
Mum’s a Neanderthal, Dad’s a Denisovan: discovery of an ancient-human hybrid - amasad
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06004-0
======
ilove_banh_mi
This happened a mere 5,000 generations ago... (before the separate admixture
with European and Melanasian Homo Sapiens).

Were the Denisovans as different from Neanderthals as Sapiens were from either
branch? †

Reading the branch/tree diagram it looks like only Europeans mixed it up with
the Neanderthals, after splitting from Asians, and only Asians with the
Denisovans, also after the split. Meanwhile Africans never encountered or
mixed with either of those ancient hominid branches. Our ancestor branches and
genome are so varied and rich!

† "Denisovans and Neanderthals split from Homo sapiens around 744,000 years
ago and diverged from each other 300 generations after that."

~~~
danieltillett
That is not quite right - Asians actually have more Neanderthal genes than
Europeans. The current best hypothesis is that there have been multiple
Neanderthal/SSA hybridization events and that some occurred post the split
between Europeans and East Asians (the first occurred in the near East and
later events occurred in East Asia).

------
dustfinger
Wonderful, now someone lucky can update the Wikipedia [1] entry for Denisova
Hominin :-)

[1]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisova_hominin](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisova_hominin)

------
EGreg
How would they know they are different species? They don't have their DNA. The
Denisovans are just a different form and we don't find them outside one cave.
And now they claim that different species can interbreed? Who determines all
this?

~~~
Symmetry
Whether Denisivans and Neanderthals are different species is mostly just a
matter of semantics. We have had a pretty good look at the DNA of each and
it's clear that the two were evolving in isolation for hundreds of thousands
of years resulting in genetically distinct populations. The difference between
Denisovans and Neanderthals is about half the difference between humans and
either.

It's not at all unusual for two different species to be able to interbreed.
Lions and tigers for instance or horses and donkeys. Mules, the offspring of
horses and donkeys are sterile, though, so the two populations can't mix.
Ligoers, the offspring of a male lion and female tigers, aren't entirely
sterile but have very low fertility. With humans and neanderthals there are
portions of the Neanderthal genome related to reproduction that were very
heavily selected against in a way which seems to indicate that male hybrids at
least had moderate fertility problems until those genes were removed. So it's
not black and white at all. We have zero evidence for any reduction in
fertility between Neanderthals and Denisovans since we have very few examples
of hybrid offspring and this sort of analysis needs lots of data - so who
knows.

~~~
EGreg
That’s my point. We don’t know the amount of gene transfer between the two
groups at different times. Calling something two different species usually
implies some sort of allopatric speciation leading to almost zero gene
sharing. Can you name a single proven example of something like this happening
in the last few thousand years?

~~~
danieltillett
Happens all the time in biology - let me introduce you to the Coywolf [0].

0\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf)

------
rgrieselhuber
Those beer goggles must have been next level.

~~~
21
[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GreenSkinnedSpac...](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GreenSkinnedSpaceBabe)

------
obelos
It's a historical storyboard for a “Quest for Fire 2”, sequel to one of the
greatest romance films ever!

~~~
WalterSear
It will never work. He's a man of the world, and her family are a bunch of
cave dwellers.

------
koosnel
Interesting how main stream science obsesses over Neanderthals but ignore
Boskopoids. I suppose it does not fit in with the narrative being projected on
humanity. Also worth mentioning Adam's calendar which was discovered in 2003
in South Africa and predates Stonehenge by 10s of thousands of years.

~~~
saiya-jin
> Adam's calendar which was discovered in 2003 in South Africa and predates
> Stonehenge by 10s of thousands of years.

Wikipedia wildly disagrees with you [1], it's few hundred years old

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaauboschkraal_stone_ruins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaauboschkraal_stone_ruins)

~~~
koosnel
In academia we do not even consider the opinion of people who cite wikipedia
as a basis for their argument.

~~~
DiabloD3
Too lazy to click through to get the cite?

~~~
koosnel
No I have just found so many discrepancies on wiki through the years that I do
not consider it a valid cite and many academics agree. Are you perhaps to lazy
for more in depth research than picking the first hit on Google and forming
your opinion based on that one source of information?

~~~
seszett
You are the one making extraordinary claims and complaining how "mainstream
science" ignores them.

The burden of showing credible evidence clearly falls to you, and you have yet
to show anything at all. I think you should already consider yourself lucky
that some people have even deigned engage with you despite your tone and your
general conspiracy theorist attitude.

~~~
koosnel
I do not consider myself lucky to be engaged by people who do "quick Google"
searches or cite Wikipedia as sources to base their arguments on.

~~~
saiya-jin
Hmm, if you are so high and above most of us, why not contribute to the
mankind and actually improve that wiki page with some cold hard facts in
academic fashion? If you actually know them of course

~~~
sctb
All: please resist the temptation to engage in this intellectually dreadful
floundering.

