<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Neandertal hybridization &amp; Haldane&#039;s rule</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 04:06:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Onur</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32550</link>
		<dc:creator>Onur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 02:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32550</guid>
		<description>A lot of Vendramini&#039;s arguments seem to be pure speculation without solid basis. But one thing struck my mind: Do the hard tissue based parts (e.g., position and size of the eyes) of Vendramini and Balseiro&#039;s Neanderthal reconstruction have any scientific validity? I am asking this as, unlike genetics, I am pretty uninformed about facial reconstruction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot of Vendramini&#8217;s arguments seem to be pure speculation without solid basis. But one thing struck my mind: Do the hard tissue based parts (e.g., position and size of the eyes) of Vendramini and Balseiro&#8217;s Neanderthal reconstruction have any scientific validity? I am asking this as, unlike genetics, I am pretty uninformed about facial reconstruction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Øyvind Kvernvold Myhre</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32549</link>
		<dc:creator>Øyvind Kvernvold Myhre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 09:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32549</guid>
		<description>To Razib Khan: You&#039;re quite right, mate. You did point it out! However, lots of people - including several famous paleoanthropologists - have disregarded this simple fact for thirty years! As more  fossils are analyzed, we should expect to see lots of mtDNA lines that are lost today. These lines will be found not only in Neandertals and Denisovans, but also in &#039;modern&#039; Homo Sapiens, in Africa as well as elsewhere. By no means does this mean that those people have no living descendents!

Several years ago, an Australian team published their results from research on fossils from Lake Mungo - perfectly &#039;modern&#039; specimens, I should add. The mtDNA they found fell outside the accepted tree rooted in the famous &#039;African Eve&#039;, and as a result, their research was largely disregarded. Whether or not their results were caused by contamination, as some critics claimed, such a result is exactly what one should expect - on purely statistical grounds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To Razib Khan: You&#8217;re quite right, mate. You did point it out! However, lots of people &#8211; including several famous paleoanthropologists &#8211; have disregarded this simple fact for thirty years! As more  fossils are analyzed, we should expect to see lots of mtDNA lines that are lost today. These lines will be found not only in Neandertals and Denisovans, but also in &#8216;modern&#8217; Homo Sapiens, in Africa as well as elsewhere. By no means does this mean that those people have no living descendents!</p>
<p>Several years ago, an Australian team published their results from research on fossils from Lake Mungo &#8211; perfectly &#8216;modern&#8217; specimens, I should add. The mtDNA they found fell outside the accepted tree rooted in the famous &#8216;African Eve&#8217;, and as a result, their research was largely disregarded. Whether or not their results were caused by contamination, as some critics claimed, such a result is exactly what one should expect &#8211; on purely statistical grounds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32548</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 01:01:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32548</guid>
		<description>At 4:13 he holds the skull so it&#039;s looking at the ceiling and says it&#039;s got a protruding face.  Not if you hold it properly so the eyes are looking forward.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At 4:13 he holds the skull so it&#8217;s looking at the ceiling and says it&#8217;s got a protruding face.  Not if you hold it properly so the eyes are looking forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Razib Khan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32547</link>
		<dc:creator>Razib Khan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 22:37:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32547</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Please do the statistics, folks. mtDNA lines disappear &lt;/i&gt;

who you are talking to? you notice i mentioned this in my post right, since you read it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Please do the statistics, folks. mtDNA lines disappear </i></p>
<p>who you are talking to? you notice i mentioned this in my post right, since you read it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Uri</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32546</link>
		<dc:creator>John Uri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 16:47:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32546</guid>
		<description>Entertainment, yes.  Science, no.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Entertainment, yes.  Science, no.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Øyvind Kvernvold Myhre</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32545</link>
		<dc:creator>Øyvind Kvernvold Myhre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 09:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32545</guid>
		<description>Please do the statistics, folks. mtDNA lines disappear - not because of natural selections, and not because the people carrying the lines didn&#039;t reproduce, but because of random statistical effects. A personal example: My paternal grandmother has approximately fifty living descendents, all carrying fractions of her DNA. However, her mtDNA line is gone forever. That&#039;s because she had five sons and two daughters. Those two daughters didn&#039;t have any daughters, just sons! On the other hand, my maternal grandmother has only ten living descendents. She had one daughter, who had one daughter, who had two daughters. Her mtDNA line lives on!

