Genetic Breakthrough that Reveals the Differences Between Humans

[babygene]

This could be BIG!

[mvonfr]

Hmm, the link above did not work for me, but the same story appears elsewhere:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=715801

[Coyoteman]

Here's another link:

Human DNA is far more varied than thought

(NewScientist.com news service).

[martin_fierro]

	Genetic Genealogy
Send FReepmail if you want on/off GGP list Marty = Paternal Haplogroup O(2?)(M175) Maternal Haplogroup H
GG LINKS: African Ancestry DNAPrint Genomics FamilyTree DNA mitosearch Nat'l Geographic Genographic Project Oxford Ancestors RelativeGenetics Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation Trace Genetics ybase ysearch
The List of Ping Lists

[dqauto]

IBTZ?

[babygene]

I've always thought that races of man were the equivalent to "breeds" in other animals such as dogs and cats.

Anyone have any thoughts about this?

[the final gentleman]

Yeah, big like a firecracker, all blow and little effect.

But you've got to admire hip genetic investigators; they know how to work a room full of supplicants.

[dqauto]

Happy Thanksgiving. Are you missing something?

[beyond the sea]

Genetic Breakthrough that Reveals the Differences Between Humans

---

Some understand baseball....... some don't.

[Coyoteman]

I've always thought that races of man were the equivalent to "breeds" in other animals such as dogs and cats.

Anyone have any thoughts about this?

Its a bit more complex than that.

There are genetic races (based on descent), and there are geographic races (based on living conditions). There is no necessary connection between the two.

Extremely small, dark skinned individuals are found in several areas (Pygmies, Negritoes, etc.). Some of the tribes in the Amazonian rain forests are tending in this direction as well, but have not quite had time to pick up all of the adaptations of the other groups. These specialized traits are geographic in origin, and there is no close genetic relationship among these groups.

In the opposite direction, groups which are relatively closely related genetically can look quite different. An example would be the Pygmies and Watusi of Africa.

[Hawthorn]

Are coyotes and domestic dogs two different races of canines?

Or are domestic dogs several hundred different "races" -- mostly the AKC breeds -- with coyotes being just another breed?

[Coyoteman]

Are coyotes and domestic dogs two different races of canines?

Or are domestic dogs several hundred different "races" -- mostly the AKC breeds -- with coyotes being just another breed?

Actually a difficult question.

Coyotes (Canis latrans) and dogs (Canis familiaris) are classified as different species, which implies they do not interbreed. While this may be true for the most part, coyotes can interbreed with both dogs and wolves (Canis lupus/rufus).

The differences among these three Canis species is far greater than the difference among various breeds of dog.

I am not sure if the term "race" applies, as that term has many meanings and still is poorly defined. However, if you use it to mean visible differences it would probably work for dog breeds.

[momincombatboots]

I cannot seem to wrap my mind around this, maybe it is the turkey: The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought... ...our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, than previously assumed from earlier studies. Instead of being 99 per cent similar, we are more likely to be about 96 per cent similar. are we 10 times more different from each other or 96 percent more similar to chimpanzees???

[AndrewC]

More use for the "junk" DNA.

[Hawthorn]

> Coyotes (Canis latrans) and dogs (Canis familiaris) are classified as different species, which implies they do not interbreed. While this may be true for the most part, coyotes can interbreed with both dogs and wolves (Canis lupus/rufus). <

If one were to take the above practice as a guideline, then the Eskimos and the Australian aborigines would constitute different species, since they generally don't interbreed -- even though presumably they "can" do so!

[Coyoteman]

If one were to take the above practice as a guideline, then the Eskimos and the Australian aborigines would constitute different species, since they generally don't interbreed -- even though presumably they "can" do so!

That's why I said your question was difficult. Your use of the above analogy, based on coyotes and dogs, actually leads to the wrong answer in humans.

All human groups can interbreed and are considered the same genus, species, and subspecies. The genetic and physical differences among human groups are extremely minor.

[Hawthorn]

> are we 10 times more different from each other or 96 percent more similar to chimpanzees? <


I think the journalist is trying to say this:

Certain DNA specialists now believe that approximately one per cent of our genetic material differs from human to human -- whereas they used to think there was a human-to-human difference of about one-tenth of one percent.

Therefore, since one percent is ten times as large as 0.1 per cent, the new finding says we differ from one another by about ten times as much as previously thought.

(Stated alternatively, we're only 99.0 per cent alike rather than 99.9 per cent alike.)

Similarly, scientists used to say that about one per cent of the typical human's genetic material was different from the genetic material of the typical chimpanzee. Now however, certain experts believe we differ from chimps in about four per cent of our genetic material. So the new doctrine has increased the perceived human-to-chimpanzee difference by a factor of four.

(Or, we're only 96 per cent like chimps, rather than 99 per cent. And a good thing it is, IMHO!)

[Bobalu]

Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar none to their correct ethnic origin.

Just great..in a few decades someone will be able to make a nanotech weapon that targets a single ethnic group.

[brytlea]

Are you sure about this?

The differences among these three Canis species is far greater than the difference among various breeds of dog.

I was under the impression that DNA testing could not tell if a dog was part wolf, altho that may no longer be true. Here is a reference:

http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm

susie