Sasquatch vs. Environmental DNA

[Incorrigible1]

^Break a leg!^

[hiflier]

Thanks, Inc1, you're a keeper  

[JKH]

They will surely be interested in your own evidence. 

[hiflier]

Thought it important to keep the BFF informed on some things. As you now I've been hot on the trail of e-DNA in the search for The Bigfoot. My recent research while going through some papers involves a very interesting genetic topic. Namely what genes would be unique to Humans (Homo Sapiens sapiens) as opposed to say Chimpanzees (Pan) And Gorillas/Orangutans (Pongo). There is such a gene that is unique to Humans. My reasoning for wanting this information is to help determine how geneticists know when an e-DNA sample is contaminated by Humans or whether the "contamination" is a misidentification of possible Sasquatch DNA. so it seemed like a good avenue for research.

 

The gene in question is called NOTCH2NL. The NOTCH2NL gene is called that because, as a defect, it produces a notch in the wing of a fruit fly. But the NOTCH2NL gene was also present in the common ancestor of Humans, Chimpanzees, and Gorillas before the split occurred between the three species. Just before, or at the time of the split, The NOTCH2NL gene duplicated itself but the duplicated version was defective. The NOTCH2 gene and its defective duplicate has stayed with Chimpanzees and Gorillas ever since. After the split, though, the gene created another duplicate which replaced/repaired the defective duplicate gene and became part of the Human genome. The original defective/unrepaired Notch2NL duplicated gene is still in the Chimpanzee and Gorilla genomes.

 

This is important to know this because the NOTCH2NL gene and it's repaired duplicates (of which there are now three) is believed to be responsible for the larger brains in Humans. But also in Humans, if the gene creates a defective version is shows up as a brain defect. For Humans there are now four versions of the gene: NOTCH2NL, NOTCH2NLA, NOTCH2NLB, and NOTCH2NLC. NOTCH2NLC doesn't really do anything but the others do and more importantly, those three genes are unique to Humans. This may not be exciting for you but it is for me. WHY? Because, if an e-DNA sample is considered contaminated by a HUMAN, but it doesn't have a NOTCH2NLA, B, or C gene? Then the DNA is NOT from a Human. It's from another primate.

 

Now granted, we supposedly don't have Sasquatch DNA that we are aware of, to compare this idea to, but, regardless, ALL Human DNA should have those four Notch2NL gene variations. For me, it's another avenue of pursuit that gets me closer to the North American primate question. I've been searching for some definite identifying factor for Sasquatch. At this point I think it's just as valuable to have a unique identifying factor for Humans. As a process of elimination it could turn out to be critical because as a design for an e-DNA protocol, having a known unique gene as a control proxy for unknown species discovery, it could be right down science's alley.    

Edited February 1, 2020 by hiflier

[wiiawiwb]

Is gathering evidence to be submitted for eDNA analysis something we can do in the field, what is the cost, and where do we submit the sample for testing?

[NatFoot]

Nice research @hiflier!

[hiflier]

4 hours ago, wiiawiwb said:

Is gathering evidence to be submitted for eDNA analysis something we can do in the field, what is the cost, and where do we submit the sample for testing?

 

It could be. Some states, like California, offer training to "citizen scientists" for free to get them up to speed on the process of collecting uncontaminated samples. Then the university or agency will supply the kits for testing. The person in the field then documents the location they went to, records the GPS coordinates and other data, takes the samples, and sends the samples back to the lab. All at no cost. If you tell me which state you are in I will take a peek and see if such a program is in place  

 

One only has to do the training in the proper procedure once. After that your on record and I'm pretty sure sample kits will then be sent to you instead of having to pick them up which could be a hardship depending on where one lives.

Edited February 1, 2020 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Before I leave this thread to its own, I will put into a nutshell what I've learned and have been talking about:

 

1) The NOTCH2NL gene is not present in any other mammal outside of Humans, Chimpanzees, or Gorillas.

2) It is not present in Orangutans because Orangutans split off BEFORE the gene appeared in the common ancestor.

3) Before the Human and Chimp/Gorilla split, the gene created a defective duplicate of itself.

4) Chimps and Gorillas kept those two NOTCH2NL genes, which includes the defective one, but neither gene does anything. They're  called pseudogenes.

5) Humans had the same two genes after the split, however, another duplication occurred which REPAIRED the duplicate defective gene. So Humans now had two good genes.

6) Two more variations were created after that which gave Denisovans, Neanderthals, and other Homo species, including modern Humans, FOUR variations.