In a stable population, one where each reproducing female leaves exactly two reproducing children, 90 % of the original mtDNA lines will be broken in just 34 generations. That&#039;s less than 1.000 years. So if you start with 1.000 female Neanderthals in a mixed population, less than 100 Neanderthal mtDNA lines will survive after 1.000 years. After another 1.000 years, less than 10. After yet another 1.000 years... You can do the same type of calculation regarding Neanderthal Y chromosome lines. All taken together: If Neanderthals were a small minority of our common ancestors, it is extremely unlikely that any two Neanderthal genes would survive after 30.000 years. (In effect, mtDNA and the Y chromosome are inherited as just one gene, since they&#039;re inherited in one piece.) Conclusion: We don&#039;t have to construct intricate theories of marriage customs or patterns of reproduction in order to explain the lack of Neanderthal mtDNA or Neanderthal Y chromosomes today; we only have to do some reasonable math.

For thirty years, the ruling orthodoxy - the &#039;Recent out of Africa&#039; school - has been leaning heavily on just one gene, out of our 25.000. In reality, each gene has its own tree of ancestry! The total picture will be incredibly complex, and we&#039;ve just started to put together a few pieces of the jigsaw. What we do know is that the average person carries approximately 1.000 genes inherited from our Neanderthal ancestors. (My own &#039;Neanderthal bun&#039; at the back of my skull confirms my mixed ancestry!) Most of the rest of our genes in all likelyhood are of recent African origin (&#039;recent&#039; meaning 100.000 years or less), but we don&#039;t KNOW this yet. We&#039;ll know much more once we start seeing DNA from Asian Homo Erectus, and I&#039;m convinced we&#039;re in for a lot of surprises. There&#039;s a revolution going on in the way we perceive who we are and where we come from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please do the statistics, folks. mtDNA lines disappear &#8211; not because of natural selections, and not because the people carrying the lines didn&#8217;t reproduce, but because of random statistical effects. A personal example: My paternal grandmother has approximately fifty living descendents, all carrying fractions of her DNA. However, her mtDNA line is gone forever. That&#8217;s because she had five sons and two daughters. Those two daughters didn&#8217;t have any daughters, just sons! On the other hand, my maternal grandmother has only ten living descendents. She had one daughter, who had one daughter, who had two daughters. Her mtDNA line lives on!</p>
<p>In a stable population, one where each reproducing female leaves exactly two reproducing children, 90 % of the original mtDNA lines will be broken in just 34 generations. That&#8217;s less than 1.000 years. So if you start with 1.000 female Neanderthals in a mixed population, less than 100 Neanderthal mtDNA lines will survive after 1.000 years. After another 1.000 years, less than 10. After yet another 1.000 years&#8230; You can do the same type of calculation regarding Neanderthal Y chromosome lines. All taken together: If Neanderthals were a small minority of our common ancestors, it is extremely unlikely that any two Neanderthal genes would survive after 30.000 years. (In effect, mtDNA and the Y chromosome are inherited as just one gene, since they&#8217;re inherited in one piece.) Conclusion: We don&#8217;t have to construct intricate theories of marriage customs or patterns of reproduction in order to explain the lack of Neanderthal mtDNA or Neanderthal Y chromosomes today; we only have to do some reasonable math.</p>
<p>For thirty years, the ruling orthodoxy &#8211; the &#8216;Recent out of Africa&#8217; school &#8211; has been leaning heavily on just one gene, out of our 25.000. In reality, each gene has its own tree of ancestry! The total picture will be incredibly complex, and we&#8217;ve just started to put together a few pieces of the jigsaw. What we do know is that the average person carries approximately 1.000 genes inherited from our Neanderthal ancestors. (My own &#8216;Neanderthal bun&#8217; at the back of my skull confirms my mixed ancestry!) Most of the rest of our genes in all likelyhood are of recent African origin (&#8216;recent&#8217; meaning 100.000 years or less), but we don&#8217;t KNOW this yet. We&#8217;ll know much more once we start seeing DNA from Asian Homo Erectus, and I&#8217;m convinced we&#8217;re in for a lot of surprises. There&#8217;s a revolution going on in the way we perceive who we are and where we come from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell W</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32544</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 08:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32544</guid>
		<description>@# 3 Justin Giancola,

&quot;geeze dialects!&quot; .  Don&#039;t you speak with a dialect?

