Thursday, March 28, 2013

This Just In! Neanderthal Human Love Child Found

Hybrid with a Neanderthal mother and Human father may have been found
"The researchers found that, although the hybridization between the two hominid species likely took place, the Neanderthals continued to uphold their own cultural traditions." --Jennifer Viegas, Discover News


We were just talking about hybrids yesterday. It's like Bigfoot Lunch Club is not only on the cutting edge of Bigfoot news, but on the cutting edge of science news too! (Intellectually we know it is coincidence, but let us have this--please.)

In an article that seems to have all the anthropologist buzzing, we may have found the first official Neanderthal/Human hybrid, with DNA to back it up. Or as we crassly put it, the Neanderthal/Human lovechild...Read the article below.

The skeletal remains of an individual living in northern Italy 40,000-30,000 years ago are believed to be that of a human/Neanderthal hybrid, according to a paper in PLoS ONE.

If further analysis proves the theory correct, the remains belonged to the first known such hybrid, providing direct evidence that humans and Neanderthals interbred. Prior genetic research determined the DNA of people with European and Asian ancestry is 1 to 4 percent Neanderthal.

The present study focuses on the individual’s jaw, which was unearthed at a rock-shelter called Riparo di Mezzena in the Monti Lessini region of Italy. Both Neanderthals and modern humans inhabited Europe at the time.

“From the morphology of the lower jaw, the face of the Mezzena individual would have looked somehow intermediate between classic Neanderthals, who had a rather receding lower jaw (no chin), and the modern humans, who present a projecting lower jaw with a strongly developed chin,” co-author Silvana Condemi, an anthropologist, told Discovery News.

Condemi is the CNRS research director at the University of Ai-Marseille. She and her colleagues studied the remains via DNA analysis and 3-D imaging. They then compared those results with the same features from Homo sapiens.

The genetic analysis shows that the individual’s mitochondrial DNA is Neanderthal. Since this DNA is transmitted from a mother to her child, the researchers conclude that it was a “female Neanderthal who mated with male Homo sapiens.”

By the time modern humans arrived in the area, the Neanderthals had already established their own culture, Mousterian, which lasted some 200,000 years. Numerous flint tools, such as axes and spear points, have been associated with the Mousterian. The artifacts are typically found in rock shelters, such as the Riparo di Mezzena, and caves throughout Europe.

The researchers found that, although the hybridization between the two hominid species likely took place, the Neanderthals continued to uphold their own cultural traditions.

That's an intriguing clue, because it suggests that the two populations did not simply meet, mate and merge into a single group.

You can read the rest at science.nbcnews.com

12 comments:

  1. "Lovechild" somehow just doesn't seem to be the appropriate noun here Guy . . . Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the comment Anon. You are correct "Love Child" is quite an assumption. Who knows if the hybrid was born out of wedlock?

      In our partial defense "Love Child" was lifted from the headline of the article we referenced. We try to keep up with trends, hybrid was so yesterday--literally yesterday, March 27th, we used hybrid instead.

      Whenever we get a comment or a concern at BLC we fire somebody. Anon, you will be happy to know, we have let go our Headline Editor. Gone.

      Delete
    2. Sackings? For a hasty malapropos? You are the envy of editors everywhere Guy. In the meanwhiles . . . how are those depth impressions of the London trackway coming . . ? Cheers!

      Delete
    3. Anon, are you still not satisfied? Your really holding our feet to the fire! Very well, our Comment Reply Strategist will find a pink slip on her desk first thing in the morning. She was a single mother, I hope your happy.

      Two more things: One, I can't wait to use malapropos in a sentence myself. Two, Cliff Barackman is doing some interesting stuff on the London trackway and has some great info on the prints he casted. Check it out. http://cliffbarackman.com/the-london-trackway-2/london-trackway-index/

      Delete
    4. A single mum? Not yours I hope . . . You are making me walk all the way to Clifford's for what, with but the barest application of small motor control, you could easily hoist on your otherwise admirable site?!? A cruel thrust Guy. Cheers!