7) The four variations have been responsible for the larger size/growth of the Human brain as well as increasing cognitive abilities.

 

So, ONLY Human contamination in e-DNA field samples would have all four NOTCH2NL gene variations. It those variations are not present the only alternative for suspect Human contamination would be the two-gene NOTCH2NL which is ONLY in Chimps and Gorillas. My contention is that even with the advanced primate, bipedal,  body of a Sasquatch, it only has the brain function of a Great Ape. So its DNA should present the two-gene NOTCH2NL: One gene and its duplicate, defective gene, neither of which do anything.

 

And that is about the best way I can give the short explanation for why I think it is so important to pursue a Human-contaminated e-DNA sample result further. Instead, scientists should look at the NOTCH2NL gene first and not just simply toss the sample out. In light of all this there would be one more point to make for you conspiracy theorists, but it'll be more fun if YOU bring it up  

Edited February 2, 2020 by hiflier

[Airdale]

Great research hiflier! Every new tool is a plus, and the education you provide is a bonus.

 

That said, I'm very conflicted on the "ape brain" subject. While they don't seem to display intelligence akin to us, it still represents a high order of reasoning on many levels. Whatever played pat-a-cake on my and a neighbor's house in the summer of 2009 put thought into the process. Our neighbor was up late watching TV in the living room and could be seen through at least two windows, and the blows were on the outside wall directly behind his chair. My wife and I were asleep with the only open window in the bedroom, the bottom of which is rougly eight feet above the outside grade, directly above our headboard. This required scouting around the darkened house until finding the sounds of two sleeping humans coming through a small window, then striking the wall repeatedly hard enough to shake a picture on the inside until hearing someone wake up, before running off on two feet downhill in the dark towards the ravine and creek marking our property line.

 

Whatever approached our campsite at 6,300' above a lake in the Northern Bitterroot Mountains a half mile from the Idaho border in 1985 or '86 managed to get within 20 feet of me on a quiet evening (I have exceptionally sensitive hearing) while I waited up past midnight to photograph the full moon as it rose above the shoulder of Mink Peak. It proceeded to shake brush to a height well over my head, stomp hard enough to feel through the soles of my boots and grunt/growl. It continued to repeat this after I had drawn my Ruger Security Six .357 and four cell Maglight and backed up to the back door of my '68 Suburban and, keeping my revolver covering the threat, set the Maglight on the floor facing out and reached into the cabinet behind me to retrieve my Mini-14 with 20 round mag. With the rifle in my left hand I quickly holstered the revolver and chambered a round which woke up my buddy in his van who also has a Mini-14. He asked "What's going on out there?", to which I replied "We have a visitor.".  The visitor promptly repeated his performance as I stepped clear of the side door with the rifle shouldered while backlit by the Maglight. That was the end of the show, there was no further sound, not so much as a branch rustleing (the ground cover behind the bushes which bordered the treeline was thick, juniper I believe, and continued for many yards into the trees). It didn't stop the racket until I clearly had a rifle pointed at it. The revolver may not have been obvious as I drew it and the Maglight simultaneously while turning towards the threat and presented in a wrist cross hold, the Maglight parallel to the handgun barrel. While not as bright as modern LED tac lights, I had installed a krypton bulb which was state-of-the-art in those days and with four fresh Energizer alkalines it was pretty dazzling to the eyes. No one, including a Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks field biologist (who told me it was a bear) has offered an explanation/identification that makes sense to me. Whatever it was, besides being incredibly stealthy, knew how to use concealment, recognized a dangerous weapon bearing on it and also knew the difference between concealment and cover. (Full disclosure, I may have said the rifle had a 30 round mag when relating this account earlier as that is what I commonly use now, but at that time my mags were all 20 round.)

 

For anyone interested, here are Google Earth views of the camp site. The first is looking generally Southwest with the Idaho border along the ridgeline with the light blue line above and behind the camp. The second is a view of the approach to the campsite from the direction our nighttime visitor came.

 

 

[hiflier]

Thank you for the kind words, Airdale. I'm only doing what others here do, which is bring in whatever it is they have learned. We should all have the same knowledge eventually so that all of our dialogues move the subject forward.

 

1 hour ago, Airdale said:

....That said, I'm very conflicted on the "ape brain" subject. While they don't seem to display intelligence akin to us, it still represents a high order of reasoning on many levels.

