Did Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals interbreed?

[Exarch]

and if so, could they produce any viable offspring (ie fertile offspring)? or would they be infertile the way a mule is?
(on that note, how many chromosomes would a neanderthal have?)

and if yes, does this mean that neanderthals' genes would still be with us??

[Turumba]

I could imagine that we mixed up a lot of times- mixed up without loosing our same ancestors- just added a few more. Its just a thought, but a great problem until the neolithicum was the lack of manpower, if the klimate dont take care for a rich food offer.
If you running out of manpower and you meet another group there are different options, but one of them is: Kill the males, get the females.
Maybe, for example, the foundergroup, which arrived china did so... and i do think homo sapiens did so when they meet neandertalensis in europe.
As far as i know, there are two gene tests about the mixing between sapiens and neandertalensis. The results:
The first: It shows that we mixed up.
The second: It shows thats we mixed not up.

Btw, thats why im very sceptical about gene stuff... but, as i said, im not up to date with genetic. Maybe there are new result of new tests.

Fictitious the foundergroups mixed up as i think, this could explain why we all homo sapiens and still have some varieties.

But yes, its just a guess, too.

The second test is two years old, both tests are criticised by the fact that they dont have enough material to do a proper gene analyse- if someone knows about newly tests, please post it.

"Did Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals interbreed?" Possible.
"and if so, could they produce any viable offspring (ie fertile offspring)?" Possible.
"or would they be infertile the way a mule is?" Possible.
"(on that note, how many chromosomes would a neanderthal have?)" Dont know...
"and if yes, does this mean that neanderthals' genes would still be with us??" If yes, of course. Unused, but existing.

[Helm]

There's some evidence that they did interbreed to a tiny extent but not enough to leave a trace in the modern population. Also a Neanderthal on a bus wearing modern clothing wouldn't attract any attention.

[Turumba]

There's some evidence that they did interbreed to a tiny extent but not enough to leave a trace in the modern population. Also a Neanderthal on a bus wearing modern clothing wouldn't attract any attention.

Looks like Vin Diesel and Jason Statham are the living proofs...

[Yersinia]

There's some evidence that they did interbreed to a tiny extent but not enough to leave a trace in the modern population. Also a Neanderthal on a bus wearing modern clothing wouldn't attract any attention.

[Amorphos]

Looks like Vin Diesel and Jason Statham are the living proofs...

That proves it for sure. + rep

The way I see it is if it can be shown that breeding with them would produce offspring, then there would surely be some of them in us. Even if a person wouldn’t choose to breed with one [women like vin diesel?], there is always rape, stuff happens.

[Nimthill]

Their genes are definitely among us, because we share 99,8% of our DNA with them (give or take a 0,1%). Without any living specimens, it's very hard to say whether they did interbreed or not. It probably occurred just as often as dogs and foxes interbreed today: not very often, if at all.

[Yersinia]

and if so, could they produce any viable offspring (ie fertile offspring)? or would they be infertile the way a mule is?
(on that note, how many chromosomes would a neanderthal have?)

and if yes, does this mean that neanderthals' genes would still be with us??

There's a lot of controversy about this. There is a 24,000 year old skeleton of a young child (estimated to have been between the ages of 4-5) from central Portugal that is thought to be a result of such hybridization. It exhibits a prominent chin characteristic of a modern human and the limb proportions and robusticity indicative of possible Neanderthal genes. There was no indication that the bizarre combination of features the child had could be attributed to any pathological condition.

However, as far as I know, researchers who have been sequencing the Neanderthal's nuclear genome have found no support for hybridization. Even some of the researchers who seemed antsy to find such evidence (Svante Pääbo ).

I am of the opinion that there may have been hybridization between Neanderthals and modern humans, but that the offspring were not viable. No net reproductive success.

Oh, and I don't think anyone knows yet how many chromosomes Neanderthals had, but if I had to take a guess I'd say 48.

we share 99,8% of our DNA with them (give or take a 0,1%). Without any living specimens, it's very hard to say whether they did interbreed or not. It probably occurred just as often as dogs and foxes interbreed today: not very often, if at all.

