WI surviving pockets of Neanderthals?

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
Similar does not mean the same. Nor does it refute my point.

Also, I don't think we have recovered a FOX2P gene from the Neanderthals. You are making an assumption about what the Neanderthal gene looks like. You might be correct, you might not.


From the paper:

Of the two FOXP2 substitutions in exon 7, position 911 was retrieved four times from the first individual and twice from the second. In all cases, the recovered allele was the derived allele seen in modern humans. Position 977 was retrieved once from the first individual and twice from the second individual. Again, in all cases the alleles were the derived variant that is fixed in modern humans....

Thus, not only was the derived form of the FOXP2 protein present in Neandertals, but it is also linked to the haplotype that is common among modern humansn and appears to have been subject to a selective sweep.

(edit) And then the absolute killer conclusion:

the current results show that the Neandertals carried a FOXP2 protein that was identical to that of present-day humans in the only two positions that differ between human and chimpanzee. Leaving out the unlikely scenario of gene flow, this establishes that these changes were present in the common ancestor of modern humans and Neandertals. The date of the emergence of these genetic changes therefore must be older than that estimated with only extant human diversity data, thus demonstrating the utility of direct evidence from Neandertal DNA sequences for understanding recent modern human evolution. Whatever function the two amino acid substitutions might have for human language ability, it was present not only in modern humans but also in late Neandertals

I'm resting my case on that.
 
Last edited:

BlondieBC

Banned
I've linked three papers talking about it. They actually state it is the same.

The first link does not provide evidence that the Neanderthal FOXP2 was as good a gene as ours, so it does not refute what I say.

Writing in the journal, Nature, the researchers describe how they compared complete and partial Neanderthal genomes with those from modern Africans who do not carry Neanderthal DNA. They found no trace of modern human DNA in Neanderthals from Spain or Croatia, but the Altai Neanderthal had strands of DNA that closely matched those of the modern Africans. One strand of modern human DNA found in the Altai Neanderthal involved a gene called FOXP2 which has been linked to language development, but Castellano said it was too early to say whether Neanderthals benefited from the DNA.

Another of the Articles says we had more interbreeding, but does not go to fitness of these genes.

I don't see the third link. Again, if the FOXP2 gene in Neanderthals is not the reason for the missing DNA segment, what is your explanation. What I am suggesting is not proven, but it is the best available explanation with the available information.
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
The first link does not provide evidence that the Neanderthal FOXP2 was as good a gene as ours, so it does not refute what I say.



Another of the Articles says we had more interbreeding, but does not go to fitness of these genes.

I don't see the third link. Again, if the FOXP2 gene in Neanderthals is not the reason for the missing DNA segment, what is your explanation. What I am suggesting is not proven, but it is the best available explanation with the available information.

No, it says it was the identical gene and whatever effects it has in humans, it had in Neanderthals. You have not provided any evidence for "a missing DNA segment" nor have you said what this phrase means to you.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
No, it says it was the identical gene and whatever effects it has in humans, it had in Neanderthals. You have not provided any evidence for "a missing DNA segment" nor have you said what this phrase means to you.

Quote the text. I quote the only section of text mentioning the FOXP2. I quote the entire paragraph. It simply is silent on what you claim the article says.
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
Quote the text. I quote the only section of text mentioning the FOXP2. I quote the entire paragraph. It simply is silent on what you claim the article says.

You have quoted nothing. Once again, this is the text I am quoting.

Of the two FOXP2 substitutions in exon 7, position 911 was retrieved four times from the first individual and twice from the second. In all cases, the recovered allele was the derived allele seen in modern humans. Position 977 was retrieved once from the first individual and twice from the second individual. Again, in all cases the alleles were the derived variant that is fixed in modern humans....

Thus, not only was the derived form of the FOXP2 protein present in Neandertals, but it is also linked to the haplotype that is common among modern humansn and appears to have been subject to a selective sweep...


the current results show that the Neandertals carried a FOXP2 protein that was identical to that of present-day humans in the only two positions that differ between human and chimpanzee. Leaving out the unlikely scenario of gene flow, this establishes that these changes were present in the common ancestor of modern humans and Neandertals. The date of the emergence of these genetic changes therefore must be older than that estimated with only extant human diversity data, thus demonstrating the utility of direct evidence from Neandertal DNA sequences for understanding recent modern human evolution.Whatever function the two amino acid substitutions might have for human language ability, it was present not only in modern humans but also in late Neandertals
 
i think we're getting too hung up on the genetics of Neanderthals vs. Anatomically Modern Humans. the subject is ASB anyway, we should be discussing what happens if Neanderthals survive and persist in certain select parts of the world until at least a few centuries ago and what their effects have on OTL cultures and what their own cultures look like, not whether someone quoted some particular article or not.
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
i think we're getting too hung up on the genetics of Neanderthals vs. Anatomically Modern Humans. the subject is ASB anyway, we should be discussing what happens if Neanderthals survive and persist in certain select parts of the world until at least a few centuries ago and what their effects have on OTL cultures and what their own cultures look like, not whether someone quoted some particular article or not.

I agree that there has been a substantial derail, but I'd say that the question of language is vital in neanderthal survival scenarios. All the evidence points to them being able to, but they may (10% chance?) not have been capable of doing so with the same complexity as humans. They would have had distinctive timbres of voice for anatomical reasons, probably deeper voices and they may have had problems with some consonants due to different mouth shapes. It is likely, given what we know of humanity, that this would be perceived by humans as symptomatic of lower intelligence when combined with lower technological achievement, whether it was or not.

Are we happy with this as a picture of our ATL neanderthal survivors?
 
Top