True, but it can be presumed that the Neanderthals, associated as they are with only a subarctic climate, would eventually evolve pale skin and hair (not wasting melenin and better for producing maximum Vitamin D while exposing minimum skin). Neanderthal reconstructions should be blondes or redheads. Freckles are just what happens on pale skin and other apes get them on their paler parts, too.
And that two subspecies can interbreed and produce viable offspring says nothing about how often that will occur. It could be that successful pregnancies only happen occasionally, which would be advantageous if the female were a hooker or otherwise was interested in sex without issue.
Maybe. There are Asian populations that have lived in arctic conditions for long periods of time and yet still have black hair.
Personally, I find it hard to imagine that Neanderthal/Sapiens hybrids were not possible. But the fact is, there isn’t any genetic evidence availbale that says it was. The fossil evidence for hybrids, although suggestive, is controversial and not broadly accepted. At this point we simply have to say that we don’t know, and that we don’t have enough data to know. It’s reasonable to expect, though, that we should have much more definitive genetic evidence in the not to distance future.
We’ve already gotten some from several specimens, although I think it has all been mtDNA. If we were to find a frozen fossil, as we have with mammoths, that would give us much better material. But I was actually thinking of techniques for DNA extration that might improve in the future, as well as a better understanding of the diversity of our own DNA.
Well I see this individual has been banned, but I’ll correct this one anyway.
There were NOT vast differences in any physical traits between H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis. Certainly the classical Neandethals and modern Sapiens differ significantly. However both ‘species’ formed a spectrum, and Levantine Neanderthals and archaic cro-Magnon overlapped completely in every feature. IOW some Neanderthals would pass without comment even in today’s world and 40, 000 years ago would have been considered extremely average people amongst cro-Magnons.
Thus far, the mtDNA data suggests that Neanderthals have not contributed to human ancestry, but rather share a common ancestor with humans, as some have speculated based on physiology. It’s the strongest bit of data we have, and I think the best-supported hypothesis at this point is humans and Neanderthals did not, and likely could not, breed. There are other bits of evidence suggesting the same or otherwise, but the mtDNA data is arguably the most robust. I’ve not seen a convincing refutation of that hypothesis, based on principles of sequence analysis and phylogenetics. Bones are suggestive, but with DNA, we can approach questions of taxonomy with some greater level of mathematical rigor; and this approach has proven itself experimentally in every instance where such proofs were possible to attain. The bigger questions (the rate of mtDNA mutagenesis, and so forth) remain, and so the mtDNA cannot stand as a definitive proof one way or another. It’s safe to say the question is still unanswered.
Yeah, it wasn’t that long ago that we had partial skeletons of only 150 individuals to work with. I don’t know what the number is up to but it ain’t big and most have no recoverable genetic material.
Nothing wrong with him, just an example of a heavier facial bone structure, my husband is what I jokingly call a neanderthal type - short [5’7"] stocky body, forearms longer in proportion to upper arms and a brow ridge combined with the crown ridge, and a fairly heavy bone structure. He also seems to have a bit more general strength in things like dead lifts and grip than bigger guys like my brother and one or two of our assorted roomies over the past decade that are 2-6 inches taller and heavier, and in just as good physical condition.
I personally like the tall, heavier type myself. Twue Lurv struck which is why I ended up with a husband the same height as I=)
I guess, given what we know about their bone mass, the bowed shape of their long bones, as well as the size of the bone processes at the the fibro-osseous junctions where their tendons attached, the average Neanderthal male could go mano a mano with an NFL linebacker. I imagine an exceptional physical specimine would have terrifying strength, and would look equally fearsome. They were very robust folks, those Neanderthals.
So what? You’re making assumptions based on one set of modern humans (Europeans) and ignoring another set (Asians). There is nothing deterministic about the way European Sapiens turned out to imply Neanderthals had to turn out the same way. We simply have no way of knowing.
Of course not, but as the mutations at MC1R that result in fair skin, freckling, and red hair would be advantageous in a population with a range mostly limited to the sub-Arctic I would not be surprised* if, by the time they stopped being an isolated population, founder effect would trend the Neandrethals paler. I am not “ignoring” Asians; for the most part they were never that isolated nor limited in their range and as the risk of vitamin D poisoning would select against pale skin in some parts of their range it shouldn’t be surprising that the mutations never “took hold.” In the one group of Asians that meets the criteria of latitude and isolation, Eskimos, their diet is high in fish oils, the best dietary source of vitamin D, so a selective pressure for paler skin would not be present.
I never, EVER, say evolution “had to turn out the same way.” There are too many factors for which we need to account. Instead, I use weasel phrases like, “I’m not surprised,” or, if I want to go WAY out on a limb, “one could expect.”
Where are we supposed to get a sample of Neanderthal DNA?