![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Neanderthal admixture theory was copied or moved into Archaic human admixture with modern Homo sapiens with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This is a quick WP:SS solution to the unsatisfactory distribution of material in the Neanderthal and Neanderthal extinction articles. The article can still be moved to a better title. Note that "Neanderthal admixture" takes the modern viewpoint, i.e. the search for Neanderthal DNA in modern humans, while "interbreeding" takes the Paleolithic viewpoing, i.e. the interbreeding during the Middle Paleolithic which resulted in the modern situation. Both are valid titles for discussing the same phenomenon. Possible fuller titles would be:
-- dab (𒁳) 10:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
You mean modern humans. People for some reason keep talking about "hominids" when referring to the Paleolithic. The Neanderthals were, of course, humans. Apparently not even a distinct human species, at best a subspecies, say, like wolves to dogs, or like a Przewalskii horse to any regular horse. -- dab (𒁳) 21:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Neanderthals are either classified as a subspecies (or race) of humans (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) or as a separate species (Homo neanderthalensis). [1] The introduction to the article states, "the result of interbreeding of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens during the Middle Paleolithic". Since Neanderthals are sometimes classified as Homo sapiens, perhaps the intro needs to be modified for clarification. -- Millstoner ( talk) 16:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
This is correct. I was going to say "Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon", but that is open to doubt for different reasons, because Cro-Magnon is not even a taxonomically meaningful term, and refers to people in Europe, while the interbreeding appears to have taken place also in the Levant.
Perhaps "Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans" would be best. -- dab (𒁳) 18:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Analysis of the Neandertal genome indicates that, contrary to previous beliefs, humans and Neandertals interbred: The Neandertal in us -- Millstoner ( talk) 14:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Although gene flow from Neandertals into modern humans when they first left sub-Saharan Africa seems to be the most parsimonious model compatible with the current data, other scenarios are also possible. For example, we cannot currently rule out a scenario in which the ancestral population of present-day non-Africans was more closely related to Neandertals than the ancestral population of present-day Africans due to ancient substructure within Africa (Fig. 6). If after the divergence of Neandertals there was incomplete genetic homogenization between what were to become the ancestors of non-Africans and Africans, present-day non-Africans would be more closely related to Neandertals than are Africans. In fact, old population substructure in Africa has been suggested based on genetic (81) as well as paleontological data
A striking observation is that Neandertals are as closely related to a Chinese and Papuan individual as to a French individual, even though morphologically recognizable Neandertals exist only in the fossil record of Europe and western Asia. Thus, the gene flow between Neandertals and modern humans that we detect most likely occurred before the divergence of Europeans, East Asians, and Papuans. This may be explained by mixing of early modern humans ancestral to present-day non-Africans with Neandertals in the Middle East before their expansion into Eurasia. Such a scenario is compatible with the archaeological record, which shows that modern humans appeared in the Middle East before 100,000 years ago whereas the Neandertals existed in the same region after this time, probably until 50,000 years ago
"scenario involving slavery"? What on earth are you talking about? Slavery in the Middle Paleolithic?
Muntuwandi is correct, these are preliminary results. But the results are so unambiguous that they cannot be said to be "controversial". Everybody is surprised, but everybody agrees that the results speak for themselves. The theoretical possibility of "ancient population substructure" would just shift the locus of the admixture into Africa. That the data ' should not be considered as facts, but rather should be attributed to their respective studies' is a truism on Wikipedia, but nevertheless Wikipedia can report undisputed points in its own voice. It is undisputed that these results are recent and subject to further analysis, but it is also undisputed that they are strikingly clear. -- dab (𒁳) 08:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
There is evidence that there were different subgroups or "races" of Neanderthals. [1] [2] [3] There is also some evidence that they could talk like we do. [4] [5] [6] Neanderthal brains were as large or larger than modern human brains. There is no reason to assume they exhibited chimp-like behavior. -- Millstoner ( talk) 12:45, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Millstoner, you keep going off on entirely weird targets. What with the "slavery" in your last post and the "chimp-like behavior" in this one. Nobody claims Neanderthals had "chimp-like behavior", what does this even have to do with anything?
