Bernard's blog reports on ancient DNA recovered from 2 million year old teeth from archaic hominins. He notes (in French, translated by Google) that:
The Paranthropes evolved between 2.8 and 1 million years ago, cohabiting with many other hominids such as Australopithecines or members of the genus Homo. Resolving the relationships between these species is key to understanding the origin of man. Even within the Paranthropus species, the relationships between the different identified branches are subject to debate. Most researchers consider Paranthropus taxa to be monophyletic, however, morphological similarities between Paranthropus robustus and Australopithecus africanus in a South African context and between Paranthropus aethiopicus and Australopithecus afarensis in an East African context, have raised the possibility of paraphylia or even admixture between species. Determining the extent to which variation within and between Pleistocene hominins is due to evolutionary diversification versus sexual dimorphism is therefore fundamental to resolving these relationships.Palesa Madupe and her colleagues have just published a paper entitled: Enamel proteins reveal biological sex and genetic variability within southern African Paranthropus. They analyzed the proteins contained in the dental enamel of four Paranthropes from South Africa usually attributed to the species Paranthropus robustus. These individuals come from the Swartkrans cave located on the Cradle of Humankind archaeological site 40 km north of Johannesburg[.]
This is an unprecedented achievement that could solidify a lot about what we know about human evolution.
9 comments:
actually it is protein not DNA
Hi Andrew,
Agree with neo, this is paleoproteomics. And interesting that they can tell the difference between the X and Y versions of the amino acids. The techniques used are mainly high end mass spec.
What they said.
My bad. I was in trial from July 7 to 13 while I plopped this one out in a rush, and then traveling to the funeral I'm attending today for my aunt. I'll clean it up when I get a chance.
Hi Andrew, That sounds like a very long and complex trial for what I understand about your legal specialties (from your Yes I'm a Lawyer post).
It was, but with drama that was worthy of prime time TV. Terrifying but one of the most exciting trials I've ever done. Crossing fingers to see what the judge will say.
Six witnesses were lined up to tell a coordinated web of lies. The judge and my co-counsel were fooled with the judge suggesting our witnesses were engaged in perjury. At the 11th hour, working until 4 a.m. before the last day of trial, we found a way to catch them red handed. Two key witnesses admitted to perjury in response to direct specific questions from the judge himself, in open court on the same morning, and then recanted most of their testimony. The last of the six witnesses who was to complete their web of lies was pulled from testifying. Their lawyer admitted in open court that he'd been duped by his client whom he admitted had no credibility.
Woot! Justice wins again. Thanx you for doing your part. Makes the wheels go round and all that.
Good job!
Post a Comment