Adam Lived 60,000 Years Ago, Not 6000

[John_Mace]

@Lemur866

Of course, for some species it is literally true that at one point there was only one male and one female who mated and were ancestors of all later members of that species, lots of island endemic species were probably founded this way with one gravid female washing up on an island by accident. And perhaps the human lineage passed through such a bottleneck at one point, although we don’t have any evidence of it.

It’s pretty well accepted by biologists that our species through several population bottlenecks since we appeared on the scene about 200k years ago. It’s quite possible that all non-African populations are the descendants of only a few hundred humans who migrated out that continent 50-60k years ago. None of these would be a bottleneck consisting of a single breeding pair, though.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@Der Trihs

As said, they don’t get wiped out; they just over time marry into other male lines.

I was talking about a paternal lineage getting wiped out. I would assume that none of us can be traced back to Adam’s contemporaries, many who may well be mine and your ancestors, but they won’t show up in a Y chromosome trace. Do I have that right ?

[Revenant_Threshold]

@The Flying Dutchman

I was talking about a paternal lineage getting wiped out. I would assume that none of us can be traced back to Adam’s contemporaries, many who may well be mine and your ancestors, but they won’t show up in a Y chromosome trace. Do I have that right ?

No, some of us probably can. It’s just that Adam’s the one we’re all related to.

Adam’s the most recent common patrilineal ancestor, which means his sons aren’t. Their lineage hasn’t been wiped out, it’s just that only some of us are related to one of them and some any others.

[John_Mace]

@The Flying Dutchman

I was talking about a paternal lineage getting wiped out. I would assume that none of us can be traced back to Adam’s contemporaries, many who may well be mine and your ancestors, but they won’t show up in a Y chromosome trace. Do I have that right ?

Yes, that’s right. You may trace your lineage back to Adam’s best buddy, but only by going through the female line at some point. The other males don’t show up in a Y-chromosome analysis because once you go thru the female line, you lose that particular Y-chromosome.

[John_Mace]

@Revenant Threshold

No, some of us probably can. It’s just that Adam’s the one we’re all related to.

No, that’s not right. Adam is the one we’re all related tho exclusively thru the male line. We may all be related to Adam’s best buddy, too, but thru the female line at some point.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@John Mace

No, that’s not right. Adam is the one we’re all related tho exclusively thru the male line. We may all be related to Adam’s best buddy, too, but thru the female line at some point.

I opened this reply to disagree with you, but i’ve thought about it some more and you’re right.

[John_Mace]

@Revenant Threshold

I opened this reply to disagree with you, but i’ve thought about it some more and you’re right.

If you want to really get confused and read about something that seems counter-intuitive, check out the Identical Ancestor Point. That’s a lot more interesting than Y-Chromosome Adam or mtDNA Eve.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@John Mace

If you want to really get confused and read about something that seems counter-intuitive, check out the Identical Ancestor Point. That’s a lot more interesting than Y-Chromosome Adam or mtDNA Eve.

Fascinating, but I am very skeptical on the time estimate for the most recent common ancestor given as 5 to 15 thousand years ago. Following the link for MRCA I find that the assumption is that Europeans after Eanes ,Columbus and Janszoon. managed to get their genes distributed to everyone in Africa, the Americas and Australia. As far as I know there are still indigineous tribes in the Amazon that have never made contact with the outside world.

[John_Mace]

@The Flying Dutchman

Fascinating, but I am very skeptical on the time estimate for the most recent common ancestor given as 5 to 15 thousand years ago. Following the link for MRCA I find that the assumption is that Europeans after Eanes ,Columbus and Janszoon. managed to get their genes distributed to everyone in Africa, the Americas and Australia. As far as I know there are still indigineous tribes in the Amazon that have never made contact with the outside world.

That could be. One thing to keep in mind about that analysis is that is based on a simulation, not actual data measurement. But even if there was some obscure tribe in the Amazon of a few hundred individuals who fell outside this analysis, isn’t it still remarkable about the rest of us 6,000,000,000 minus a few hundred?

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@John Mace

That could be. One thing to keep in mind about that analysis is that is based on a simulation, not actual data measurement. But even if there was some obscure tribe in the Amazon of a few hundred individuals who fell outside this analysis, isn’t it still remarkable about the rest of us 6,000,000,000 minus a few hundred?

Certainly. Just one thing though. Based on the definition, is it your conclusion that the identical ancestors point is now fixed ?

[John_Mace]

@The Flying Dutchman

Certainly. Just one thing though. Based on the definition, is it your conclusion that the identical ancestors point is now fixed ?

By “fixed” do you mean “determined” or do you mean that it might change at a later date? If the latter, no, it’s not fixed. In fact, it was probably much, much older before the Age of Exploration (1600s, 1700s). It’ll probably get younger and younger as time goes on and people interbreed more.

But keep in mind that this was determined through simulation, not actual data collection. Still, I’ve read the actual paper the guys published, and they did a good job of covering the assumptions they had to make in order to do the simulation. I think it’s a pretty good model.

[gonzomax]

Seek and you will find...: The Journey of Man - A Genetic Odyssey Whose your daddy?
There apparently was a successful adaptation that took over 60,000 years ago. There were however many unsuccessful ones. For some reason they died out. But ,this Adam did not live alone. He probably killed and ate the other ones.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@John Mace

By “fixed” do you mean “determined” or do you mean that it might change at a later date? If the latter, no, it’s not fixed. In fact, it was probably much, much older before the Age of Exploration (1600s, 1700s). It’ll probably get younger and younger as time goes on and people interbreed more.

Okay then, here’s my problem . There are two criteria, and only two groups in the total population for the IAP according to your cite.

1. Group A involves people who all are a commom ancestor to everyone on earth today.

2. Group B involves people are are an ancestor of no one alive today.

@previous cite

In genetic genealogy, the identical ancestors point (IAP) is that point in a given population’s past where each individual alive turned out to be either the ancestor of every individual alive now, or to have no living descendants at all.

bolding mine

If you’re in A and you’ve got 6 billion descendants, How do you suddenly get none and drop into B ? Of course I can drop the word suddenly but every descendant of a descendant is a descendant.

Wait wait wait.

I get it now. I was focusing on the present population when I should have been looking at the past population. Of course there would be plenty of people without kids back then. :smack:

[BrainGlutton]

[porgy & bess]

Methusaleh lived 900 years
Methusaleh lived 900 years
But why call that livin’
When no gal will give in
To no man what’s 900 years?

[/p&b)

[pepperlandgirl]

@gonzomax

Seek and you will find...: The Journey of Man - A Genetic Odyssey Whose your daddy?
There apparently was a successful adaptation that took over 60,000 years ago. There were however many unsuccessful ones. For some reason they died out. But ,this Adam did not live alone. He probably killed and ate the other ones.

So…“Adam” is Chuck Norris?