The video is  definitely for entertainment only.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@# 3 Justin Giancola,</p>
<p>&#8220;geeze dialects!&#8221; .  Don&#8217;t you speak with a dialect?</p>
<p>The video is  definitely for entertainment only.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher Rees</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32543</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Rees</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 04:13:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32543</guid>
		<description>The consumption of homo sapiens flesh, particularly the brain, probably gives a clue to the eventual extinction of homo sapiens neanderthalensis. Look to a prion condition like kuru in the central New Guinea highlands that, in the late 1940&#039;s and through the 1950&#039;s,  nearly exterminated the tribes that had lived there for tens of thousands of years. Our ancestors did not hunt the neanderthals to extinction. Our brain prions killed them off. Kind of a poetic justice, that!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The consumption of homo sapiens flesh, particularly the brain, probably gives a clue to the eventual extinction of homo sapiens neanderthalensis. Look to a prion condition like kuru in the central New Guinea highlands that, in the late 1940&#8242;s and through the 1950&#8242;s,  nearly exterminated the tribes that had lived there for tens of thousands of years. Our ancestors did not hunt the neanderthals to extinction. Our brain prions killed them off. Kind of a poetic justice, that!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Day Brown</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32542</link>
		<dc:creator>Day Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 01:20:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32542</guid>
		<description>Talk to a midwife. I&#039;ve been quoting for years online now one who looked at the robust Neanderthal pelvis- which does not crack wider during birthing- saying they would not have been able to safely deliver a hybrid, but a Cro Magnon woman would.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Talk to a midwife. I&#8217;ve been quoting for years online now one who looked at the robust Neanderthal pelvis- which does not crack wider during birthing- saying they would not have been able to safely deliver a hybrid, but a Cro Magnon woman would.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Buck</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32541</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Buck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 18:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32541</guid>
		<description>This adds a whole new meaning to one of my late father&#039;s favorite expressions to describe bratty kids or otherwise out-of-control people &quot;as wild as a raped ape.&quot;  Seriously, though, I agree with the advisory under the video &quot;For entertainment purposes only.&quot;  I was, indeed, entertained.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This adds a whole new meaning to one of my late father&#8217;s favorite expressions to describe bratty kids or otherwise out-of-control people &#8220;as wild as a raped ape.&#8221;  Seriously, though, I agree with the advisory under the video &#8220;For entertainment purposes only.&#8221;  I was, indeed, entertained.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walter Sobchak</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32540</link>
		<dc:creator>Walter Sobchak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 04:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32540</guid>
		<description>&quot;selective mating of Neanderthal males with females of human populations which had left Africa more recently&quot;

Can&#039;t be. The Africans must have been the aggressors, and they got the women. Otherwise we would be Neanderthals wondering what happened to the Africans.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;selective mating of Neanderthal males with females of human populations which had left Africa more recently&#8221;</p>
<p>Can&#8217;t be. The Africans must have been the aggressors, and they got the women. Otherwise we would be Neanderthals wondering what happened to the Africans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: I&#8217;m part Neanderthal, and proud of it! - Genomes Are Us</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32539</link>
		<dc:creator>I&#8217;m part Neanderthal, and proud of it! - Genomes Are Us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 21:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32539</guid>
		<description>[...] a little bit Neanderthal and we didn’t replace them, we absorbed them with some interbreeding (interesting theory as to how). Perhaps not so completely as that but definitely some admixture going on. As Razib of Gene [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a little bit Neanderthal and we didn’t replace them, we absorbed them with some interbreeding (interesting theory as to how). Perhaps not so completely as that but definitely some admixture going on. As Razib of Gene [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt B.</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32538</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32538</guid>
		<description>Um, does Vendramini know that gorillas aren&#039;t bipedal? I don&#039;t think &lt;i&gt;chimps&lt;/i&gt; are really all that bipedal. He says neanderthals are primates, but doesn&#039;t note that they&#039;re more specifically hominids. And it&#039;s interesting how his voice echoes the same when he&#039;s ostensibly outdoors as when he&#039;s indoors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um, does Vendramini know that gorillas aren&#8217;t bipedal? I don&#8217;t think <i>chimps</i> are really all that bipedal. He says neanderthals are primates, but doesn&#8217;t note that they&#8217;re more specifically hominids. And it&#8217;s interesting how his voice echoes the same when he&#8217;s ostensibly outdoors as when he&#8217;s indoors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ohwilleke</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32537</link>
		<dc:creator>ohwilleke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:55:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32537</guid>
		<description>&quot;I don’t know why it hasn’t occurred to them that the Neandertal mtDNA type was probably lost because of natural selection.”