Muntuwandi, I agree with most of what you say. I may disagree in some details, but this is irrelevant under WP:FORUM. Neanderthal admixture has been revived as a real possibility, but we agree this is still a long way from "unqualified fact". -- dab (𒁳) 16:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
New study that is critical of the interbreeding hypothesis as suggested by Green et al. 2010.
Hodgson; et al. (2010).
"Neandertal Genome: The Ins and Outs of African Genetic Diversity".
doi:
10.1016/j.cub.2010.05.018. {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help)
Wapondaponda ( talk) 13:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 04:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
This isn't a hypothesis anymore, it's a theory. 99.236.221.124 ( talk) 23:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
{{movereq|Neanderthal admixture theory}}
Neanderthal admixture hypothesis → Neanderthal admixture theory —
I've proposed a merger into Talk:Archaic Homo sapiens admixture with modern humans instead. Please discuss at the discussion page. Warren Dew ( talk) 16:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I've copied the following from a section I made on the "Heritability of Autism" page. My only request is that you read before you delete:
The Journal of Evolutionary Psychology just published a paper that supports the hypothesis that the confirmed neanderthal admixture event(s) provided cognitive variations that were subsequently selected for, sometimes causing a locus of deleterious recombinations in the genomes of children with parents who selected one another for those characteristics: http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP09207238.pdf
Here are some peer reviewed sources that imply a link between the genes garnered via neanderthal admixture and the genes that code for ASDs:
The fact that the male side of the admixture(s) was/were strictly neanderthal would mean that we share none of their mtDNA. This explains the lack of mtDNA abnormality and the existence of mitochondrial dysfunction in people with ASDs: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/12/50
The neanderthal haplotype described in this 2011 paper is x-linked: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/01/25/molbev.msr024.full.pdf+html
More evidence is cited in this wrongplanet thread: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp3696657.html#3696657 Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 21:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
The stock photo they are using is horribly outdated, but, this might be useful reference.
All Non-Africans Part Neanderthal, Genetics Confirm
—
al-Shimoni (
talk)
07:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Please Update with latest Paper
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/08/26/neanderthalautoimmune/neanderthalautoimmune.pdf LhunGrub ( talk) 05:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Evolutionary origin of bipolar disorder-revised: EOBD-R ( Accessible PDF)
Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 18:19, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Neanderthal admixture theory was copied or moved into Archaic human admixture with modern Homo sapiens with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This is a quick WP:SS solution to the unsatisfactory distribution of material in the Neanderthal and Neanderthal extinction articles. The article can still be moved to a better title. Note that "Neanderthal admixture" takes the modern viewpoint, i.e. the search for Neanderthal DNA in modern humans, while "interbreeding" takes the Paleolithic viewpoing, i.e. the interbreeding during the Middle Paleolithic which resulted in the modern situation. Both are valid titles for discussing the same phenomenon. Possible fuller titles would be:
-- dab (𒁳) 10:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
You mean modern humans. People for some reason keep talking about "hominids" when referring to the Paleolithic. The Neanderthals were, of course, humans. Apparently not even a distinct human species, at best a subspecies, say, like wolves to dogs, or like a Przewalskii horse to any regular horse. -- dab (𒁳) 21:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Neanderthals are either classified as a subspecies (or race) of humans (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) or as a separate species (Homo neanderthalensis). [1] The introduction to the article states, "the result of interbreeding of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens during the Middle Paleolithic". Since Neanderthals are sometimes classified as Homo sapiens, perhaps the intro needs to be modified for clarification. -- Millstoner ( talk) 16:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
This is correct. I was going to say "Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon", but that is open to doubt for different reasons, because Cro-Magnon is not even a taxonomically meaningful term, and refers to people in Europe, while the interbreeding appears to have taken place also in the Levant.