 

Given the same environments and circumstances, I truly believe that Chimps and Gorillas are fully capable of the same kind of high order of intelligent action as our BF's. Chimps and Apes are incredibly smart. If they lived here in the same situations as the Bigfoots, saw our hunters, and saw our residences then I have no doubt their actions may be similar. They can be stealthy in their own jungle habitats but in zoos we see them slap things, shake things, howl, and move quickly without much noise. The Bigfoot has no fire and can't manufacture anything above the most primitive of tools. And its brains genetics will not allow it to, such that it may NEVER progress.

 

As a speculative thought, I think that it either branched off along with the Orangutans and has no NOTCH gene, or split along with the Chimps and Gorillas and has the double NOTCH gene with one being a defective copy. But it definitely cannot have the four versions of the NOTCH gene that Humans have. For if it did? Then it would have been on the Moon before us. Why? Because as a species something that physically powerful and possessing a larger Human brain would have wiped out Homo Sapiens sapiens tens of thousands of years ago. Not only that, they probably would have wiped out the Denisovans and Neanderthals as well. None of our species would have been a match for such a powerful species that had our larger brain. They would be a true Homo species without peer, and the rest of the Homo species would have been toast. Think Planet of the Apes on steroids.

[Airdale]

I certainly don't think their brain is on par with ours, but possibly along with it's bipedal gait and evident omnivorous diet (and I know chimps are at least somewhat omniverous) there are other differences. While some believe the population is quite limited, I'm not so sure; they seem to have mastered living everywhere from seeming desert waste through mountain wilderness and withing the fringes (at least) of human habitation. Just between your State of Maine and mine of Montana there are vast areas seldom trod by human feet for such a creature to live well. Possibly some gene for a different type of intelligence developed independently in Sasquatch, as bipedelism seems to have done. Always more questions than answers my friend!

[hiflier]

16 minutes ago, Airdale said:

Possibly some gene for a different type of intelligence developed independently in Sasquatch

 

I wouldn't put it past nature to do such a thing  

 

18 minutes ago, Airdale said:

Always more questions than answers my friend!

 

Got that right, Airdale. And I think that would hold true even after discovery answers the questions that we currently ask.

[hiflier]

10 hours ago, Airdale said:

Possibly some gene for a different type of intelligence developed independently in Sasquatch,

 

I was thinking some more about this, Airdale. If Sasquatch DNA isn't already stored somewhere then no one would know what that gene (or genes) might be. But, more to the point, it would be almost guaranteed that it wouldn't be the same as the four NOTCH2NL gene variations seen in Humans. It means that anything other than the Human four-gene variation set up would still indicate a novel primate outside of Humans.

 

The key to the whole thing lies in the fact that we have these four variations of functioning NOTCH2NLgenes. And since Chimps and Gorillas are the ONLY OTHER mammal that has them, and only two of them at that, then ANY configuration, outside of our four-variation Human one, would be proof positive of a Sasquatch. Especially if it was found in a DNA sample North America.

 

I need to remind everyone how new all of this is. The papers came out only a year and a half ago (May 2018). Which means that neither Ketchum (2012) nor Sykes (2014) had this knowledge. It makes me want to go back and look deeper into any "Human contamination" in their results.   

Edited February 3, 2020 by hiflier

[Airdale]

@hiflier

Your tenacity is admirable and infectious sir, food for thought! 

Edited February 4, 2020 by Airdale
Error correction

[hiflier]

Thank you, Airdale. One thing I know, and that is that knowledge is a good thing, but if scientists aren't available, then all the knowledge in the world won't Solve for Bigfoot. That has take somebody actually doing the sampling. Or at least let us know if any of this is at all workable in the field. If it is then there may be a good chance to at least begin to monitor certain environments for such creatures. I'm really hoping chances are good for that because e-DNA can cover an awful lot of territory, especially in steeper more remote watersheds where access to creeks and streams is much easier that climbing around in dense vegetation on 40 degree slopes.

 

Couple the search with known activity and we may have opportunities for discovery that we've never had before and in areas where we've never been. I'm still a few months away from anything definitive from a scientist but who knows. That dead one in the Spring may not be so elusive as it will keep shedding DNA into creeks or streams every time it rains, or as long as the snows melt, until it's down to just bones. I'm banking on the potential of this approach and sure hope it's not all for nothing. Gotta good feeling about it though as long as the approach is valid. Something I hope to find out by the end of this month or next.

 

Um....before April Fool's Day would be good  

Edited February 4, 2020 by hiflier