Quantcast
issue
Read articles, including Science News stories written for ages 9-14, on the SNK website.
Neandertal genome yields evidence of interbreeding with humans
After years of looking, geneticists are shocked to find a link
A+ A- Text Size

After years of looking, geneticists are shocked to find a link

By Tina Hesman Saey

Web edition: May 6, 2010
Print edition: June 5, 2010; Vol.177 #12 (p. 5)

Enlarge
Surprising connection
These three fragments of Neandertal bones yielded the first DNA evidence of human-Neandertal interbreeding.
Max-Planck-Institute EVA

Some people don’t just have a caveman mentality; they may actually carry a little relic of the Stone Age in their DNA.

A new study of the Neandertal genome shows that humans and Neandertals interbred. The discovery comes as a big surprise to researchers who have been searching for genetic evidence of human-Neandertal interbreeding for years and finding none.

About 1 percent to 4 percent of DNA in modern people from Europe and Asia was inherited from Neandertals, researchers report in the May 7 Science. “It’s a small, but very real proportion of our ancestry,” says study coauthor David Reich of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in Cambridge, Mass. Comparisons of the human and Neandertal genomes are also revealing how humans evolved to become the sole living hominid species on the planet.

Neandertals lived in Europe, the Middle East and western Asia until they disappeared about 30,000 years ago. The new data indicate that humans may not have replaced Neandertals, but assimilated them into the human gene pool.

“Neandertals are not totally extinct; they live on in some of us,” says Svante Pääbo of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, and leader of the Neandertal genome project.

He and other geneticists involved in the effort to compile the complete genetic instruction book of Neandertals didn’t expect to find that Neandertals had left a genetic legacy. Earlier analyses that looked at only a small part of the genome had contradicted the notion that humans and Neandertals intermixed (SN Online: 8/7/08).

“We as a consortium came into this with a very, very strong bias against gene flow,” Reich says. In fact, when he and his colleagues announced the completion of a rough draft of the Neandertal genome a year ago, the researchers said such genetic exchange was unlikely (SN: 3/14/09, p. 5).

But several independent lines of evidence now convince the researchers that humans and Neandertals did interbreed. “The breakthrough here is to show that it could happen and it did happen,” Pääbo says.

Enlarge
Distant relatives
People of European and Asian ancestry (woman, left) inherited roughly 1 to 4 percent of their DNA from Neandertals (reconstruction, right), genetic work suggests.
copyright Joe McNally/Reconstruction by Kennis and Kennis

The result came as no surprise to some scientists, however. Archaeologists have described ancient skeletons from Europe that had characteristics of both early modern humans and Neandertals; evidence, the researchers say, of interbreeding between the two groups. But until the cataloging of the entire Neanderthal genome, genetic studies could find no evidence to support the idea.

“After all these years the geneticists are coming to the same conclusions that some of us in the field of archaeology and human paleontology have had for a long time,” says João Zilhão, an archaeologist and paleoanthropologist at the University of Bristol in England. “What can I say? If the geneticists come to this same conclusion, that’s to be expected.”

Researchers re-created the Neandertal’s genetic blueprints using DNA extracted from three bone fragments — each from a different Neandertal woman — found in a cave in Croatia.

Comparing the resulting blueprints of the female Neandertals, who lived about 40,000 years ago, with those of five present-day humans from China, France, Papua New Guinea and southern and western Africa, revealed that people outside of Africa carry Neandertal DNA.

Scientists were surprised to find that people from China and Papua New Guinea (places where Neandertals never lived) have just as much Neandertal ancestry as people from France. The group did not find traces of Neandertal heritage in the two African people studied. The result probably means that interbreeding between Neandertals and humans took place about 50,000 to 80,000 years ago in the Middle East as humans began migrating out of Africa to colonize the rest of the world, Reich says.

It is not clear how extensive interbreeding was; the data are consistent with either a short period with a great deal of interbreeding or with a long period of little interbreeding, says Richard E. (Ed) Green, a genome biologist now at the University of California Santa Cruz and a coauthor of the new study.

Comparison of the Neandertal genome to human and chimpanzee genetic sequences have led to some clues about recent human evolution. Neandertals “were not genetically very distinct from us,” says Pääbo. For example, the researchers were able to find only 78 proteins in which humans carry a different amino acid than is found in Neandertals and chimpanzees. That means that few changes in proteins have taken place in the past few hundred thousand years of human evolution. Researchers don’t know yet whether the changes in the proteins alter their function or give humans some survival advantage.