Perhaps "Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans" would be best. -- dab (𒁳) 18:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Analysis of the Neandertal genome indicates that, contrary to previous beliefs, humans and Neandertals interbred: The Neandertal in us -- Millstoner ( talk) 14:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Although gene flow from Neandertals into modern humans when they first left sub-Saharan Africa seems to be the most parsimonious model compatible with the current data, other scenarios are also possible. For example, we cannot currently rule out a scenario in which the ancestral population of present-day non-Africans was more closely related to Neandertals than the ancestral population of present-day Africans due to ancient substructure within Africa (Fig. 6). If after the divergence of Neandertals there was incomplete genetic homogenization between what were to become the ancestors of non-Africans and Africans, present-day non-Africans would be more closely related to Neandertals than are Africans. In fact, old population substructure in Africa has been suggested based on genetic (81) as well as paleontological data
A striking observation is that Neandertals are as closely related to a Chinese and Papuan individual as to a French individual, even though morphologically recognizable Neandertals exist only in the fossil record of Europe and western Asia. Thus, the gene flow between Neandertals and modern humans that we detect most likely occurred before the divergence of Europeans, East Asians, and Papuans. This may be explained by mixing of early modern humans ancestral to present-day non-Africans with Neandertals in the Middle East before their expansion into Eurasia. Such a scenario is compatible with the archaeological record, which shows that modern humans appeared in the Middle East before 100,000 years ago whereas the Neandertals existed in the same region after this time, probably until 50,000 years ago
"scenario involving slavery"? What on earth are you talking about? Slavery in the Middle Paleolithic?
Muntuwandi is correct, these are preliminary results. But the results are so unambiguous that they cannot be said to be "controversial". Everybody is surprised, but everybody agrees that the results speak for themselves. The theoretical possibility of "ancient population substructure" would just shift the locus of the admixture into Africa. That the data ' should not be considered as facts, but rather should be attributed to their respective studies' is a truism on Wikipedia, but nevertheless Wikipedia can report undisputed points in its own voice. It is undisputed that these results are recent and subject to further analysis, but it is also undisputed that they are strikingly clear. -- dab (𒁳) 08:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
There is evidence that there were different subgroups or "races" of Neanderthals. [1] [2] [3] There is also some evidence that they could talk like we do. [4] [5] [6] Neanderthal brains were as large or larger than modern human brains. There is no reason to assume they exhibited chimp-like behavior. -- Millstoner ( talk) 12:45, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Millstoner, you keep going off on entirely weird targets. What with the "slavery" in your last post and the "chimp-like behavior" in this one. Nobody claims Neanderthals had "chimp-like behavior", what does this even have to do with anything?
Muntuwandi, I agree with most of what you say. I may disagree in some details, but this is irrelevant under WP:FORUM. Neanderthal admixture has been revived as a real possibility, but we agree this is still a long way from "unqualified fact". -- dab (𒁳) 16:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
New study that is critical of the interbreeding hypothesis as suggested by Green et al. 2010.
Hodgson; et al. (2010).
"Neandertal Genome: The Ins and Outs of African Genetic Diversity".
doi:
10.1016/j.cub.2010.05.018. {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help)
Wapondaponda ( talk) 13:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 04:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
This isn't a hypothesis anymore, it's a theory. 99.236.221.124 ( talk) 23:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
{{movereq|Neanderthal admixture theory}}
Neanderthal admixture hypothesis → Neanderthal admixture theory —
I've proposed a merger into Talk:Archaic Homo sapiens admixture with modern humans instead. Please discuss at the discussion page. Warren Dew ( talk) 16:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I've copied the following from a section I made on the "Heritability of Autism" page. My only request is that you read before you delete:
The Journal of Evolutionary Psychology just published a paper that supports the hypothesis that the confirmed neanderthal admixture event(s) provided cognitive variations that were subsequently selected for, sometimes causing a locus of deleterious recombinations in the genomes of children with parents who selected one another for those characteristics: http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP09207238.pdf
Here are some peer reviewed sources that imply a link between the genes garnered via neanderthal admixture and the genes that code for ASDs:
The fact that the male side of the admixture(s) was/were strictly neanderthal would mean that we share none of their mtDNA. This explains the lack of mtDNA abnormality and the existence of mitochondrial dysfunction in people with ASDs: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/12/50
The neanderthal haplotype described in this 2011 paper is x-linked: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/01/25/molbev.msr024.full.pdf+html
More evidence is cited in this wrongplanet thread: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp3696657.html#3696657 Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 21:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
The stock photo they are using is horribly outdated, but, this might be useful reference.
All Non-Africans Part Neanderthal, Genetics Confirm
—
al-Shimoni (
talk)
07:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Please Update with latest Paper
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/08/26/neanderthalautoimmune/neanderthalautoimmune.pdf LhunGrub ( talk) 05:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Evolutionary origin of bipolar disorder-revised: EOBD-R ( Accessible PDF)
Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 18:19, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)