Chimps Now to be Considered Humans

National Geographic ^ | 5/19/2003 | kkindt

[kkindt]

A new report argues that chimpanzees are so closely related to humans that they should be included in our branch of the tree of life. Chimpanzees and other apes have historically been separated from humans in classification schemes, with humans deemed the only living members of the hominid family of species

[Ichneumon]

Chimps using vacuums and microwaves is not the point. How many of these appliances did they invent? (Al Gore excluded).

How many have you invented?

By your criterion, most humans don't "count" either.

[Ichneumon]

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes ---chimps and gorillas have 24 pairs. How many pairs of chromosomes did the "common ancestor" have? Was it 23 or 24 pairs? How do you "evolve" missing or added chromosomes ---that would happen all at one time.

The common ancestor had 24 chromosomes.

If you look at the gene sequences, you'll find that Chromosome 2 in humans is pretty much just 2 shorter chimpanzee chromosomes pasted end-to-end, with perhaps a slight bit of lost overlap:

(H=Human, C=Chimpanzee, G=Gorilla, O=Orangutan)

Somewhere along the line, after humans split off from the other great apes, or during the split itself, there was an accidental fusion of two chromosomes, end-to-end. Where there used to be 24 chromosomes, now there were 23, but containing the same total genes, so other than a "repackaging", the DNA "instructions" remained the same.

If a chimpanzee gives birth to a creature with 23 chromosomes, that offspring isn't going to be a well-formed chimpanzee able to survive well.

It is if the same genes are present, which they would be in the case of a chromosome fusion.

Evolve would imply the genetic material changes little by little --not some big loss of two chromosomes at once but I don't see how they'd go away gene by gene.

Tacking two chromosomes together end-to-end is not a "big loss" of genes, and it really is a "little by little" change in the total genetic code. It's just been "regrouped" a bit. Instead of coming in 24 "packages", it's now contained in 23, but the contents are the same.

So how, you might ask, would the chromosomes from the first 23-chromosome "fused" individual match up with the 24 chromosomes from its mate when it tried to produce offspring? Very well, thanks for asking. The "top half" of the new extra-long Chromosome 2 would adhere to the original chromosome (call it "2p") from which it was formed, and likewise for the "bottom half" which would adhere to the other original shorter chromosome (call it "2q"). In the picture above, imagine the two chimp chromosomes sliding over to "match up" against the human chromosome. The chimp chromosomes would end up butting ends with each other, or slightly overlapping in a "kink", but chromosomes have overcome worse mismatches (just consider the XY pair in every human male -- the X and the Y chromosome are *very* different in shape, length, and structure, but they still pair up).

In fact, the "rubbing ends" of the matched-up chimp chromosomes, adhering to the double-long human-type chromosome, would be more likely to become fused together themselves.

For studies in which recent chromosome fusions have been discovered and found not to cause infertility, see:

Chromosomal heterozygosity and fertility in house mice (Mus musculus domesticus) from Northern Italy. Hauffe HC, Searle JB Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom. hauffe@novanet.it

An observed chromosome fusion: Hereditas 1998;129(2):177-80 A new centric fusion translocation in cattle: rob (13;19). Molteni L, De Giovanni-Macchi A, Succi G, Cremonesi F, Stacchezzini S, Di Meo GP, Iannuzzi L Institute of Animal Husbandry, Faculty of Agricultural Science, Milan, Italy.

J Reprod Fertil 1979 Nov;57(2):363-75 Cytogenetics and reproduction of sheep with multiple centric fusions (Robertsonian translocations). Bruere AN, Ellis PM

J Reprod Fertil Suppl 1975 Oct;(23):356-70 Cytogenetic studies of three equine hybrids. Chandley AC, Short RV, Allen WR.

In that last reference, the Przewalski horse, which has 33 chromosomes, and the domestic horse, with 32 chromosomes (due to a fusion), are able to mate and produce fertile offspring.

Meanwhile, the question may be asked, how do we know that the human Chromosome 2 is actually the result of a chromsome fusion at/since a common ancestor, and not simply a matter of "different design"?

Well, if two chromsomes accidentally merged, there should be molecular remnants of the original chromosomal structures (while a chromosome designed from scratch would have no need for such leftover "train-wreck" pieces).

