Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genetics question (Re: Comparison of Human and Ape Genomes)
Black
Member (Idle past 5183 days)
Posts: 77
Joined: 11-28-2008


Message 1 of 19 (96584)
04-01-2004 7:36 AM


Hey,
I was wondering something. What are the actual genetic differences between humans and apes. Anyone have info on this? Something else: do we (humans) have any proteins that apes don't have?
Thx!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Trixie, posted 04-01-2004 3:49 PM Black has not replied
 Message 3 by Coragyps, posted 04-01-2004 6:22 PM Black has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 2 of 19 (96671)
04-01-2004 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Black
04-01-2004 7:36 AM


DNA sequences
Both the human genome and that of Pan troglodytes have been completely sequenced and the sequences are available to everyone. At the moment comparisons of the two are ongoing and the findings should be published in the next couple of months or so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Black, posted 04-01-2004 7:36 AM Black has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 1:01 PM Trixie has replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 3 of 19 (96708)
04-01-2004 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Black
04-01-2004 7:36 AM


do we (humans) have any proteins that apes don't have?
Surely there are a few here and there.... The significant biochemical difference that I'm aware of between us is the exact sialic acid that we have on the outsides of our cells. But they're amino sugars, not proteins.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Black, posted 04-01-2004 7:36 AM Black has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by judge, posted 04-03-2004 8:04 AM Coragyps has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 4 of 19 (96717)
04-01-2004 6:34 PM


Title modification
I've added the "(Re: Comparison of Human and Ape Genomes)" part to the title.
Not to pick on "Black", but the title should have been something like "Comparison of Human and Ape Genomes" in the first place.
People, lets really try to get quality titles on your topics.
Little testy, but not cranky Adminnemooseus

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 19 (96718)
04-01-2004 6:35 PM


Thread moved here from the Evolution forum.

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 19 (97062)
04-02-2004 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Trixie
04-01-2004 3:49 PM


Re: DNA sequences
I thought this had already been done. Is this a second study to confirm previous result or go into more detail?
Chimps Belong on Human Branch of Family Tree, Study Says
John Pickrell in England
for National Geographic News
May 20, 2003
A new report argues that chimpanzees are so closely related to humans that they should be included in our branch of the tree of life. Chimpanzees and other apes have historically been separated from humans in classification schemes, with humans deemed the only living members of the hominid family of species.
Now, biologists at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit, Michigan, provide new genetic evidence that lineages of chimps (currently Pan troglodytes) and humans (Homo sapiens) diverged so recently that chimps should be reclassed as Homo troglodytes. The move would make chimps full members of our genus Homo, along with Neandertals, and all other human-like fossil species. "We humans appear as only slightly remodeled chimpanzee-like apes," says the study.
Goodman and colleagues used computer methods to analyze the amount of similarity between 97 important human and chimp genes and as many of the same gene sequences as are currently available for less-studied gorillas, orangutans, and Old World monkeys.
The results suggested that within important sequence stretches of these functionally significant genes, humans and chimps share 99.4 percent identity.
My understanding is that Bonobos ("pygmy chimps" currently Pan paniscus) are closer than chimps (but that a lot of the studies seem to confuse the two).

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Trixie, posted 04-01-2004 3:49 PM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Trixie, posted 04-02-2004 4:44 PM RAZD has replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 7 of 19 (97192)
04-02-2004 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
04-02-2004 1:01 PM


Re: DNA sequences
Pan troglodytes genome was released on 10th December 2003. See
http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/11509418

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 1:01 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 5:06 PM Trixie has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 8 of 19 (97210)
04-02-2004 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Trixie
04-02-2004 4:44 PM


Re: DNA sequences
thanks. what about Pan paniscus?
Apparently the Wayne State University School of Medicine was not using complete information then (or did they have inside access?).

