Evolution

You are currently browsing articles tagged Evolution.

ResearchBlogging.orgSvante Pääbo’s group at the Max Plank Institute have a paper coming out in the February issue of Cell Biology. In it, they describe sequencing a complete early human mitochondrial genome from the Markina Gora specimen from the Kostenki 14 site in Russia. The remains date to around 30,000 years ago, not the oldest human sequence, but interesting nonetheless because the authors have identified new ways to determine if ancient DNA sequences are genuine vs. contamination.  This is especially important for more anatomically modern human fossils, who may have similar sequences to extant populations.

For Neandertal mtDNA, identifying contamination is relatively simple, because their mtDNA sequences fall outside the range of variation found in modern humans. Not so for more recent fossils.  So how can researchers identify true archaic sequences?

fragment length, deamination-induced sequence errors at ends of molecules, and purine-associated fragmentation represent features by which endogenous and contaminating populations of DNA molecules can be distinguished in at least some late Pleistocene specimens (1).

So, fragments sequenced from ancient samples are typically shorter than modern contaminants.  In many cases, the fragments are shorter than what can be amplified using PCR, meaning high-throughput direct sequencing methods are required to analyze these ancient samples.  In addition, the cytosine bases at the 5′ ends of ancient DNA fragments are susceptible to deamination (removal of an -NH3 group), causing those bases to be misread as thymine. The 3′ ends of ancient sequences have a commensurate increase in G-A errors. Finally, fragmentation of ancient sequences occurs more frequently at purine bases (guanine and adenine).

With these criteria in mind, the researchers determined that the Markina Gora sequence belongs to mitochondrial haplogroup U2, a haplogroup still present in Europe today.

Figure 3D from Krause et al. (2010) - with the EMH sequence highlighted in red.

The authors determine that it is unlikely that this sequence is the result of modern contamination, because the nucleotide difference between the Markina Gora specimen and the ancestral U sequence is much shorter than than seen between the root and modern sequences, which have accumulated many more mutations over time.  Their results also support the hypothesis of pre-agricultural genetic continuity in Europe, so that genetic lineages which were present on the continent prior to the Neolithic transition can still be found in modern European populations.

Krause J, Briggs AW, Kircher M, Maricic T, Zwyns N, Derevianko A, & Pääbo S (2009). A Complete mtDNA Genome of an Early Modern Human from Kostenki, Russia. Current biology : CB PMID: 20045327

In celebration of the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s seminal work, On the Origin of Species, here are a few online resources.

The Complete Works of Charles Darwin Online – literally everything written by Darwin

Darwin’s Dangerous Idea – from the PBS Evolution series

Darwin’s Darkest Hour – If you missed the original airing last month, you can watch the entire program online.

YouTube Preview Image

Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.

– Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species (1859)

There’s been some good news on the teaching of evolution front this month. In Oklahoma, the “Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act” (Senate Bill 320 – rtf) failed to make it out of the Senate Education Committee.  This means it is effectively dead in the Senate for the next two years.  Good thing.  The bill stated, in part, that:

The Oklahoma Legislature finds that an important purpose of science education is to inform students about scientific evidence and to help students develop critical thinking skills they need in order to become intelligent, productive, and scientifically informed citizens.  The Legislature further finds that the teaching of some scientific subjects, such as biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning, can cause controversy, and that some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects.

In reality, there is no controversy among biologists.  Evolution exists; we can measure it.  Like many “Academic Freedom Acts,” it’s an attempt to sneak ID into science classrooms.  Sounds silly, but it worked in Louisiana, where Gov. Bobby Jindal signed the Louisiana Science Education Act into law last summer.  Barbara Forrest posted a penetrating analysis of the bill on the Louisiana Coalition for Science blog.  And last week, the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology announced they would no longer hold their annual meetings in New Orleans, noting:

The SICB leadership could not support New Orleans as out meeting venue because of the official position of the state in weakening science education and specifically attacking evolution in science curricula…SICB is joining other scientific organizations in suggesting professional societies reconsider any plans to host meetings in Louisiana.  As scientists, it is our responsibility to oppose anti-science initiatives….

Nice to know my home state is one up on Louisiana, but it bodes ill for the scientific education of the children of The Pelican State.

In keeping with the Year of Science theme, this month will focus on celebrating evolution.  To start, here’s first part of the HHMI Holiday Lecture Series from 2005: Evolution – constant change and common threads.

YouTube Preview Image

And here’s a quick quiz to test your own knowledge of evolution.

Smithsonian.com has an interesting essay by Richard Conniff on the development of evolutionary theory.

We call it Darwinism, for short. But in truth, it didn’t start with Darwin, or with Wallace either, for that matter. Great ideas seldom arise in the romantic way we like to imagine—the bolt from the blue, the lone genius running through the streets crying, “Eureka!” Like evolution itself, science more often advances by small steps, with different lines converging on the same solution.

What many fundamentalists seem to forget (or choose to selectively ignore), is the fact that Darwin was a product of his time, and had he not published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, someone else (namely Alfred Russel Wallace) surely would have.


Alfred Russel Wallace
Co-founder of the theory of evolution

Blog Widget by LinkWithin

« Older entries