Denisovan Homid DNA..., something is very weird here. Options

[austronesian0sai...]

So the list of Denisovan SNPS were released to the public, and a list posted on 23andme. Out of 160 some-odd snps, A japanese guy responded that he tested homozygous in SNPS listed below.

This is not the full list of SNPS. I don't have time to test the full list, but I tested a handful Denisovan SNPS on the full list, and it seems i was homozygous in every single one.

+ The SNP list contains annotations made by the Japanese respondent

dbSNP rsID Chr Position Ancestral Vindija Denisova AFR CEU ASN
rs17501775 1 223793205 C 2_C,1_G 0/46 4/44 2/46 *GG
rs3947140 1 223800984 T 2_G 5_A 46/0 44/4 46/2 *AA
rs11728468 4 171224613 C 1_C 1_T 0/46 5/43 0/48 *TT
rs16898339 5 29015420 A 1_A 2_G 0/46 0/48 3/45 *GG
rs16898349 5 29015562 A 2_A 1_G 0/46 0/48 3/45 *GG
rs17768321 6 66210745 C 1_C 2_A 46/0 28/20 41/7 *AA
rs10944799 6 66211053 T 1_T 3_C 46/0 28/20 41/7 *CC
rs9351494 6 66214771 C 2_C 1_A 46/0 28/20 41/7 *AA
rs10971271 9 32978455 A 2_A 3_G 0/46 4/44 0/48 *GG
rs17324043 9 32979004 C 2_C 5_T 0/46 4/44 0/48 *TT
rs17324462 9 32993302 C 4_C 2_T 0/46 4/44 0/48 *TT
rs17324735 9 33004578 C 2_C 1_T 0/46 4/44 0/48 *TT
rs17325001 9 33014641 G 3_G 2_C 46/0 44/4 48/0 *CC
rs17133680 10 4864019 G 1_G 3_A 46/0 45/3 42/6 *AA
rs12573010 10 4864712 A 3_A 2_G 0/46 3/45 6/42 *GG
rs17133693 10 4865591 G 2_G 3_A 46/0 45/3 42/6 *AA
rs17133747 10 4875217 T 2_T 3_C 46/0 45/3 42/6 *CC
rs17133748 10 4875231 G 2_G 3_A 46/0 45/3 42/6 *AA
rs17133752 10 4875834 G 2_G 4_A 46/0 45/3 42/6 *AA
rs17133753 10 4877935 C 3_C 4_T 0/46 3/45 6/42 *TT
rs1993182 10 4881112 C 1_G 2_A 46/0 45/3 42/6 *AA
rs17133796 10 4882664 G 2_G 7_C 46/0 45/3 42/6 *CC
rs10483163 22 30789451 G 1_A 3_A 46/0 44/4 48/0 *AA




However, on this partial list that the Japanese person showed homozygous alleles, I have found that i am also homozygous in all of the SNPs. My spouse, who is a Han Women, tested homozygous in most genes, and heterozygous in a handful. Two 100% europeans responded, and they were Homozygous for every SNP on the partial list as well.

What's going here? Judging from the responses, not everyone had the Denisovan genes, but those that did were in sense "Full" denisovans, with complete homozygous alleles. So, it's not like everyone has these genes. I think there was a mistake made in the research. Either that, or the Denisovans have many more descendants than what the current research is showing.

This post has been edited by austronesian0sailor: Oct 8 2011, 09:06 PM

[reutty]

Scientists need to revamp the classification system.

According to proper rules, animals of the same species can mate and produce fertile offspring.

animals of different species, but the same genus, can mate and produce sterile offspring, which can no longer mate.

like a horse mating with a zebra, it would produce a sterile offspring, which is why horses and zebras are different species.

however, from these genetic tests, it has proved that denisovas and neanderthals mated with humans and produced fertile offsrping. this means denisovan, neanderthal, and humans all belong to same species, and should be classified as subspecies instead of species

Homo denisova-> homo sapiens denisova
homo neanderthalis->home sapiens neanderthalis
Homo sapiens-> homo sapiens sapiens.

[uchinanchu_sanse...]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/...11031154119.htm

Shared Genes With Neanderthal Relatives: Modern East Asians Share Genetic Material With Prehistoric Denisovans
ScienceDaily (Oct. 31, 2011) — During human evolution our ancestors mated with Neanderthals, but also with other related hominids. In this week's online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers from Uppsala University are publishing findings showing that people in East Asia share genetic material with Denisovans, who got the name from the cave in Siberia where they were first found.

New research shows that people in East Asia share genetic material with Neanderthal-related hominids called Denisovans. (Credit: © lily / Fotolia)

"Our study covers a larger part of the world than earlier studies, and it is clear that it is not as simple as we previously thought. Hybridization took place at several points in evolution, and the genetic traces of this can be found in several places in the world. We'll probably be uncovering more events like these," says Mattias Jakobsson, who conducted the study together with Pontus Skoglund.
Previous studies have found two separate hybridization events between so-called archaic humans (different from modern humans in both genetics and morphology) and the ancestors of modern humans after their emergence from Africa: hybridization between Neanderthals and the ancestors of modern humans outside of Africa and hybridization between Denisovans and the ancestors of indigenous Oceanians. The genetic difference between Neandertals and Denisovans is roughly as great as the maximal level of variation among us modern humans.
The Uppsala scientists' study demonstrates that hybridization also occurred on the East Asian mainland. The connection was discovered by using genotype data in order to obtain a larger data set. Complete genomes of modern humans are only available from some dozen individuals today, whereas genotype data is available from thousands of individuals. These genetic data can be compared with genome sequences from Neandertals and a Denisovan which have been determined from archeological material. Only a pinky finger and a tooth have been described from the latter.
Genotype data stems from genetic research where hundreds of thousands of genetic variants from test panels are gathered on a chip. However, this process leads to unusual variants not being included, which can lead to biases if the material is treated as if it consisted of complete genomes. Skoglund and Jakobsson used advanced computer simulations to determine what this source of error means for comparisons with archaic genes and have thereby been able to use genetic data from more than 1,500 modern humans from all over the world.
"We found that individuals from mainly Southeast Asia have a higher proportion of Denisova-related genetic variants than people from other parts of the world, such as Europe, America, West and Central Asia, and Africa. The findings show that gene flow from archaic human groups also occurred on the Asian mainland," says Mattias Jakobsson.
"While we can see that genetic material of archaic humans lives on to a greater extent than what was previously thought, we still know very little about the history of these groups and when their contacts with modern humans occurred," says Pontus Skoglund.
Because they find Denisova-related gene variants in Southeast Asia and Oceania, but not in Europe and America, the researchers suggest that hybridization with Denisova man took place about 20,000-40,000 years ago, but could also have occurred earlier. This is long after the branch that became modern humans split off from the branch that led to Neandertals and Denisovans some 300,000-500,000 years ago.
"With more complete genomes from modern humans and more analyses of fossil material, it will be possible to describe our prehistory with considerably greater accuracy and richer detail," says Mattias Jakobsson.
Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:

Other bookmarking and sharing tools:
| More
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Uppsala University, via AlphaGalileo.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Journal Reference:
Pontus Skoglunda and Mattias Jakobssona. Archaic human ancestry in East Asia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1108181108
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA

MLA
Uppsala University (2011, October 31). Shared genes with Neanderthal relatives: Modern East Asians share genetic material with prehistoric Denisovans. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 1, 2011, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2011/10/111031154119.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.