While this is possible, there doesn&#039;t seem to be particularly strong evidence of natural selection playing a strong role in modern human mtDNA variation.  The mtDNA variation looks like is a better fit for selective neutrality with it coming along for the ride of trends driven by other genetic and/or cultural drivers of natural selection that happen to coincide with mtDNA variants.

Hawks recent findings that the Neanderthal DNA found in East Eurasians is mostly different than the Neanderthal DNA found in West Eurasians also argues for the case that most of our Neanderthal DNA legacy, while not decisively counterproductive from a selective perspective, also didn&#039;t provide decisive selective advantages.  The case for selective advantage can only be made if the number of genes found in both West and East Eurasian Neanderthal DNA legacies are a larger share of the total than one would expect from random chance.

The selective factors related to mtDNA would probably relate to metabolic rate, as mitchondria are intimately involved in regulating  metabolism.  This is a trait that one would expect Neanderthals in colder climes to have better adapted to for colder climates than modern humans who would be more recent African expatriots where it is warmer, at least for those modern humans migrating to colder areas as many were doing in the era of Neanderthal-modern human interaction.  Thus, it would be quite surprising that modern human mtDNA would have selective advantage relative to Neanderthal DNA.

I also don&#039;t think that Eze @14 is correct that a random DNA test has much of a chance of discovering a Neanderthal Y or mtDNA lineage in a modern human in the next 5-15 years.  The aggregate sample size of all Eurasians who have had uniparental DNA haplogroup typing already is on the order of tens of thousands if not the hundreds of thousands, with atypical relict populations mostly oversampled, with not a single such case identified so far.

Given the amount of population expansion (something on the order of ten thousand fold) that the world has seen in the last 30,000 years (the youngest possible origin for Nenaderthal DNA), it is very hard to imagine that a gene with a thousand plus generations of age in a period of profound population expansion would have stayed in the population, but be so rare that it or a phylogenetic descendant of it, wouldn&#039;t have shown up in a sample as large as the one that already exists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I don’t know why it hasn’t occurred to them that the Neandertal mtDNA type was probably lost because of natural selection.”</p>
<p>While this is possible, there doesn&#8217;t seem to be particularly strong evidence of natural selection playing a strong role in modern human mtDNA variation.  The mtDNA variation looks like is a better fit for selective neutrality with it coming along for the ride of trends driven by other genetic and/or cultural drivers of natural selection that happen to coincide with mtDNA variants.</p>
<p>Hawks recent findings that the Neanderthal DNA found in East Eurasians is mostly different than the Neanderthal DNA found in West Eurasians also argues for the case that most of our Neanderthal DNA legacy, while not decisively counterproductive from a selective perspective, also didn&#8217;t provide decisive selective advantages.  The case for selective advantage can only be made if the number of genes found in both West and East Eurasian Neanderthal DNA legacies are a larger share of the total than one would expect from random chance.</p>
<p>The selective factors related to mtDNA would probably relate to metabolic rate, as mitchondria are intimately involved in regulating  metabolism.  This is a trait that one would expect Neanderthals in colder climes to have better adapted to for colder climates than modern humans who would be more recent African expatriots where it is warmer, at least for those modern humans migrating to colder areas as many were doing in the era of Neanderthal-modern human interaction.  Thus, it would be quite surprising that modern human mtDNA would have selective advantage relative to Neanderthal DNA.</p>
<p>I also don&#8217;t think that Eze @14 is correct that a random DNA test has much of a chance of discovering a Neanderthal Y or mtDNA lineage in a modern human in the next 5-15 years.  The aggregate sample size of all Eurasians who have had uniparental DNA haplogroup typing already is on the order of tens of thousands if not the hundreds of thousands, with atypical relict populations mostly oversampled, with not a single such case identified so far.</p>
<p>Given the amount of population expansion (something on the order of ten thousand fold) that the world has seen in the last 30,000 years (the youngest possible origin for Nenaderthal DNA), it is very hard to imagine that a gene with a thousand plus generations of age in a period of profound population expansion would have stayed in the population, but be so rare that it or a phylogenetic descendant of it, wouldn&#8217;t have shown up in a sample as large as the one that already exists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eze</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32536</link>
		<dc:creator>Eze</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:15:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32536</guid>
		<description>When DNA testing becomes commonplace in another 5-15 years, I envision that a Neanderthal Y or MT-DNA lineage will be found in a modern Hs. at random.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When DNA testing becomes commonplace in another 5-15 years, I envision that a Neanderthal Y or MT-DNA lineage will be found in a modern Hs. at random.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Torbjörn Larsson, OM</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32535</link>
		<dc:creator>Torbjörn Larsson, OM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 21:48:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32535</guid>
		<description>FWIW, &lt;a href=&quot;http://johnhawks.net/node/2592&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;John Hawks, who should be an expert at this, said this a year ago&lt;/a&gt;:

