On Our Species' Origin
May 19, 2023 11:42 PM Subscribe
Study Offers New Twist in How the First Humans Evolved [ungated] - "By analyzing the genomes of 290 living people, researchers concluded that modern humans descended from at least two populations that coexisted in Africa for a million years before merging in several independent events across the continent. The findings were published on Wednesday in Nature."
54,000 Years Ago, Humans and Neanderthals May Have Inhabited Europe Together - "Our human ancestors and their Neanderthal relatives not only shared space and time during evolutionary history; they also interbred in various places and times. Today, most humans who live outside of sub-Saharan African carry Neanderthal genes, at 1 to 4 percent."
Modern Humans Reached Europe In 3 Waves Starting 10,000 Years Before Previous Estimates - "A new model of Homo sapiens' movement into Europe proposes two periods of coexistence with Neanderthals, before a subsequent replacement associated with technological development."
54,000 Years Ago, Humans and Neanderthals May Have Inhabited Europe Together - "Our human ancestors and their Neanderthal relatives not only shared space and time during evolutionary history; they also interbred in various places and times. Today, most humans who live outside of sub-Saharan African carry Neanderthal genes, at 1 to 4 percent."
Modern Humans Reached Europe In 3 Waves Starting 10,000 Years Before Previous Estimates - "A new model of Homo sapiens' movement into Europe proposes two periods of coexistence with Neanderthals, before a subsequent replacement associated with technological development."
merging in several independent events
So that's what the kids are calling it these days?
posted by Naberius at 6:00 AM on May 20, 2023 [12 favorites]
So that's what the kids are calling it these days?
posted by Naberius at 6:00 AM on May 20, 2023 [12 favorites]
I'm curious how these researchers define species when they note these ancient populations were only as genetically distinct as modern Europeans and West Africans. Why are Stem1 and Stem2 considered distinct when they have common ancestors and are reproductively compatible?
posted by latkes at 6:33 AM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by latkes at 6:33 AM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
maybe how like europe is considered a separate 'continent' from asia :P
posted by kliuless at 6:54 AM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by kliuless at 6:54 AM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
So we have more of a family banyan than a family tree, sounds like.
posted by abucci at 8:06 AM on May 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by abucci at 8:06 AM on May 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
I don't think stem1 and stem2 are being called different species, are they? Just distinct populations
posted by little onion at 8:18 AM on May 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by little onion at 8:18 AM on May 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
This research really is amazing. The one problem with paleogenetics is it's relying on very faint signals. There's a lot of uncertainty in the data that doesn't come through in the popular press writing. And there's such a strong desire to tell stories that seem relatable, human. I'm not saying all the conclusions are wrong but it's very early days and our understanding of human genetic lineage will keep changing as we get more solid data.
As a specific example, I'm continually frustrated with the way cross-group intermixing is presented romantically in the popular press. Ie, from the NYT article: "The scientists concluded that people had moved between Stem1 and Stem2, pairing off to have children and mixing their DNA." I suspect the reality was much more grim and violent than the Romeo & Juliet story the NYT article is implying with the phrase "pairing off".
posted by Nelson at 8:33 AM on May 20, 2023 [8 favorites]
As a specific example, I'm continually frustrated with the way cross-group intermixing is presented romantically in the popular press. Ie, from the NYT article: "The scientists concluded that people had moved between Stem1 and Stem2, pairing off to have children and mixing their DNA." I suspect the reality was much more grim and violent than the Romeo & Juliet story the NYT article is implying with the phrase "pairing off".
posted by Nelson at 8:33 AM on May 20, 2023 [8 favorites]
I suspect the reality was much more grim and violent than the Romeo & Juliet story the NYT article is implying with the phrase “pairing off”.
Certainly much of it was, but I believe that there's been some recent archeological evidence that there was peaceful interaction.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 5:51 PM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Certainly much of it was, but I believe that there's been some recent archeological evidence that there was peaceful interaction.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 5:51 PM on May 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Nelson, what evidence has convinced you to the point of frustration that “pairing off” can only be a euphemism for something more grim and violent?
Hominids like to bang, enjoy novelty, and are capable of empathy just as much as we like to punish, tend to trust the ingroup and fear the outgroup, and are capable of rape and murder. Pop-anthropology writers sell books and op-eds on the topic of Man The Fire-Wielding Meat-Eating Warrior Alpha Chad because those concepts reinforce hegemonic (western, capitalist, patriarchal) notions of what “success” means, bolstered by the pervasive and persistent misunderstanding of evolution as a zero-sum goal-driven “optimizing” red-in-tooth-and-claw cage fight/startup funding competition.
Rape and murder are unavoidable facts of our history, for sure. Triangualted with heaps of existing and emerging research on the evolution, archaeology, and documented history of human (and non-human primate) cooperation, the impressively high proportion of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA in the contemporary gene pool is in and of itself a compelling argument against a human evolutionary history in which rape and murder are the only circumstances under which diverse ancestral groups would have “paired off.”
posted by rrrrrrrrrt at 3:07 PM on May 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Hominids like to bang, enjoy novelty, and are capable of empathy just as much as we like to punish, tend to trust the ingroup and fear the outgroup, and are capable of rape and murder. Pop-anthropology writers sell books and op-eds on the topic of Man The Fire-Wielding Meat-Eating Warrior Alpha Chad because those concepts reinforce hegemonic (western, capitalist, patriarchal) notions of what “success” means, bolstered by the pervasive and persistent misunderstanding of evolution as a zero-sum goal-driven “optimizing” red-in-tooth-and-claw cage fight/startup funding competition.