But some parts of the human genome clearly do produce an evolutionary advantage, the researchers say. Again, the team compared the human genome to those of Neandertals and chimpanzees and identified places where humans differ. If nothing of importance had happened in human evolution since humans and Neandertals diverged, such changes would be spread evenly across the genome, Green says. Instead, the researchers found large swaths of the genome where humans have distinct changes not found in Neandertals or chimpanzees. The team identified 212 such regions where “selective sweeps” were likely to have happened, many of which include genes involved in brain function. The researchers don’t yet know what the changes are or how they produce a selective advantage.

“These data are really a goldmine for understanding recent human evolution,” Green says.

Since humans and Neandertals could interbreed, some people question whether the two groups are different hominid species. The question doesn’t hold interest for John Hawks, an anthropologist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Genealogically, he says, the new study shows that many humans had a Neandertal great-great-great-great … grandfather.  “It’s impossible to talk about them as ‘them’ anymore,” he says. “Neandertals are us.”

______________________________________________________________________

Back Story | Fossil clues to intermingling

Some archaeologists have long argued that fossil evidence suggests interbreeding between Homo sapiens and Neandertals.

Neandertal bones

1. Lagar Velho child
Uncovered in the late 1990s in Portugal, this child’s skeleton dates to 24,500 years ago and displays a mix of H. sapiens and Neandertal characteristics. Human traits include a well-formed chin and small lower arms, while Neandertal characteristics include a huge jaw, large front teeth, short legs and a broad chest (SN: 5/8/99, p. 295).
Credit: José Paulo Ruas

2. Châtelperronian artifacts
Bone and stone tools blending Neandertal and human techniques have been found in a French cave and date to roughly 40,000 and 35,000 years ago. Though not evidence for interbreeding, the artifacts suggest that humans and Neandertals lived side by side for at least a millennium and that there wasn’t necessarily a mental gulf between the species.
Credit: Gravina et al./Nature 2005

3. Oase fossils
A 40,000-year-old skull found in a Romanian cave defies traditional anatomical categorization. Though the skull has the proportions of a modern human cranium, it has a retreating forehead and large upper molars (palate shown), among other features typical of Neandertals (SN: 3/24/07, p. 186). A similar jaw had previously been found at the site.
Credit: Rougier et al./PNAS 2007

Comment
Print Friendly and PDF

Green, R. E., et al. 2010. A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome. Science 328(May 7): 710-722. doi: 10.1126/science.1188021


Saey, Tina H. 2009. First rough draft of Neandertal genome released. Science News 175(March 14): 5.
[Go to]

Saey, Tina H. 2008. Neandertal mitochondrial DNA deciphered. Science News web edition, August 7.
[Go to]

Comments (20)

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

  • I recently watched a documentary in which Cromagnon used to steal Neanthertal women and slowly pushed the Neanthertal groups into worse geographical niches to speed up, if not cause, their extinction. I think this is less believable than people kicking alien asses in Indepence Day with Will Smith!
    Neanthertals were physically stronger and heavier. Cromagnons, in their best scenario, were in possession of rough spears, an impact with which could have easily been avoided at any distance by the Neanthertals (they were way smarter than bears and dears). Hence, the two humanoids must have fought melee, when necessary. Even today, given gun power, physically stronger individuals always dominate low/underground society niches and low developed societies. It is naïve to believe that Cromagnons used communication skills and tactics to overwhelm Neanthertals. It was 30K B.C. in the woods not a G7 meeting in 2010. The stronger and heavier Neanthertals must have definitely been the dominant group at least until the invention of the bow. I agree they were slower and inefficient runners but I think they didn’t have to run at all. In fact, the Cromagnons had to.
    Even if it is hard to admit, it were most probably the Neanthertals, who stole Cromagnon women. Assuming these were prettier, it must have been common practice. If a Cromagnon man’s child is more likely to have a Cromagnon mother (reasonable) and if a Neanthertals man’s child is more like to have a Cromagnon mother (prettier, possible with physical dominance of the father) than it is clear why the pure Neanthertals went extent!!!
    This raises several questions about the sexes, beauty and strength. If a great deal of the human evolution has taken place between a beautiful female and a strong male, no wonder why this stereotype of the sexes is still true.

    Ivo Smith Ivo Smith
    Jun. 12, 2010 at 8:08pm
  • Now thugs can plead that their Neandertal genes made them do it.
    And juries would "buy" it.
    Fred Coppin Fred Coppin
    Jun. 15, 2010 at 10:49pm
  • I am of East Asian descent (with a touch of Northern European in our family tree somewhere), and i am EMBRACING THE NEANDERTHAL WITHIN! :-D
    Daniel Wang Daniel Wang
    Jun. 27, 2010 at 9:32am
  • Human racism and our cultural mindset:
    What I find fascinating with the present human condition is the presumption the Neanderthal was inferior! They had bigger brains; (1500cc to our 1400cc). Stronger teeth and bones so considerably more muscular. They had bigger eyes so they can see much more clearly in the dark.

