[HN Gopher] Denisovan DNA found in cave on Tibetan Plateau
___________________________________________________________________
Denisovan DNA found in cave on Tibetan Plateau
Author : etiam
Score : 85 points
Date : 2020-10-30 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (science.sciencemag.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (science.sciencemag.org)
| colechristensen wrote:
| Yeti?
| sradman wrote:
| The abstract from the paper _Denisovan DNA in Late Pleistocene
| sediments from Baishiya Karst Cave on the Tibetan Plateau_ [1]:
|
| > A late Middle Pleistocene mandible from Baishiya Karst Cave
| (BKC) on the Tibetan Plateau has been inferred to be from a
| Denisovan, an Asian hominin related to Neanderthals, on the basis
| of an amino acid substitution in its collagen. Here we describe
| the stratigraphy, chronology, and mitochondrial DNA extracted
| from the sediments in BKC. We recover Denisovan mitochondrial DNA
| from sediments deposited ~100 thousand and ~60 thousand years ago
| (ka) and possibly as recently as ~45 ka. The long-term occupation
| of BKC by Denisovans suggests that they may have adapted to life
| at high altitudes and may have contributed such adaptations to
| modern humans on the Tibetan Plateau.
|
| [1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6516/584
| pachico wrote:
| Sometimes I wonder how things would be if we had more than one
| hominid species in the world and I get trapped in fascinating
| hypothesis of all sorts.
|
| Then I remember how we treat animals in general and it makes me
| think we'd be destined to have a dominating species making all
| others miserable and I stop thinking those hypothesis are so
| fascinating.
|
| Just thinking out loud.
| disown wrote:
| > Sometimes I wonder how things would be if we had more than
| one hominid species in the world and I get trapped in
| fascinating hypothesis of all sorts.
|
| What fascinating hypothesis? Why not spell it out rather being
| so coy? Well we have different races of people. Why not work
| off that? It's not like we lack diversity amongst human.
|
| > Then I remember how we treat animals in general
|
| Oh I see now. It gets exhausting and boring to see everything
| twisted for the vegan agenda. You should see how we treat
| plants. Now that's horrifying.
|
| > it makes me think we'd be destined to have a dominating
| species making all others miserable
|
| 99.99% of animals killed on earth aren't killed by humans. Each
| day more animals are killed in nature than are killed by humans
| in a century. Most animals are made "miserable" by non-humans.
| I doubt you're losing sleep over that since you can't win
| virtue signaling points that way.
|
| > Just thinking out loud.
|
| We get it.
| lordnacho wrote:
| Just because science says Denisovans are a subspecies of humans
| doesn't mean human societies would see it like that.
|
| Women have only been allowed to vote for about 100 years. It's
| not that long ago that you could go to an advanced country
| where people could be bought and sold.
|
| We are good at defining the boundary socially, rather than
| scientifically. Who knows, perhaps we'll also decide that
| eating animals is wrong sometime. Certainly, there's some hope
| in that violence has lessened over recent decades.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> perhaps we 'll also decide that eating animals is wrong
| sometime._
|
| At some point, there's the very real possibility that vat-
| grown meat may become a main staple.
|
| It sounds a bit icky, but think about it: We could have
| flavors and textures of meat that were never available in
| nature (and maybe also some horrific mistakes). It's entirely
| possible that we could have "top-shelf vat" brands that sell
| for more than farm-raised.
|
| Of course, the biomass to create the foodstuff needs to come
| from somewhere...Soylent Green?
|
| I wonder how this would affect some vegetarians.
| pachico wrote:
| Well, they still start from real animal cells, from what I
| understand. As a vegan, I'd have that dilemma. If I was an
| utilitarian, I'd probably justify it more clearly.
|
| In the meanwhile, I'm quite happy with vegetable based
| "meat". It was definitely harder to be vegan 10 years ago
| (social interaction somehow demands a certain diet), and
| especially here in Spain. Now it's really easy and
| confinement makes it easier too.
| dahfizz wrote:
| What's the vegan reason to not eat lab grown meat? No
| animal was harmed or even involved in the production of
| the meat. It's morally equivalent to greenhouse grown
| plants IMO.
| kitotik wrote:
| Not the op, but not all vegans have animal cruelty as
| their primary concern. Many do it for health reasons and
| avoid ingesting animal proteins in general, regardless of
| how they were produced.
| pachico wrote:
| Take in consideration that being vegan is considered
| something that goes beyond diet. It takes you to decide
| on pretty much anything you buy or consume (it took me
| some time, for instance, finding a strap for my 6 strings
| bass guitar that wasn't made out of leather). (Btw, do
| you call it strap or did I just make that out?)
| uhtred wrote:
| Sorry to nitpick, but if someone chooses to not eat
| animal products for a reason other than animal welfare,
| they are not vegan, but rather "eating plant based" or
| whatever they want to call it. Being vegan is more than
| about what you eat, it's trying to live in a way that
| reduces as much as possible the cruelty to other animals
| from one's own lifestyle. e.g. don't eat animal products,
| don't wear animal products, don't use products tested on
| animals.
