Skip to comments.The Earliest Group Of Modern Humans To Branch Off Survived Until Just 2,300 Years Ago
Posted on 10/03/2014 8:26:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Oxford Journals, Genome Biology and Evolution
DNA from a 2,300-year-old skeleton suggests that the earliest known group of modern humans to branch off from the wider genetic population survived until astonishingly recently. The finding supports the case that southern, rather than eastern, Africa is humanity's ancestral home.
Mitochondrial DNA, passed on only from the mother, demonstrates that all humanity is descended from a single ancestor around 200,000 years ago. Archaeological evidence points to the Omo Valley, where fossil evidence suggests that Homo sapiens roamed Africa 195,000 years ago.
However, over the intervening time a number of populations who also descended from “Mitochondrial Eve” became genetically separated from the rest of humanity. Human genetic diversity in Africa is far greater than elsewhere and is particularly high among the indigenous people of the Kalahari and its surrounding areas, leading to the theory that it is from this region that the great modern human migration began.
The theory also predicts that south-western Africa is the most likely place to find evidence of now extinct groups of people that separated genetically from the wider human family tree, particularly those whose separation occurred quite early.
So when a 2,300-year-old skeleton was found at St. Helena Bay, Professor Andrew Smith of the University of Cape Town was keen to explore the individual's genetics. Smith enlisted Professor Vanessa Hayes of the Garvan Institute, who succeeded in extracting DNA from a tooth and rib.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Does this mean we are all African Americans?? going to get my EBT yeah!
No, there is one left....and he has about as much use as the skeleton in the pic....
I wish they would at least tell us the haplogroup from the DNA tests.
RE: Already debunked.
Could you please cite a few sources? Thanks.
“Could you please cite a few sources? Thanks.”
Ditto. I’ve always been fascinated by this claim and wondered if there was any counter-evidence.
The ancient mtDNA represents a new L0d2c lineage (L0d2c1c) that is today, unlike its Khoe-language based sister-clades (L0d2c1a and L0d2c1b) most closely related to contemporary indigenous San-speakers (specifically Ju).
They are just trying to normalize cohabitation without marriage.
We’re to dumb for them to mention the DNA haplogroup, I guess.
I’m a hillbilly.
Well, the article is in Business Insider. The author may not know what a haplogroup is.
Well...that is my normal complaint with these articles referencing DNA.
After I posted, it occurred that it's one never seen before so...I could just call it haplogroup 'Z' and still not know where to place it in the scheme of things.
It’s the normal complaint with BI articles in general. They’re click-bait.
No other early Homo site in the world has yielded such a bounty of bones,
This sounds like an ad for a perverse porno site
11 posted on 11/3/2003, 7:37:44 AM by John O (God Save America (Please))
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.