      Delete
  2. Allow me to preface this comment by saying I am extremely satisfied with this article; I have questions but they are in the spirit of Inquiry, not the Inquisition, so please don't fire anybody.

    My question is this: if all peoples of Asian and European descent have some percentage of Neanderthal DNA, aren't all those people hybrids? Isn't that sort of conclusive proof that there was interbreeding? Why are they saying, even after this discovery of a "half n' half"(so to speak) only that interbreeding "likely took place" as though the question is still up in the air? Isn't this sort of a Q.E.D., or am I missing something?

    Okay, so it was four questions, not just one. But still don't fire anyone! Please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dr. Lloyd, we were thinking along the same lines. Since Svante Pääbo has sequenced the Neanderthal's DNA, there has been many independent studies that have supported the interbreeding of Neanderthals/Humans.

      We have even covered this ourselves back in 2010. http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2010/05/different-species-identical-dna.html.

      I am not sure what evidence could make it more conclusive, but if it makes any difference to you Dr, we feel the same way. It is what Svante Pääbo has been saying for years.

      Delete
    2. Though I am not exactly an advocate of "Consensus = Science", it does make a difference, thank you. And I shouldn't dare to question someone with double umlauts in his surname.

      Thank you for the link, I followed it and read what I found there, which among other things indicated that this is part of an ongoing series of articles on this subject, which led me to read them all(which led to me posting more comments and questions on those other articles, which I'm sure you will have realized by the time you read this).

      I have long been interested in Fortean subjects, but I am somewhat new to the specific subject of Cryptozoology(in fact, my browser spell-checker insists that is not a real word, I am ashamed to admit). Having recently discovered, to my surprise, that the area in which I live is considered somewhat of a prime cryptozoology hotspot, I plan to read up on the subject(and, if other Fortean subjects are any indication, I should end up realizing that I know less than I thought I did; and therein I approach Wisdom.)

      The BLC seems an excellent place to begin.

      Delete
  3. The BBC has read the article and will sack the sacker who sacked the sacker. Anyone else will be taken out and shot. Good day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for posting this! I have heard the DNA piece for quite some time and thought it was an accepted fact well. I would love to hear more on why we are still saying maybe. At least we know bigfoot evidence isn't alone in it's general treatment by the majority.

    Since I am new here, I am certain you will forgive me the ignorance revealed in this question: is there an actual lunch style gathering or is this strictly an online resource? I feel lucky to live in Portland for many reasons, perhaps I'm missing out on getting to sit around talking bigfoot with people who are actually interested and knowledgeable.

    Since I just finished Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (DVD and the book). I thought I'd throw my other DNA question up here too. (Rather than fire someone, can you hire back the single mom?) So in the DVD, the hairs from the skookum cast came back too human like to likely point to contamination. I heard him say he was going for nuclear DNA targets, where the Ketchum study identified human from the mitochondrial DNA and the nuDNA was novel is single strand elements rather than the double helix. This is a difference of maternal and paternal lineage and even if there was no contamination in either attempt, the findings do not support each other. My understanding of hair based on the OJ Simpson trial is that hair offers mitochondrial DNA, and that nuDNA is harder to extract and sequence in general. The medulla of hair does have protien, but sasquatch hair samples have little to no medulla. So why did that guy even try for nuDNA? Did that not destroy the sample so he cannot go back and try for mDNA? Do we have people on this site who can answer these questions? Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Outstanding article Guy! I don't have any questions. And if the single mom has other employment as of now,I would gladly volunteer my time,for the super low price of talking about BF for a couple hours a day,,unless it requires typing,witch I'm non proficient. As in it took 37 minutes to type this. Lol
    Thanks Guy! Keep up the awesome articles!!

    ReplyDelete

Let's keep the language and material clean, keep in mind we have younger fans that get their Bigfoot News here too. If your comment is directed specifically to our editor, Guy Edwards, he will personally take time out of his day and ask one of us interns to reply to you in his name.

Please read our terms of use policy.