Based on recent evidence it looks as though our DNA may only differ from the Neanderthals by .5%

[Belisarius]

I saw a documentary about this, apparently they now thing they were phased out and bred with us in what is now spain and western europe. Wish I had a source though.

[Manco]

There used to be some hypothesises that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens interbred in Europe, but to my knowledge the position has always been rather dubious and strongly tainted by racial implications.

Current consensus implies that they probably did not interbreed, if it was even at all possible to breed between them.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Apparently there is a National Geographic story (Rumor) to talk about this very thing. A Neaderthal girl is raped by two humans and she becomes pregnant and delivers the baby.

If it is even remotely possible for an offspring to survive out of the womb I would expect the changes to be too drastic if the father were human. If they did mate on some occasions and the human populations were larger than would it be possible for the human populations to continue mating with the hybrids and their offspring will develop more into what we look like today.

[Helm]

I doubt they would have looked all that neat and clean shaven, but then neither would we.

[Amorphos]

If it is even remotely possible for an offspring to survive out of the womb I would expect the changes to be too drastic if the father were human. If they did mate on some occasions and the human populations were larger than would it be possible for the human populations to continue mating with the hybrids and their offspring will develop more into what we look like today.

The raped mother would look after it? then it would mate with other neanderthals or sapiens, either by will or by force, these things happen.

I saw a chap on Australian master chef today who looked the spitting image of the Neanderthal image posted earlier [not meaning to be insultive but thats what he reminded me of ], obviously aborigines are not Neanderthals, but such specimens make me feel there must have been interactions, how else do we explain the differences between modern sapiens?

We either have Neanderthal interaction, or we have two original sapien races, one that is quite similar to Neanderthals and one that is not so similar. I don’t see any way around that.
my guess is that there was a gradient.

[Manco]

Or maybe it's just normal variation within Homo Sapiens, which is a far more logical and easy explanation. Also the one actually supported by science.

Your feeling there must have been interactions is hogwash as long as you don't have anything to support it.

[sumskilz]

how else do we explain the differences between modern sapiens?

Microevolution

There used to be some hypothesises that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens interbred in Europe, but to my knowledge the position has always been rather dubious and strongly tainted by racial implications.

Yeah, the idea was that each of the races evolved separately out of precursor species, though the evidence has overwhelmingly disproved this hypothesis.

Current consensus implies that they probably did not interbreed, if it was even at all possible to breed between them.

I would say that view is far from a consensus (see Yersinia's post), but given the genetic evidence it would appear that if interbreeding occurred, the offspring were either not viable or any of their DNA that entered the anatomically modern human genepool was selected against by natural pressures.

[Manco]

I would say that view is far from a consensus (see Yersinia's post), but given the genetic evidence it would appear that if interbreeding occurred, the offspring were either not viable or any of their DNA that entered the anatomically modern human genepool was selected against by natural pressures.

Oh yes, I meant regular and widely spread occurrences when I said interbreeding. One off instances are too random to account for.
I'm also not convinced by a single skeleton, which could be the result of a myriad of causes.

Manco, sumskilz What is the best explanation for how homo Sapian races evolved in the last 200,000 years. This is a hard topic not to sound racist in but I'm curious as to how the African, Caucasian, East Asian, Polynesian races evolve to look so different. Do bone structures differ in these races as well?

First of all, modern day 'races' aren't African, Caucasian, ... Skincolour is far too narrow a characteristic to rely on. Especially considering black Africa has far more genetic variance than all the others together.
Any attempt to objectively categorize humans would end up in a dozen black categories, with only 3 or so for the rest of humanity.
Second, all modern humans hardly differ. There are certainly population differences, but these are not nearly as static as the term race would imply, and what population differences there are, do not equal to skin colour differences.
(you mentioning bone structures is interesting in this context. Anthropologic phrenologists in ye olden days often considered East Africans and Bedouins to belong to the same group as 'white' poeple, as their bone structures were rather similar. So the same group of people could be considered black by skin, but white by skull type)

To illustrate how fluid the distinction between populations is: draw a line from Norway to South Africa and take all the people on the line in one mile intervals. You'llk hardly notice the difference between the person on mile 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 4, and so on.
But then take the person on mile 1 and compare him to the person on mile 5.000 and you will see an obvious differnce, despite not seeing it originally when comparing the one mile intervals.