    Their build seems to refer their activities as a grazing, rooting and opportunism lifestyle. So quite likely lived in very small families or less. Maybe a bear-like existence.
    Andy Jones Andy Jones
    Jul. 29, 2010 at 8:50pm
  • Human racism and our cultural mindset:
    What I find fascinating with the present human condition is the presumption the Neanderthal was inferior! They had bigger brains; (1500cc to our 1400cc). Stronger teeth and bones so considerably more muscular. They had bigger eyes so they can see much more clearly in the dark.

    Their build seems to refer their activities as a grazing, rooting and opportunism lifestyle. So quite likely lived in very small families or less. Maybe a bear-like existence.
    Andy Jones Andy Jones
    Jul. 29, 2010 at 8:50pm
  • I believe it, I'm 6'3 250 played college football and have a large occipital bun and purtruding brow ridge, and I'm an engineer which means i like using tools and building things. My heritage is also western Europe and French, haha so I'm pretty much a modern day neandertal!!
    Jon Belcher Jon Belcher
    Feb. 14, 2011 at 10:13am
  • So, this brings to mind another question, could we determine whether american indians arrived in north america prior to to interbreeding period?
    Douglas Cruthers Douglas Cruthers
    May. 8, 2010 at 3:01am
  • If Neandertals and homo sapiens did successfully interbreed, they are the same species. The commonly given date for the "split" between Neandertals and homo sapiens is 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. If this "split" is similar to others in hominid history, many of the various branches of the family tree may simply be varieties within the species.

    It will be interesting to learn which other hominids we do or don't share DNA with.
    S Gruhn S Gruhn
    May. 12, 2010 at 2:56pm
  • I don't know about the rest of you, but I resent the distinction of "human" and "Neanderthal". Who says my cave dwelling brothers weren't human? What is "human" anyway?
    richard search richard search
    May. 12, 2010 at 7:59am
  • Neanderthals 'R' Us, or as John Lennon said: "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together." Goo goo ga joob.

    Now if we can just get past pre-conceived conclusions and the misguided attempt to only entertain facts that substantiate those conclusions, we can get down to some real science.

    "The only thing a lack of evidence proves is that there is no known evidence."
    Dr. Momus A. Morgus Dr. Momus A. Morgus
    May. 11, 2010 at 6:38pm
  • My own view is that the Neanderthals still count as a separate species. It is only a minority of their traits that entered our genome even if this study holds true.

    I also think that there are two other possibilities that future research needs to deal with. One possibility is that there was contamination which may account for the results. Apparently great effort was made to avoid and identify contamination, but that the Neanderthal genome has been sequences 1.3 times on average anything that slipped by could easily be unchallenged. Hopefully further resequencings (which the group is working on) will resolve this issue. Another possibility is that we are looking at an older case of gene transfer from AMH to the N's. Of course the problem with this idea is that it genes could go one way, why did they not go the other way?

    My suspicion is that some of the genetic imprinting that we have so that we can reliably reproduce with intelligent children may have been absent in the Neanderthals and/or inconsistent with their imprinting. The result would have been highly disadvantaged children. Maybe some early gene flow allowed some essential Neanderthal genes into the human genome, after which any contribution from the Neanderthals could only have been for the worse.
    Edward Schaefer Edward Schaefer
    May. 11, 2010 at 2:36pm
  • I have long been suspect of the theory that modern humans brought about the demise of the Neanderthals and I am gratified that we now have evidence of interbreeding. One aspect of the scenario that seems to be missing is Neanderthal infertility as a driving mechanism.
    We know that, upon arriving, modern humans almost immediately became grain eaters, and surprisingly early on, figured out how to store grain. This suggests that game--which is available year round and a good source of calories when abundant--was no longer abundant when modern humans arrived. We also know that Neanderthals were larger and stronger than modern humans, that their caloric needs were extraordinarily high and that their diet was up to 80% meat based by some estimates. We also have evidence that, “in the end,” Neanderthals practiced cannibalism.