Rape and murder are unavoidable facts of our history, for sure. Triangualted with heaps of existing and emerging research on the evolution, archaeology, and documented history of human (and non-human primate) cooperation, the impressively high proportion of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA in the contemporary gene pool is in and of itself a compelling argument against a human evolutionary history in which rape and murder are the only circumstances under which diverse ancestral groups would have “paired off.”
posted by rrrrrrrrrt at 3:07 PM on May 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
I don't have "evidence" and I'm not a domain expert. But...
One example of coercive genetic mixing is the history of African American people. Studies of the population genetics vary but this one puts the heritage at 73% African, 24% European, mixing that occurred in the New World. I'm assuming you are familiar with the history of coercion and sexual violence that was so often involved.
Another example is the various characterizations of Gengis Khan's personal contribution to human male DNA along with that of a few other "super fertile" men. No doubt many factors contribute to the success of one individual's DNA: political power, wealth, etc. But it's hard to overlook that Khan's power and influence in the world was on the back of a life of violent warfare. (There's also a lot of specific quotes attributed to Genghis of raping women as one of the spoils of warfare.)
The details of these examples have important differences from the article we're talking about here. The Genghis Khan result is about Y-Chromosome DNA and the accident of a single male lineage, a very different kind of genetics than population mixing. I wouldn't dare make a direct comparison between African American lineage and examples like Stem1 and Stem2, not knowing anything about what those ancient peoples were like. These differences matter! But the two examples above are incidents of violence contributing a measurable amount of genetic mixing.
I don't draw any particular conclusion from all this other than that human history is often violent and cruel. I have no problem believing some genetic mixing was the result of happier voluntary relationships. It's just the popular press leans heavily in that direction and I think it's misleading. I suspect factors that lead to genetic mixing is a hot topic of research among anthropologists, particularly those studying ancient DNA. I'd welcome reading some expert research.
posted by Nelson at 5:19 PM on May 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
One example of coercive genetic mixing is the history of African American people. Studies of the population genetics vary but this one puts the heritage at 73% African, 24% European, mixing that occurred in the New World. I'm assuming you are familiar with the history of coercion and sexual violence that was so often involved.
Another example is the various characterizations of Gengis Khan's personal contribution to human male DNA along with that of a few other "super fertile" men. No doubt many factors contribute to the success of one individual's DNA: political power, wealth, etc. But it's hard to overlook that Khan's power and influence in the world was on the back of a life of violent warfare. (There's also a lot of specific quotes attributed to Genghis of raping women as one of the spoils of warfare.)
The details of these examples have important differences from the article we're talking about here. The Genghis Khan result is about Y-Chromosome DNA and the accident of a single male lineage, a very different kind of genetics than population mixing. I wouldn't dare make a direct comparison between African American lineage and examples like Stem1 and Stem2, not knowing anything about what those ancient peoples were like. These differences matter! But the two examples above are incidents of violence contributing a measurable amount of genetic mixing.
I don't draw any particular conclusion from all this other than that human history is often violent and cruel. I have no problem believing some genetic mixing was the result of happier voluntary relationships. It's just the popular press leans heavily in that direction and I think it's misleading. I suspect factors that lead to genetic mixing is a hot topic of research among anthropologists, particularly those studying ancient DNA. I'd welcome reading some expert research.
posted by Nelson at 5:19 PM on May 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
By way of counterexample, Nelson, look at Gobekli Tepe. Built by pre-agricultural folk and apparently for large scale religious / social purposes, a massive effort that required huge time commitment and cooperation. Maybe when resources are not so scarce and people are spread wide and thin they can appreciate others and see sharing and peaceful mixing as a mutual benefit?
posted by Meatbomb at 11:40 PM on May 21, 2023
posted by Meatbomb at 11:40 PM on May 21, 2023
-New DNA Research Changes Origin of Human Species
-DNA Suggests Modern Humans Emerged From Several Groups in Africa, Not One
posted by kliuless at 1:56 AM on May 26, 2023
-DNA Suggests Modern Humans Emerged From Several Groups in Africa, Not One
posted by kliuless at 1:56 AM on May 26, 2023
-Human genome reboot better reflects global population
-Genome data sheds light on how Homo sapiens arose in Africa
posted by kliuless at 1:23 AM on June 1, 2023
-Genome data sheds light on how Homo sapiens arose in Africa
posted by kliuless at 1:23 AM on June 1, 2023
-The Primate Genome Project unlocks hidden secrets of primate evolution
-Mysterious species buried their dead and carved symbols 100,000 years before humans
posted by kliuless at 9:33 PM on June 5, 2023
-Mysterious species buried their dead and carved symbols 100,000 years before humans
posted by kliuless at 9:33 PM on June 5, 2023
« Older They inspired nearly everyone who came after them | 15 million years ago, Australia had large tree... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Meatbomb at 3:14 AM on May 20, 2023 [3 favorites]