Ends of chromosomes have characteristic DNA base-pair sequences called "telomeres". And there are indeed remnants of telomeres at the point of presumed fusion on human Chromosome 2 (i.e., where the two ancestral ape chromosomes merged end-to-end). If I may crib from a web page:

Telomeres in humans have been shown to consist of head to tail repeats of the bases 5'TTAGGG running toward the end of the chromosome. Furthermore, there is a characteristic pattern of the base pairs in what is called the pre-telomeric region, the region just before the telomere. When the vicinity of chromosome 2 where the fusion is expected to occur (based on comparison to chimp chromosomes 2p and 2q) is examined, we see first sequences that are characteristic of the pre-telomeric region, then a section of telomeric sequences, and then another section of pre-telomeric sequences. Furthermore, in the telomeric section, it is observed that there is a point where instead of being arranged head to tail, the telomeric repeats suddenly reverse direction - becoming (CCCTAA)3' instead of 5'(TTAGGG), and the second pre-telomeric section is also the reverse of the first telomeric section. This pattern is precisely as predicted by a telomere to telomere fusion of the chimpanzee (ancestor) 2p and 2q chromosomes, and in precisely the expected location. Note that the CCCTAA sequence is the reversed complement of TTAGGG (C pairs with G, and T pairs with A).

Another piece of evidence is that if human Chromosome 2 had formed by chromosome fusion in an ancestor instead of being designed "as is", it should have evidence of 2 centromeres (the "pinched waist" in the picture above -- chromosomes have centromeres to aid in cell division). A "designed" chromosome would need only 1 centromere. An accidentally "merged" chromosome would show evidence of the 2 centromeres from the two chromosomes it merged from (one from each). And indeed, as documented in (Avarello R, Pedicini A, Caiulo A, Zuffardi O, Fraccaro M, Evidence for an ancestral alphoid domain on the long arm of human chromosome 2. Hum Genet 1992 May;89(2):247-9), the functional centromere found on human Chromosome 2 lines up with the centromere of the chimp 2p chromosome, while there are non-functional remnants of the chimp 2q centromere at the expected location on the human chromosome.

As an aside, the next time some creationist claims that there is "no evidence" for common ancestry or evolution, keep in mind that the sort of detailed "detective story" discussed above is repeated literally COUNTLESS times in the ordinary pursuit of scientific research and examination of biological and other types of evidence. Common ancestry and evolution is confirmed in bit and little ways over and over and over again. It's not just something that a couple of whacky anti-religionists dream up out of thin air and promulgate for no reason, as the creationists would have you believe.

[FITZ]

That's very interesting ---thanks. I've always leaned toward the "intelligent design" theory because the example of birds' wings --- I can see how they could evolve wings but until a wing is evolved enough to let the bird get off the ground, the wings would just be an evolving useless appendage. Mutations that did nothing to enhance survival ---hollowing out bones, loss of digits, growth of feathers, everything else needed for flight wouldn't take place at once or fast enough. A lizard losing it's front legs to become wings doesn't really have a survival advantage.

[KoestlersRedFiat]

they tell us that
we lost our tails
evolving up
from little snails
i say it's all
just wind in sails
are we not men?
we are DEVO!
we're pinheads now
we are not whole
we're pinheads all
jocko homo
are we not men?
D-E-V-O
monkey men all
in business suit
teachers and critics
all dance the poot
are we not men?
we are DEVO!
are we not men?
D-E-V-O
god made man
but he used the monkey to do it
apes in the plan
we're all here to prove it
i can walk like an ape
talk like an ape
do what a monkey do
god made man
but a monkey supplied the glue
we must repeat
o.k. let's go!

[Kenny Bunk]

Wait a minute, here. My scientific mind has just clicked in.
If watermelons AND cats share 90% of our DNA, does this mean that government scientists could cross cats with watermelons?

Think of that! A fruity snack that treats you badly at the 4th of July picnic! It could change the world as we know it. But, my scientific colleagues, you have avoided my question about inviting the chimp to that 4th of July Picnic.

I maintain that if the chimp is a properly registered Democrat (and with Motor Voter there isn't a damn thing to prevent that), then he/she should be invited. But no long speeches.