&quot;I keep seeing people, who &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; ought to know better, saying that the new Neandertal genome results show that the gene flow must have been Neandertal men mating with modern human women, and not the other way around.

You see, they&#039;re fixated on the idea that the mtDNA showed no signs that the Neandertal clade survived into the present-day population. That result really convinced some people that interbreeding was impossible. They&#039;re flummoxed that some of the rest of the genome has significant signs of intermixture. It&#039;s like their world is spinning out of control. I&#039;m not naming any names, but if you&#039;ve followed much of the press around the Neandertal genome, you&#039;ve probably seen this suggestion.

I don&#039;t know why it hasn&#039;t occurred to them that the Neandertal mtDNA type was probably lost because of natural selection.&quot;

I like a more balanced approach though, such as in the post as I read it.

@ dave chamberlain:

Don&#039;t you think Vendramini, a movie producer/writer/director, haven&#039;t thought about that? From the beginning, perhaps.

[Ouch! He turned up in the ads too.] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, <a href="http://johnhawks.net/node/2592" rel="nofollow">John Hawks, who should be an expert at this, said this a year ago</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;I keep seeing people, who <i>really</i> ought to know better, saying that the new Neandertal genome results show that the gene flow must have been Neandertal men mating with modern human women, and not the other way around.</p>
<p>You see, they&#8217;re fixated on the idea that the mtDNA showed no signs that the Neandertal clade survived into the present-day population. That result really convinced some people that interbreeding was impossible. They&#8217;re flummoxed that some of the rest of the genome has significant signs of intermixture. It&#8217;s like their world is spinning out of control. I&#8217;m not naming any names, but if you&#8217;ve followed much of the press around the Neandertal genome, you&#8217;ve probably seen this suggestion.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know why it hasn&#8217;t occurred to them that the Neandertal mtDNA type was probably lost because of natural selection.&#8221;</p>
<p>I like a more balanced approach though, such as in the post as I read it.</p>
<p>@ dave chamberlain:</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t you think Vendramini, a movie producer/writer/director, haven&#8217;t thought about that? From the beginning, perhaps.</p>
<p>[Ouch! He turned up in the ads too.] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32534</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:05:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32534</guid>
		<description>At first glance, the Amerindian example seems questionable, since that pattern reflects not only contact, but the power differential between coloniser and colonised. But OHWilleke&#039;s comment (#11) got me thinking - just because humans eventually displaced Neanderthals doesn&#039;t mean that they got the upper hand in encounters between the two groups.

What if Neanderthals had the upper hand in these interactions? Hunter-gatherers can&#039;t steal material possessions, but they can steal women. If you&#039;re talking about a prolonged tributary relationship, it&#039;s also conceivable that the Neanderthals were able to recognise (and claim) hybrid sons. (It wouldn&#039;t be such a stretch to imagine Neanderthal society prizing sons more than daughters - it would fit well within what we find in many modern human societies.)

I&#039;m thinking of the Island Caribs as a (partial) model. Men and women spoke different languages - the men reportedly spoke the Carib language, while the women spoke an Arawakan language (presumably reflecting the long-term import of captive Taino women).