| MaximumYComb wrote:
| I'd argue that the majority of vegans do it, at least
| partially, for animal reasons. I started to see how it
| would affect health but quickly enjoyed the peace I felt
| from not harming animals
| pachico wrote:
| It's where those initial cells were taken from, that's
| all. It's not that labs create cells from scratch but
| rather they efficiently reproduce then. It would demand a
| constant source of reliable cells from animals, from what
| I understand. Now, personally, do I think this is better
| than the current situation? Probably yes, but it's an
| utilitarian reasoning, which tends to justify the misery
| of few for the wellbeing of many.
| PopsiclePete wrote:
| Ok, but... a few cells? You're shedding hundreds of
| millions of cells daily if not hourly? It's not like
| you're feeling pain, right?
| pachico wrote:
| It's not any cell and this is what I mean by utilitarian
| thinking, my friend :)
| uhtred wrote:
| As far as I am aware they don't need to harm the origin
| animal when they take the cell, and they only need to do
| it once at the start and can then reproduce the cells
| from the lab grown meat. But I could be very wrong. I am
| perfectly happy with plant based "meat" myself, too. By
| the way, I had a really hard time finding vegan food in
| Spain (outside of Barcelona) when I visited. Out of
| desperation I tried to get a veggie burger in McDonald's
| (I know not vegan, I was desperate) and they didn't have
| one! Barcelona however was awesome for vegan food.
| pachico wrote:
| I understand your pain finding vegan food outside from
| Barcelona (where I live, btw). Even in Madrid is not that
| easy, despite being the capital and biggest city. I'm
| sure not harming is better than harming, I agree.
| Nevertheless, they are used as tools. I know this might
| sound like a tree hugger, hippy argument but, would
| anyone like to be in that situation against their will
| when it's really not necessary? That's my moral dilemma
| :)
| uhtred wrote:
| Not at all, I completely agree. I personally wont be
| eating lab meat, partly for that reason and partly
| because I don't feel like I need to. At this point real
| meat, even if lab grown, would probably seem to
| disgusting to me.
| pachico wrote:
| That's a question I do to myself. Can I detach a flavour
| from what it used to mean? When I think about it
| rationally I come to the conclusion that I should be able
| to enjoy a flavour, any flavour, if it carries no harm.
| But we both know there's also an emotional component,
| which I might share too. It's an interesting topic I
| don't think I have yet reached a conclusion about.
| voldacar wrote:
| > It's not that long ago that you could go to an advanced
| country where people could be bought and sold.
|
| I believe this can be done in Libya today
| riffraff wrote:
| That is also true in most of Europe, but not legally, and
| lybia is not generally considered an advanced country.
| voldacar wrote:
| >lybia is not generally considered an advanced country
|
| true. Second world, maybe? And where in Europe would one
| go to buy a human?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| The Second World was the Soviet block.
|
| But I understand what you mean.
| infradig wrote:
| Still can via adoption and surrogacy.
| pachico wrote:
| Well, I guess that's a hope outside the timescale of
| individual lives, after hundreds of thousands of years of
| preventing individuals from florishing. I understand your
| point but somehow it sounds like a romantic idea only.
| Nevertheless, I hope you are right. :)
| lowestprimate wrote:
| Some women voted 100 years ago. Not all women. As an example
| US born Japanese Americans got to vote in 1952
| wolco2 wrote:
| Just Japanese women or all Japanese?
| [deleted]
| xenospn wrote:
| This is basically the plot of the time machine. One of my
| favorite books!
| minikites wrote:
| Or "Planet of the Apes"
| alanbernstein wrote:
| Similar, Robert J Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax trilogy.
| eesmith wrote:
| Or Turtledove's "A Different Flesh" -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Different_Flesh
|
| > a collection of alternate history short stories by
| American writer Harry Turtledove set in a world in which
| Homo erectus and various megafauna survived in the Americas
| instead of Native Americans or any other human cultures.
| minikites wrote:
| Humans don't need a species difference to dominate other groups
| and make them miserable, we're perfectly capable of selecting
| some other difference to create an "other".
| colechristensen wrote:
| Much of the history of the west's treatment of africans was
| essentially justified by classifying them as lower forms of
| human.
|
| Romans did it to northern european "barbarians", Europe and
| colonies did it do african and native american "savages"
| wolco2 wrote:
| And African's did it to other tribes. Who do you think sold
| the west the slaves in the first place. Tribes in central
| Africa would be sold through western African countries.
| pachico wrote:
| And not only Africans: pre-Columbian civilizations did
| that to each other too. You don't become an empire just
| by handshakes and agreements.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Again weird slavery denial responding to a comment that
| doesn't mention slavery.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| although well-meaning, I believe this is a shallow and
| Anglo-centric interpretation of history. Slaving was
| practiced across the world, and is generally regarded as
| "barbaric" because, well, it is. BUT the "West" did NOT
| make African Slavery.. Its incomplete to say that, and
| points fingers at modern people in the USA. I cannot start
| to give examples without a complete treatment due to the
| seriously toxic nature of this subject. But since I
| personally am descended from people in the USA that opposed
| slavery for the last 300 years AT LEAST, in EVERY FORM, I
| am sensitive, and strongly opposed, to a "guilt by
| association" on this topic.