    I propose that Neanderthals were not unsuccessful but too successful and were already under stress from overpopulation and the increasing scarcity of meat food by the time humans arrived. Furthermore, in this scenario, female Neanderthals were likely increasingly infertile. I think Neanderthal males kidnapped modern females and bred with them (and probably kidnapped modern males and ate them). The progeny of these unions were able to make the transition to a modern diet and interbreed back into the increasingly larger modern population, while the purebred Neanderthals died off, infertile and emaciated, in their caves.
    Angela Zehava Angela Zehava
    May. 11, 2010 at 12:30pm
  • i think it is about time to really stop and say something about the validity of the statistical analysis being done along with the underlying hypotheses. Research community in this field has to acknowledge that coding regions similarities between species is not a big deal. All functional process shares similar attribute and it is expected to be guite the same between nenhedrals and humans. Unfortunately, we rarely hear voices from people studying non-coding regions probably due to the complexity.. All this we didnot post any questions regarding the integrity of the sample itself...

    I think sometimes we have to admit that there are somethings (such as noncoding dna) that our human mind cannot comprehend.
    moe yssn moe yssn
    May. 8, 2010 at 10:11pm
  • Good stuff.
    Exciting to see thought.
    Even as we delicatley skirt OAT.
    Can the truth be racist?
    martin lavin martin lavin
    May. 15, 2010 at 4:18pm
  • One social consequence (if these findings are confirmed) could be an intellectual justification for racism. The argument would go that people of European and Asian descent are a hybrid race of Homo sapien and Neandertal, while people of African descent are not. Hybrid vigor and the incorporation of selected Neandertal genes into the European and Asian gene pool could be used to explain why Europe and Asia advanced while Africa stagnated.

    PLEASE understand I don't agree with that and I'm simply stating what we could be hearing in a few years. So please don't attack me for saying in advance what we might be hearing in a few years.
    Marty Marty
    May. 7, 2010 at 6:01pm
  • The lines of "About 1 percent to 4 percent of DNA in modern people from Europe and Asia was inherited from Neandertals," and of "The group did not find traces of Neandertal heritage in the two African people studied." are very interesting, considering all of the eugenics claims of the "superiority of the white race". It seems like the African people are the only true Modern people around that have not be "contaminated" with older, less modern stock.
    Eric Vandernoot Eric Vandernoot
    May. 7, 2010 at 5:01pm
  • So, 60 thousand years ago, S(apiens) and N(eanderthalensis) shared a bit of genome they DIDN'T share 80 thousand years ago? I wonder. Considering the rarity of N DNA, doesn't the hype kind of lead the evidence? What precludes the possibility that both S and N shared a common ancestor 500 thousand years ago, with the same genetic marker in S, N and S:N? Also, genes commonly drop out of the S population (or any population, for that matter) as natural selection prunes the evolutionary bush with Darwin's weedwhacker, so what's the big deal? Too much theory, not enough observation, end of story, IMHO.
    grikdog grikdog
    May. 7, 2010 at 2:40am
  • FINALLY - Why Researchers rushed to claim otherwise several years ago said more about how we humans when looking for facts notice and accept facts that match our preconceived ideas. Being strongly biased against intermixing, believing Neanderthals too "different" from Cromagnon in the eyes of these researches resulted in their very early, initial findings being taken as conclusive proof, even though they had only checked a small fraction of DNA !!!

    Even more oddly I thought back then is why are they so adamant that Neanderthals were a distinct separate species, considering they were looking for mixing between the human types didn't that run counter to that notion, since different species can't produce 100% fertile offspring, yet if Neanderthals and Cro-magnon did hmmmm.

    And now I see that as well, the comment that there isn't that much genetic difference clearly shows that eventually the notion that neanderthals were a distinct human species is going to fall eventually too, but like all preconceived notions accepted as fact it's going to take awhile and a ton of overwhelming evidence.

    The differences between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon should be considered on the same level as the differences between dogs from different breedlines.

    The dramatic differences in appearance between a St. Bernard and a Japanese Chin and say a Greyhound belay they are all still one single species.

    In fact physiologically speaking the differences between a neanderthal and a cromagnon are minute compared to the vast physical differences between say a Chihuahua and a Bulldog, but they are still one species, and so too one day will Science realize Neanderthals for all their differences were modern humans with merely cosmetic physiological differences that can be rooted in genetics, but taken together just do not justify being considered apart from Cro-magnon or modern humans any more than breeds of dogs are considered different species.
    johnny morales johnny morales
    May. 7, 2010 at 1:10am
  • So, when I insult someone by saying, "You, you Neandertal, you!" I'll be right?

    Of course, a SN subscriber might retort "Like You!" which would sort of ruin the mood. :-)
    Ric Werme Ric Werme
    May. 6, 2010 at 8:50pm
  • Human behavior is highly complex and variable. I don't see why homo sapiens wouldn't have had a mix of responses - interbreeding, killing, enslaving. All the things we do to people we consider "other" now.
    Amanda McWilliams Amanda McWilliams
    May. 13, 2010 at 7:32am
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