There&#039;s a weakness to such a model - if most hybrid sons were recovered by their fathers, then the contact would have to be prolonged. If there was prolonged contact, then the human-to-Neanderthal introgression would probably be &lt;i&gt;more&lt;/i&gt; pronounced than in Neanderthal-to-human. The paucity of putative hybrid fossils might argue against this...though, on the other hand, despite the lack of fossils, we know that hybrids existed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At first glance, the Amerindian example seems questionable, since that pattern reflects not only contact, but the power differential between coloniser and colonised. But OHWilleke&#8217;s comment (#11) got me thinking &#8211; just because humans eventually displaced Neanderthals doesn&#8217;t mean that they got the upper hand in encounters between the two groups.</p>
<p>What if Neanderthals had the upper hand in these interactions? Hunter-gatherers can&#8217;t steal material possessions, but they can steal women. If you&#8217;re talking about a prolonged tributary relationship, it&#8217;s also conceivable that the Neanderthals were able to recognise (and claim) hybrid sons. (It wouldn&#8217;t be such a stretch to imagine Neanderthal society prizing sons more than daughters &#8211; it would fit well within what we find in many modern human societies.)</p>
<p>I&#8217;m thinking of the Island Caribs as a (partial) model. Men and women spoke different languages &#8211; the men reportedly spoke the Carib language, while the women spoke an Arawakan language (presumably reflecting the long-term import of captive Taino women).</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a weakness to such a model &#8211; if most hybrid sons were recovered by their fathers, then the contact would have to be prolonged. If there was prolonged contact, then the human-to-Neanderthal introgression would probably be <i>more</i> pronounced than in Neanderthal-to-human. The paucity of putative hybrid fossils might argue against this&#8230;though, on the other hand, despite the lack of fossils, we know that hybrids existed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ohwilleke</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32533</link>
		<dc:creator>ohwilleke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:45:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32533</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been beating this drum for months now.  I&#039;m glad to see that someone else is starting to accept it as well.

Also, there is a pretty easy way to solve the question of why all Neanderthal admixture in modern humans comes from Neanderthals males, which is the missing link in the analysis above.  All you need is a scenario in which Neanderthal-human relationships are in the nature of rape/flings/seasonal meetups rather than being stable long term marriages, or (probably less plausibly) with Neanderthal-human relationships being matrilocal (which seems to be at odds with the very little that we know about Neanderthal social structure).  Either way, the hybrid kids end up with their mother&#039;s tribes.

In the case of modern human mothers (who were pregnant from Neanderthal fathers) those hybrid kids join the modern human gene pool.  In the case of Neanderthal mothers (who were pregnant from modern human fathers) those hybrids end up in the Neanderthal gene pool.

The trouble is that the Neanderthal gene pool is a pond that goes dry when the Neanderthals go extinct, so that mixed species kids with Neanderthal mothers go extinct along with their Neanderthal maternal extended families, leaving only the hybrid kids of modern human mothers in the modern gene pool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been beating this drum for months now.  I&#8217;m glad to see that someone else is starting to accept it as well.</p>
<p>Also, there is a pretty easy way to solve the question of why all Neanderthal admixture in modern humans comes from Neanderthals males, which is the missing link in the analysis above.  All you need is a scenario in which Neanderthal-human relationships are in the nature of rape/flings/seasonal meetups rather than being stable long term marriages, or (probably less plausibly) with Neanderthal-human relationships being matrilocal (which seems to be at odds with the very little that we know about Neanderthal social structure).  Either way, the hybrid kids end up with their mother&#8217;s tribes.</p>
<p>In the case of modern human mothers (who were pregnant from Neanderthal fathers) those hybrid kids join the modern human gene pool.  In the case of Neanderthal mothers (who were pregnant from modern human fathers) those hybrids end up in the Neanderthal gene pool.</p>
<p>The trouble is that the Neanderthal gene pool is a pond that goes dry when the Neanderthals go extinct, so that mixed species kids with Neanderthal mothers go extinct along with their Neanderthal maternal extended families, leaving only the hybrid kids of modern human mothers in the modern gene pool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Razib Khan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32532</link>
		<dc:creator>Razib Khan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32532</guid>
		<description>tx! funny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tx! funny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RafeK</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/neandertal-hybridization-haldanes-rule/#comment-32531</link>
		<dc:creator>RafeK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:18:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=11295#comment-32531</guid>
		<description>Very Entertaining indeed.

To back up Miko&#039;s point about degree of genetica relatedness and similarity of appearance, Papaun tribesmen  are more closely related to Han Chinese then West Africans were appearances would indicate quite the opposite.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very Entertaining indeed.</p>
<p>To back up Miko&#8217;s point about degree of genetica relatedness and similarity of appearance, Papaun tribesmen  are more closely related to Han Chinese then West Africans were appearances would indicate quite the opposite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