| colechristensen wrote:
| What are you talking about, and how does it relate at all
| to what you are replying to? I didn't even use the word
| slavery , and I was talking about Rome and cultural
| attitudes of Europeans and their colonists.
|
| Then you go on about your 300 years of complete family
| opposition to slavery in the US which has only existed
| for 244 of those years... and you're speaking for ... eh
| thousands to tens of thousands of people? Calm down.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| I agree that discussions on this topic are generally
| toxic, but nothing in the GP directly assigned blame.
|
| It's more or less widely accepted in broader society that
| European colonialism laid the foundation for much of the
| modern world and many historians agree it was in turn
| partially justified by the "subeuropean-ness" of
| colonized peoples. I can easily show you papers published
| in the last decade continuing to justify historic
| colonialism as bringing civilization. There's an
| excellent (though dated) book on this called "Machines as
| the Measure of Men", which I often recommend to other
| people in tech.
| pachico wrote:
| True, absolutely.
| moultano wrote:
| The fact that humans interbred with them likely means we would
| just think of them as another kind of slightly different
| looking people.
| wh1t3n01s3 wrote:
| I personally think Homo Sapiens killed to extinction all the
| other 'human' species, and the megafauna as well. (That's sad,
| I know)
| tejtm wrote:
| And we don't even stop there. Never minding the flashy
| war/genocide aspects, we self-select mono cropping to a
| detrimental degree to our species genetic diversity.
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| What's the connection between monocropping for agriculture
| and human genetic diversity?
| msla wrote:
| I think it would be an unstable situation unless the hominid
| species were somehow incompatible enough to prevent cross-
| breeding; otherwise, what would happen is what evidently did
| happen, which is that all of the hominids cross-bred and
| produced a single remaining phenotype.
| hinkley wrote:
| I always wonder with archaeology how often we are finding remains
| in their natural habitat versus 'comedy of errors' situations.
|
| Did those dinosaurs really live near mud flats, or were they
| driven there by severe drought followed by torrential rains? Or
| was it part of a migration route driven by repeating cycles of
| drought and rain? (the fact that they are under many, many layers
| of sedimentary rock suggests the latter)
|
| Similarly, were hominids living in that cave a plan A, plan B, or
| plan C? Plan B could be a "Helm's Deep" situation, where you go
| there when something goes wrong. While Plan C could be an 'any
| port in a storm' situation where unexpected weather caught you in
| an area you did not mean to stay.
|
| Plan A might have been a biologically active region where life
| devours anything that stops moving for too long, the same way we
| have trouble finding evidence of these huge cultures in Central
| and South America.
| brailsafe wrote:
| I just visited the Royal Tyrrell Museum in Alberta, and
| thankfully there is quite a bit of display real estate devoted
| to mentioning things like this. For example, one talks about
| how the initial hypothesis about a particular dinosaur had them
| die during river crossing, but later research suggests they
| were probably washed into the river during floods, based on the
| likelihood of them residing a great distance away.
| [deleted]
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| As you'd expect, this is a well-known problem. We call them
| 'formation processes'. There's a rich literature out there, but
| always more to explore because there's no general solution.
| hoseja wrote:
| I am often astonished there are any fossils at all.
| ummonk wrote:
| There is also just the question of what kinds of conditions are
| conducive to preserving fossil remains.
| vmception wrote:
| Thats basically the only consideration.
|
| Some future civilization is going to find an American frozen
| on Mt Everest and think that was our favorite habitat.
| backtoyoujim wrote:
| The discovery of Otzi didn't lead contemporary humans to
| believe something like that.
| Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote:
| They'll probably find the trash first.
| dahfizz wrote:
| And in keeping with anthropologist tradition, they will
| assume all the trash was part of some significant
| religious ceremony.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| The climbers would don their Green Boots in hopes of
| meeting the God at the top.
| evo_9 wrote:
| More info on the Denisovan's: https://www.history.com/topics/pre-
| history/denisovans
| Shivetya wrote:
| Since I had to look them up, they are very early humans. See
| quote and link below from wikipedia.
|
| The Denisovans or Denisova hominins ( /dI'ni:s@v@/ di-NEE-s@-v@)
| are an extinct species or subspecies of archaic human that ranged
| across Asia during the Lower and Middle Paleolithic. Denisovans
| are known from few remains, and, consequently, most of what is
| known about them comes from DNA evidence. Pending consensus on
| their taxonomic status, they have been referred to as Homo
| denisova, H. altaiensis, or H. sapiens denisova.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisovan
| saas_sam wrote:
| Very early but also super advanced. Check out the jewelry they
| made with precision-drilled holes etc:
| https://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/features/f0100-s...
| Pfhreak wrote:
| You can think of them as similar to neanderthals, from what I
| understand -- a separate species of humans that lived
| concurrently with modern humans. (Though, denisovans lived in
| an entirely different region.)
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| denisovans and neanderthals probably interacted
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-10-30 23:01 UTC)