[Turumba]

I was asking around in the university today and we had a lot of fun fantasysing about it, but the serious anwers are like this:
"Did Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals interbreed?" Possible.
"and if so, could they produce any viable offspring (ie fertile offspring)?" Possible.
"or would they be infertile the way a mule is?" Possible.

Because of the second and newly dna test most tend to say more likely that they dont interbreed, but no serious scientist wants to determine his opinion- and thats quite ok so, thats how science work. I do think in a few years we will know more.

Dont take a TV documentation as a source- for sure it isnt source. They pick out one scientist with a lot of fantasy and add 4 others who say "Well, we dont know, all is possible..." and finished is the raping story. Thats not serious.

Even (as i statet above that i could imagine, so, also fantasysing about that topic) if they interbreed and if they had a fertile offpring (please note the two "if") the impact would be very small. Think on a single drop of juice in a glas of water and then mix it up with another glas of pure water, add another glas of pure water and so on and so on...
After all, it would just mean that the juice is in the (swimming)pool. Nothing more, you didnt see it, didnt taste it. As evolution goes, it would be able to appear somewhere, somehow very rarely... and if it fits it goes on, if not its a dead end.
There are a lot of "if" and "would" and "could"... lets wait a few years or realize one just using his imagination (quite ok for me, if you keep the facts in mind that theres no proof).

[Amorphos]

Yeah, the idea was that each of the races evolved separately out of precursor species, though the evidence has overwhelmingly disproved this hypothesis.

So what species was mitochondrial eve’s mother?

Manco, sumskilz What is the best explanation for how homo Sapian races evolved in the last 200,000 years. This is a hard topic not to sound racist in but I'm curious as to how the African, Caucasian, East Asian, Polynesian races evolve to look so different. Do bone structures differ in these races as well?

There is definitely differences in bone structures, that much I have seen evidence for.

I'm also not convinced by a single skeleton, which could be the result of a myriad of causes.

Such as? …in a mere 50,000 years?

Dont take a TV documentation as a source- for sure it isnt source. They pick out one scientist with a lot of fantasy and add 4 others who say "Well, we dont know, all is possible..." and finished is the raping story. Thats not serious.

The documentary I saw agreed with what you guys are saying, I just added the part about potential rape as these things happen. Some people just have characteristics that are nearer to Neanderthals incrementally [vinny jones ]. As humans were a small group at one stage, a single ‘interaction’ with a similar species could have made a significant difference. not to mention that a small amount of genes can make a big difference, after all we are judging the whole thing by the mitocondrial gene.

I don’t see how we just appeared with no interaction from our predecessors.


yea i guess time will tell.

[Amorphos]

Neanderthal genes in our brains…
"most likely, prehistoric modern humans interbred with a now extinct hominid that carried haplogroup D, most likely Neanderthals".
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Human...ne-39515.shtml

"Cro Magnons or modern human skeletal remains with 'Neanderthal traits' were found in Lagar Velho (Portugal), dated to 24,500 years ago and controversially interpreted as indications of extensively admixed populations".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

"This skeleton, which has some characteristics of Neanderthals and others of early modern humans, demonstrates that early modern humans and Neanderthals are not all that different. They intermixed, interbred and produced offspring," said Erik Trinkaus of Washington University.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/323657.stm

[MathiasOfAthens]

Manco, sumskilz What is the best explanation for how homo Sapian races evolved in the last 200,000 years. This is a hard topic not to sound racist in but I'm curious as to how the African, Caucasian, East Asian, Polynesian races evolve to look so different. Do bone structures differ in these races as well?