Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck
From: Val Lentz (vlentz_at_shaw.ca)
Date: 01/29/05
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is."
- Previous message: Val Lentz: "Re: Human brain on an evolutionary sprint!"
- In reply to: Kaz: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Next in thread: pete: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Reply: pete: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 02:18:32 GMT
"Kaz" <KazVorpal@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pozKd.16125$cc7.7192@fe07.lga...
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:41F7C275.216ACABF@hotmMOVEail.com...
> >
> > The researchers believe the high rate of mutations is seen because
> > the hominid ancestor to both species went through an evolutionary
> > bottleneck, when its breeding population was limited to only about
> > 10,000 individuals.
> >
> > This meant that the process of pruning out damaging mutations via
> > natural selection of the fittest mates was more difficult and slower.
> > In contrast, rats and mice have descended from a much larger
> > population, leaving them less susceptible to genetic diseases.
>
> Couldn't most of the difference actually be explained by humans being
> intelligent, social, and tool-using, so that a negative genetic trait is
not
> as likely to prevent reproduction?
>
> A myopic rat is at a huge disadvantage. But even two million years ago a
> myopic human could get by just fine, as long as he was socially skilled.
The
> members of his family could support him. And even beyond what a myopic
> meerkat or other social animal might enjoy, because if faced with a
predator
> he still could hold a spear, faced with a reduced food supply he still had
> fire (which makes many otherwise-inedible things at least tolerable).
>
> I see a lot of oddly global statements made, based on some genetic trend,
> which seem to ignore all other possible factors that could contribute to
> producing such an effect.
>
All of that would really be fine, if they weren't talking about a time
period >6 mya where the animals in question didn't have tools or fire and
all that... You know, the ancestor to *both* chimps and humans...
Val
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is."
- Previous message: Val Lentz: "Re: Human brain on an evolutionary sprint!"
- In reply to: Kaz: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Next in thread: pete: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Reply: pete: "Re: Hominid Inbreeding And The Bottleneck"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|