[Junior]

I can see how they could evolve wings but until a wing is evolved enough to let the bird get off the ground, the wings would just be an evolving useless appendage. Mutations that did nothing to enhance survival ---hollowing out bones, loss of digits, growth of feathers, everything else needed for flight wouldn't take place at once or fast enough. A lizard losing it's front legs to become wings doesn't really have a survival advantage.

Well, feathers evidently came first -- and were used as insulation by warm-blooded or semi warm-blooded dinosaurs. There is strong evidence that even semi-formed wings enabled the bearer to escape predation by helping it climb trees (juvenile birds of some species still use this method).

[Publius6961]

I suppose they will vote Democratic party line.

I thought they already did.

[Fintan]

[plusone]

'How many vacuums have you invented?' Well, none actually. But I am under contract to AlGore to invent a Time Machine. He intends to use it to go back in time to the 2000 Presidential Race and give himself better advice. (I predict that he still loses!)

[Aric2000]

You sure do talk a lot, it's too bad you're full of Sh$t...

[Aric2000]

No sir, I did not put the cart before the horse, you made a silly statement, and I asked you to back it up.

When a creationist says, in no uncertain terms, that evolution is false, and creationism or whatever ism is correct, well, it is on them to supply the proof.

THe only proof that will back them up, would be, SCIENTIFICALLY verifiable evidence that A: disproves evolution, or B: gives a new theory that would compete or replace evolution.

Evolution is science, therefore science is what needs to replace it.

If you are going to spout off how evolution is false, then it is ON YOU, to prove that to be the case.

YOU made the statement, YOU back it up.

You can't, which tells me that you are either A: Clueless about what evolution actually is, or B: a diehard creationist who repeats what other creationists tell you, and really are quite clueless about why they say what they say.

So basically I am saying to you, the way to replace or hurt a scientific theory, is with scientific evidence that refutes it, or come up with a a better theory that better explains the scientific evidence.

So, where is your proof that evolution is false?

You made the statement, now back it up.

[fat city]

LOL Thanks for the Jocko Homo. Still have my original 45. Looks like I'd better dig it out for research.

[kkindt]

Feathers are so complex at the macro level that each element of their complexity - most of it irreducible complexity - could not have 'evloved' at every stage - there has to be a designer who put these together - it is absolutely ridiculous to want to believe in evolution when the facts are so so obvious that these complex microscopic elements of machinery that make up feathers, blood clotting, etc, etc, could never have popped into being with no designer to make it happen. Romans 1:21

[laredo44]

I suppose they will vote Democratic party line.

Not only vote it, they're destined to become its leaders.

[kkindt]

THe article doesn't state that chimps are to be considered 'human' but it is throughout the whole article arguing that they are - "chimps belong on human branch of family tree" - WHAT family are they talking about? THere is a human branch they suppose and chimps are on that branch so they are human - and don't tell me this research is not designed to argue the case that they are human and should have human rights! Read about the attorneys working with gorillas that are trying to get into court to argue their rights. This research is designed to support that litigation.

http://www.cefr.org/cefr_learn_more.htm

Right now they are saying "non-human" animals have rights - by arguing that some animals are on our family tree and so should have 'human' rights - its so so obvious this is where they are going.

I predict the day is coming when we will have to make special accomodations on our busses for gorillas who will be left to roam the streets and because they might want to board a bus we need to make sure they can do so and humans who are frightened will have to be given special cages in which they can hide from the gorilla because they are prejudiced against the way the gorilla might behave on the bus.

[Aric2000]

Another ID'r, just gotta love it.

So, Mr. ID'r, is ID scientific?

We don't know, so goddidit, is not science, it is intellectual laziness.

ID, what a joke...

[MEGoody]

"Humans and chimps evolved from a common ancestor, splitting about 5 million years ago."

So it is presumed.

[LittleJoe]

Sorry to be gross, but does this change the legal definition of bestiality?

LMAO!!!
Sure it would. Humans and chimps can have children...

[LittleJoe]

Couldn't evolution be the process used by the creator?

[Liberal Classic]

Why has no one posted any 'Planet of the Apes' pix yet?

Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!