Guest Theagenes Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Theagenes, Might it be possible that the mosaic described in the nuDNA would give an estimate back to the hybridization event by evaluating how much recombination is there? Without the data, it might be premature to think that the hybridization event isn't something that has persisted. If it happened 15k ybp it could still happen. That would be disturbing potentially. Maybe, but to be honest I really don't know what her mosaic comment means. Maybe CTfoot has some insight? She may be suggesting that the hybrization is ongoing, because she thinks it would have to be for the mtDNA to be modern human, but I don't think that is the case. As CTfoot said earlier, all you need is an unbroken line of mothers and daughters going back to orginal human mother in the hybridization event. Maybe I'm mistaken, but that's my understanding of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) ^Thanks BfSleuth! Well if Sasquatch is human/hybrid I do not see why this is not possible, so the mtDNA comes only from the motheer and the nDNA can come from both right? In my oversimplification I see the father and mother as different, yes, but similar enough to breed. oh...thanks for the link LAL! Edited December 11, 2012 by VioletX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I haven't listened to her latest interview. In her press release it says, "The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species." This is what is puzzling to me, that Neanderthal mtDNA might be further from human than sasquatch mtDNA, while the nDNA of sasquatch might be further from human than Neanderthal nDNA (if I am reading the tea leaves correctly). Thank you! I've noticed that sometimes when I copy and paste from other web sites the font will be tiny, and I need to edit my post while I can... Suppose that there was a surviving Neanderthal today, who's female Neanderthal ancesters could be traced back in an unbroken line from mother to daughter, all the way back to the original mating of a Neanderthal male and an anatomically modern human female. That surviving Neanderthal would have modern human mtDNA even though it's nDNA would be Neanderthal. Let's say you have a second surviving Neanderthal whose female ancestors was not an unbroken line of females with the human mtDNA. that Neanderthal would have modern human mtDNA. But if you put these two hypothetical Neanderthals next to each other they still both look like Neanderthals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) I guess the part that stretches it for me is having an unbroken line of daughters for 15,000 years and having collected only specimens from that unbroken line of daughters. I'm not sure I'd bet on those odds... Edited December 11, 2012 by BFSleuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 A couple of follow up research possibilities that could strengthen this model: Compare the 3 sequenced BF genomes with genomes of Native American populations particularly from the Pacific NW. Also compare it with Kennewick Man. See if those particular modern human genomes show small percentages of BF DNA the way non-Africans have small amounts of Neanderthal DNA and Melanasians have small amounts of Denisovan DNA. Sequence the BF louse. It should be Type B or a new species or subspecies closely related to type B that diverged genetically 15-10K BP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Does it have to be an unbroken line for 15.000 years to get the Ketchum results? I am out of my league,but I would have thought that only the mating at the origin of the species and for a time after that,how long after I do not know, would account for the IOO%.I should stop now maybe,lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) Theagenes, Might it be possible that the mosaic described in the nuDNA would give an estimate back to the hybridization event by evaluating how much recombination is there? Without the data, it might be premature to think that the hybridization event isn't something that has persisted. If it happened 15k ybp it could still happen. That would be disturbing potentially. If it's true that Rhettman Mullis is working with Bryan Sykes to track down and get DNA from suspected BF hybrids, maybe there's something to the idea they feel this isn't just an ancient pairing. This was reported by Lindsay but Mullis himself said as much back when news of the Sykes study first surfaced. I don't know much about Mullis' credibility. Anyone know? Is he a member? Edited December 11, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) I guess the part that stretches it for me is having an unbroken line of daughters for 15,000 years and having collected only specimens from that unbroken line of daughters. I'm not sure I'd bet on those odds... That was the biggest hurdle for me as well, until it dawned on me that the Bering Strait land bridge could be the answer. it may have created a sort of genetic "bottle neck." If we assume the hybridization event took place in the Old World and only a small group of BFs crossed over to N. America. And within this group or clan, all the females had the human mtDNA, then all of their descendents would too. If they no longer had contact with the BFs that stayed in the Old World and no longer had contact with "regular" non-human-mtDNA BF females, then it might make sense. But I may be completely misunderstanding this, so hopefully CTfoot or GenesRUS will jump in. Edited December 11, 2012 by Theagenes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 If it's true that Rhettman Mullis is working with Bryan Sykes to track down and get DNA from suspected BF hybrids, maybe there's something to the idea they feel this isn't just an ancient pairing. This was reported by Lindsay but Mullis himself said as much back when news of the Sykes study first surfaced. Yes I was wondering how to fit this in with reports that the Sykes study would not corroborate the Ketchum one, seems they would be showing similarities IMO. That was the biggest hurdle for me as well, until it dawned on me that the Bering Strait land bridge could be the answer. it may have created a sort of genetic "bottle neck." If we assume the hybridization event took place in the Old World and only a small group of BFs crossed over to N. America. And within this group or clan, all the females had the human mtDNA, then all of their descendents would too. If they no longer had contact with the BFs that stayed in the Old World and no longer had contact with "regular" non-human-mtDNA BF females, then it might make sense. Good thinking ; ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I've asked this before but wouldn't that mean all twenty mito genomes would likely point to the same mitochondrial "Eve"? I ask because I don't know. I also ask because I'm not sure that's the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) I've asked this before but wouldn't that mean all twenty mito genomes would likely point to the same mitochondrial "Eve"? I ask because I don't know. I also ask because I'm not sure that's the case. Yes. They would trace back to a human female that mated with a male BF-like hominin. And that's why I'm suggesting the hybrization event took place in the old world and that this eve's descendents then crossed over to the new world. They would have been a small inbred group presumably to start with and all the females would have to be direct descendents of "Eve" without a "pure" BF female in their lineage. Edited December 11, 2012 by Theagenes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Yes. They would trace back to a human female that mated with a male BF-like hominin. And that's why I'm suggesting the hybrization event took place in the old world and that this eve's descendents then crossed over to the new world. They would have been a small inbred group presumably to start with and all the females would have to be direct descendents of "Eve" without a "pure" BF female in their lineage. And if all twenty don't point to the same Eve? I don't think Stubstad thought they did. I need to go back and look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Quick question on the lice. Are lice strictly a human/ape parasite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 This is all starting to sound like Clan of the Cave Bear.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobZenor Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 According to the radio interview she says that she has samples from Asia. They aren't in the study but she sounded like the evidence was that they were related. That might explain the Russian involvement and why she was pushing the Asian origin of the hybridization event. You wouldn't need the whole genome to see if it is in that haplogroup so that would be 109 mitochondrial sequences. She didn't specifically say they were all in that haplogroup but it seemed like she implied it. It depends what she meant by consistent. She may have just meant that they were human. Without them being in that haplogroup they are just human so I don't see how they would contribute to the study. Radio show interview AM770 Interviewer: "By the way were the samples consistent?" Melba: "We have a 109 samples in the study and they all gave us the human mito component." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts