 percent may still seem like a lot today, back in the times we are talking about here, it was a fart in the wind and would have gone entirely unnoticed unless the Neanderthals managed to master advanced statistics.

      This is compounded across generations. It is 2 or 3 percent per generation as the bad genes stick around.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  2. The first Neanderthal sister . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . so easy, a caveman could do her!

    1. Re:The first Neanderthal sister . . . by Zynder · · Score: 2

      Yo momma so stupid she's your sister?

      I don't think I did that right. Someone else care to try?

  3. Incest by JustOK · · Score: 2, Funny

    Incest is best. Keep it in the family. Or genus

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  4. And yet ... by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... there is no record of a Slashdotter ever having bred with a supermodel.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  5. They are not from Alabama by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    But modern humans are not from ONE SINGLE stock either.

    For example, the Denisovans have offsprings, but only part of the modern humans are their offsprings.

    And then, while most modern humans have Neandertal genes inside them, some modern humans do not.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  6. We're all the same... by HellCatF6 · · Score: 2

    There was a great article in Science a few weeks ago evaluating 6 extremely complete skeletons that were "collected" by a giant cat about a million years ago. (reference below)
    The biggest revelation to many biologists was the amount of variation among the skulls. If they'd been found independently, they probably would have been put into different species. It's almost as if biologists haven't figured out that people vary quite a bit within species.
    Why can't we just see ourselves as one big amorphous mass of metabolism - still trying to climb out of the primordial ooze?

    A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo, by David Lordkipanidze, Marcia S. Ponce de León, Ann Margvelashvili, Yoel Rak, G. Philip Rightmire, Abesalom Vekua, and Christoph P. E. Zollikofer Science 18 October 2013: 326-331. An early Pleistocene adult skull illuminates the evolution and morphology of the first hominins outside Africa.

  7. Re:NeandertHal get it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I noticed your sig and I'm a bit low at the moment so: I just want to tell you all here that the LHC is in Europe.

    Whar's mah karmah?

  8. Re:NeandertHal get it right by formfeed · · Score: 2

    They're Neanderthals, despite the fact that 'tal' is the German word that it's based on.

    Thal is the older German spelling of Tal, meaning valley. Both are pronounced the same, with t not th. It simply means Neander valley. The Valley is now called Neandertal, but my uncle kept his original name.

  9. Re:No: inTERbreeding by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

    Anything that MOVES!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  10. Re:No: inTERbreeding by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Funny

    Correction: Anything that doesn't move fast enough!

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  11. Inbreeding? In a Small Tribe? I'm SHOCKED! by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2

    Any small tribe or village, even up to the last century, is going to have some inbreeding; if there's only 250 people in your village (and assuming that the population has been relatively stable for the last few hundred years) and every potential mate in your village is at least a 4th cousin, probably more than one way. As James Burke noted, the steam engine caused a revolution in genetic engineering, because with the railroad and the steamship, it was possible to meet and mate with people who weren't related to you at all.

    Hybrid vigor works on people. Look at the stature of people from feudal Japan and China; stereotypically small, almost tiny. When those people came to Hawaii and wed other Japanese (and Chinese) people from other villages, their children were inches taller - living in the same culture, often on similar diets. Their children were taller still, and THEIR children are the size of everybody else.

  12. Re:Hence the extinction... by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2

    The problem with inbreeding depends on the closeness of the relationship. With your sibling? If you carry ANY defective recessive genes at all, the chances of a child having it expressed is one half. With your 2nd cousin? A much lower chance of recessives matching. But in a small community, you'll almost certainly be marrying a cousin of some degree or another, even if your culture either marries outside the village (Ashkenazim) or raids for women (Viking or Polynesian, for example). If your culture tracks genealogy and tries to prevent inbreeding, then the problem is reduced. (People in the "Old Country" didn't know WHY inbreeding was bad, but they could see the effects!)

  13. Re:Inbreeding? In a Small Tribe? I'm SHOCKED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The summary clearly states inTERbreeding, the title turned it into inbreeding which is more or less the opposite. But this is Slashdot where the editors can't write and the posters can't read.

    Hmmm who can't read?

    Source article:

    "Paabo and his colleagues could tell that this Siberian Neandertal was the product of inbreeding and that her ancestors also chose their mates from their extended family. This suggests that this Neandertal woman came from a small, isolated population, the team reports online today in Nature."

    Abstract Here: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12886.html

    " mating among close relatives was common among her recent ancestors"

    Yes, the article also discusses interbreeding.

  14. Re:Hence the extinction... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

    While closeness is important, repeated closeness is a much bigger factor. You could have a child with your sister with a fairly small chance of birth defects, but if those offspring had offspring, the chances increase dramatically. IIRC, cousin marriages were common in the middle east, but it's a system of parallel cousin marriage with rules that prevent repeatedly drawing from the same small gene pool. It's an interesting mechanism of staying within the tribe without most of the adverse effects of incest.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  15. Re:Hence the extinction... by Cutterman · · Score: 2

    Not so. In Saudi, where cousin marriages are very common, the incidence of genetic defects (particularly ano-genital malformations) is very high. A reconstructive surgeon's paradise. Mac

  16. Some Indians called *themselves* Indians by tepples · · Score: 2

    Not really any such thing as an "Indian"

    Then explain Inde, the Apache people's name for themselves before U.S. westward expansion.

    1. Re:Some Indians called *themselves* Indians by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not really any such thing as an "Indian"

      Then explain Inde, the Apache people's name for themselves before U.S. westward expansion.

      While that may be true, it was Columbus who referred to the indigenous people of the Americas as Indians, erroneously thinking he had made it to the Indian Ocean. Even after people realized it was an error, the name stuck (which is why we also have the Carribean called the West Indies). Columbus, never met an Apache, so it is unlikely that Indie or whatever word they had for themselves factored in. If they were using this term prior to the end of the 15th century, then it is coincidence. If use of that term came later, then it is likely they adopted it from early encounters with various European groups.

  17. Re:Inbreeding? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    There's a good point hidden in the above AC's trollish "joke"; inbreeding happens with almost all, if not all, species, especially when there is a small population of that species. That includes Neanderthals and modern humans, dogs, cats, bonobos...

    This story brings to mind an old pop song by some one hit wonder I haven't heard in almost half a century --

    I'm a neanderthal man
    You're a Neanderthal girl
    Lets make Neanderthal love
    In this Neanderthal world

    (IIRC it was that one verse repeated over and over, a really repetitious and stupid but catchy pop song)