Quantcast
issue
Read articles, including Science News stories written for ages 9-14, on the SNK website.
News in Brief: Ancient human DNA suggests minimal interbreeding
Genetic analysis indicates Stone Age people mated infrequently with Neandertals and other close relatives
A+ A- Text Size

Genetic analysis indicates Stone Age people mated infrequently with Neandertals and other close relatives

By Bruce Bower

Web edition: January 21, 2013
Print edition: February 9, 2013; Vol.183 #3 (p. 18)

A 40,000-year-old human skeleton previously excavated in China has yielded genetic clues to Stone Age evolution.

Ancient DNA from cell nuclei and maternally inherited mitochondria indicates that this individual belonged to a population that eventually gave rise to many present-day Asians and Native Americans, says a team led by Qiaomei Fu and Svante Pääbo, evolutionary geneticists at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

The partial skeleton, unearthed in Tianyuan Cave near Beijing in 2003, carries roughly the same small proportions of Neandertal and Denisovan genes as living Asians do (SN: 8/25/12, p. 22), the scientists report online January 21 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Stone Age people and their close evolutionary relatives interbred infrequently, the researchers suspect. DNA analyses of additional human fossils from Asia and Europe are needed to illuminate how often cross-species flings occurred tens of thousands of years ago.

Comment
Print Friendly and PDF

Q. Fu et al. DNA analysis of an early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Published online Jan. 21, 2013. doi:10.1073/pnas.1221359110.


B. Bower. Tangled Roots. Science News. Vol. 182, Aug. 25, 2012, p. 22. Available online: [Go to]

Comments (4)

Please alert Science News to any inappropriate posts by clicking the REPORT SPAM link within the post. Comments will be reviewed before posting.

  • A semantic comment: this result bears on how often significant interbreeding occurred, but not on the throughness with which it occurred when it did. "Minimal" in this case does not imply that interbreeding was always sparse, affecting only small fractions of the population at a time, throughout the past. It simply implies that interbreeding on a scale sufficient to impact group genetics was infrequent.
    The strong expression of the Neandertal and Denisovan genes indicates an interbreeding affecting many individuals within the interacting groups so as to affect group genetics enough at the time that the effects would not simply be submerged in the norm of the larger group. At the times this occurred, the interbreeding would not have been "minimal". Subsequent instances of interbreeding may have been less widespread among the groups, perhaps involving occasional individuals, and thus would be more prone for the effects to die out.
    The above would apply unless the genes transferred provided a major survival benefit, in which case a smaller number of individuals need have input the new genes. This is also a sample of the surviving groups. The hazards of life during the time would also have wiped out groups that were simply unlucky rather than having genetics unsuitable to the general environment, so some interbreeding may have occurred among groups who then died out before they interbred with the surviving groups.
    Tony Cooley Tony Cooley
    Jan. 22, 2013 at 2:16pm
  • Tony Cooley's comment is helpful. I would like to know how the conclusion about "infrequent" mating was inferred from the DNA evidence.
    Ralph Dratman Ralph Dratman
    Jan. 28, 2013 at 9:10pm
  • How do we distinguish Neanderthal and Denisovan genes from human genes? Is there some biochemical difference? Otherwise, how could we tell whether genes we have today didn't originally come from a Neanderthal population whose DNA we haven't yet found and sequenced?
    bean bean
    Jan. 28, 2013 at 9:10pm
  • Tony Cooley's comment is helpful. I would like to know how the conclusion about "infrequent" mating was inferred from the DNA evidence.
    Ralph Dratman Ralph Dratman
    Jan. 29, 2013 at 2:46pm
Registered readers are invited to post a comment. To encourage fruitful discussion, please keep your comments relevant, brief and courteous. Offensive, irrelevant, nonsensical and commercial posts will not be published. (All links will be removed from comments.)

You must register with Science News to add a comment. To log-in click here. To register as a new user, follow this link.

Follow Us