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Trixie, posted 04-02-2004 4:44 PM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Trixie, posted 04-03-2004 2:09 PM RAZD has replied

  
judge
Member (Idle past 6443 days)
Posts: 216
From: australia
Joined: 11-11-2002


Message 9 of 19 (97449)
04-03-2004 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Coragyps
04-01-2004 6:22 PM


Surely there are a few here and there.... The significant biochemical difference that I'm aware of between us is the exact sialic acid that we have on the outsides of our cells. But they're amino sugars, not proteins.
In what way is this different?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Coragyps, posted 04-01-2004 6:22 PM Coragyps has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Coragyps, posted 04-03-2004 9:44 AM judge has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 10 of 19 (97459)
04-03-2004 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by judge
04-03-2004 8:04 AM


The sialic acids apparently have a lot to do with exactly what molecules will bind to cell surfaces - but we better get a biochemist in here before I step off into deep water.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by judge, posted 04-03-2004 8:04 AM judge has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 11 of 19 (97514)
04-03-2004 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
04-02-2004 5:06 PM


Re: DNA sequences
Don't think the whole genome has been sequenced since there would have been a fanfare of trumpets etc. There are sequences of bits and pieces available - you can do a search under the species name at
Search NCBI databases - NLM
Happy hunting!!
Edited to add - the previous work only looked at 97 genes which had been sequenced. Now we have the complete genome of both humans and chimps comparisons can be made using not just important genes, but also non-coding regions which are more likely to vary. This will give a better overall picture of the relatedness.
[This message has been edited by Trixie, 04-03-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 04-02-2004 5:06 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 04-03-2004 2:52 PM Trixie has not replied
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 04-03-2004 4:07 PM Trixie has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 12 of 19 (97523)
04-03-2004 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Trixie
04-03-2004 2:09 PM


Re: DNA sequences
thanks, trixie, I will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Trixie, posted 04-03-2004 2:09 PM Trixie has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 13 of 19 (97540)
04-03-2004 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Trixie
04-03-2004 2:09 PM


Re: DNA sequences
Looks like they have two genome studies
one simian virus
NCBI/sutils101 - WWW Error 404 Diagnostic
one mitochondrial
NCBI/sutils101 - WWW Error 404 Diagnostic

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Trixie, posted 04-03-2004 2:09 PM Trixie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Mike, posted 04-21-2004 1:38 AM RAZD has not replied

  
Mike
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 19 (101421)
04-21-2004 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by RAZD
04-03-2004 4:07 PM


Re: DNA sequences
Abby,
Just to address a couple of points:
There are no plans to completely sequence the bonobo genome.
Like Trixie said, the Wayne State study looked at a set of genes, not the whole genome.
An even larger study was published in Science last fall looking at about 7,000 genes between humans and chimps and mice.
Bonobos are not more similar to humans, nor more closely related to us, than common chimps. It was suggested at one point that in some ways bonobos may look more like the last common ancestor of humans/chimps/bonobos than do common chimps. In other words, since these three species had a commmon ancestor humans have changed a lot, chimps somewhat, and bonobos a bit less so. But this was meant to be a generalization, not to be taken too seriously.
Finally, and back to the original question, there are undoubtedly thousands of genetic differences between humans and chimps. We just haven't found very many yet; or, more correctly, haven't figured out which of the small changes mean anything and which don't. Most of these will not be proteins that we have and chimps don't, but our proteins will be slightly different, or how we use those proteins may differ.
Mike

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 04-03-2004 4:07 PM RAZD has not replied

  
catapam
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 19 (103031)
04-27-2004 9:47 AM


Who create early human beings?
Hi!
I’m from Romania and I have a question for you.
Recently because of genetics and molecular biology, the scientist declare that Neanderthal Man is a different species from Homo sapiens sapiens (descendents of modern humans).
Evidence discover by archeologists show that Neanderthal man can handle fire, create and use tools, create clothes, create colored paintings on the walls of caves, buried their dead.
Even we reject genetics, only judging after the skulls or bones found by archeologists, we must admit that they look highly different from humans.
So we must conclude that they are an intelligent species different from humans.
Now, I want to ask you, in Creation theory, who create those intelligent species?

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 04-27-2004 10:47 AM catapam has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024