This article discusses a certain fossil,
a thigh bone found in Spain, that had previously seemed to many experts to
belong to predecessor to Neanderthals. But, its DNA most closely resembles DNA
from an enigmatic lineage of humans known as Denisovans. Until now, Denisovans
were known only from DNA retrieved from 80,000-year-old remains in Siberia (4,000
miles east of where the new DNA was found). The new finding does not match the
picture of human evolution that has been emerging in recent years based on
fossils and ancient DNA. Denisovans were believed to be limited to East Asia,
and they were not thought to look so Neanderthal-like. The finding shocked the
scientists, who are now rethinking human evolution over the past few hundred
thousand years. For example, they are now considering that there are many
extinct human populations that scientists have yet to discover. It is possible
that the newly discovered DNA was passed to both Neanderthals and Denisovans,
but eventually disappeared from Neanderthals, replaced by other variants. The
article quotes Beth Shapiro, an expert on ancient DNA, who suggests an even
more radical possibility: “that the humans of Sima de los Huesos belong to yet
another branch of humans. They might have been a species called Homo erectus,
which originated about 1.8 million years ago and became extinct within the last
few hundred thousand years.”
This article affects humanity
because it pertains to our species in particular. Moreover, it is questioning
all we have thought about our origins as a species. The study of human
evolution is important to our understanding of our own biology as humans and
this new mystery could eventually lead to a better understanding of our
evolution. This thigh bone will mean even more to humanity once the scientists
get more DNA from the Spanish fossil, as well as other fossils from the site,
to help solve this new mystery they have just come across. This site, a Spanish
cave, proves to be a promising place for new discoveries and new knowledge of
our evolution. Since the 1970s, Spanish scientists have brought out a wealth of
fossils from the cave dating back hundreds of thousands of years including 28
nearly complete skeletons of humans during three decades of excavations.
The article, although incredibly
informative, does at times go off topic. I found this discovery so intriguing
so I personally would have preferred to read more about it. Instead, the author
talks about various other discoveries which, although interesting, were not
necessary for the understanding of the article. Despite some irrelevant information,
I thoroughly enjoyed this article and recommend reading it.
I read Jackie’s article review on Baffling 400,000-Year-Old Clue to Human Origins by Carl Zimmer. I thought Jackie did a great job in summarizing the article. I thought she covered all the main points from the actual article by staying general, yet also giving information that was not in the article, which made me understand locations more easily (for example, the extent of the distance between the Netherlands and Siberia). I also thought Jackie did a great job in making this article important to real life. I thought that she tied up the importance of this discovery to the wider science world and our own little world of science in the biology classroom. Finally, I thought Jackie did a very nice job in giving constructive criticism. I completely agree with her that the author did go off topic, and I noticed this in another article of his too.
ReplyDeleteI thought Jackie had one major flaw and then one minor flaw. She did not mention the title of the article once in her review. I thought this was a major flaw because the name of the article is important in finding the article. The other thing that was similar to this that detracted from her review was the lack of bibliography. Since the title of the article and the author were not in the review, I would have thought that I at least could find that information in the bibliography. But, there was no such thing. These minor changes could have really contributed to a better article review. However, these were the only mistakes I noticed.
I was very interested by the fact that this one bone can change scientists, and my, entire view of evolution in humans. We have always learned the evolvement of humans as a, more or less, set idea. Here we are discovering that our ideas might all be wrong, and that we have to start all over again. Within the next couple of decades, there will most likely be new findings on different species of humans, which will give us more information about modern human beings. This is exciting news, and I look forward to staying updated on it.
I read Jackie's review of the article, “Baffling 400,000-Year-Old Clue to Human Origins”. Jackie did a very good job reviewing this article. Jackie's summary of the article was very clear and concise. She did a great job including all the important information from the article and summarizing it in a very neat way. Jackie also did a good job including credible quotes into her review. She included a quote from a credible expert on DNA, Beth Shapiro, which gave substance to her review. A third thing I think Jackie did well was giving criticism of the article. I agree that the article was not always exactly to one point, and I think her criticism would really help make the article stronger.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Jackie did a great job, there are a few things she could have improved upon. I think her article review would have been stronger if she had included more about what scientists believed about human evolution prior to the discovery of this thigh bone. This would allow the reader to better understand how a Denisovan differs from the picture of human evolution scientists have had for years. Also, she mentions in her review that other fossils were talked about in this article. However, she doesn't include much information about them. It would strengthen her review if she included more about the other fossils mentioned in the article.
Overall, I found Jackie's review to be very well done and informative. It is amazing that this one thigh bone can possibly change the whole view of evolution. I find this article to be very intriguing and I want to learn more about this topic.
I read Jackie’s summary of the article “Baffling 400,000-Year-Old Clue to Human Origins”. I thought that Jackie did a great job not only summarizing the piece, offering lots of detail which really helped the reader follow what seems to be a very complicated article. Jackie is able to take a ton of information and decide which is the most important, allowing her review to be concise while at the same time very informative. I also liked how Jackie went into depth about the effects of the discovery. The DNA of one thighbone fossil could completely change our perception of human history in the last million years. Such a discovery suggests that there may have been other species of humans that scientists have yet to discover. Jackie does a great job stressing the importance of this discovery, and shows all the ways in which it could affect human history. I also liked how Jackie gave her opinion of the article. I think that this really helps the reader get a better understanding of the article, and allows the reviewer to make legitimate complaints about the quality of the article. One thing that Jackie could improve on would be the number of quotes she used. While the one quote that she did use was extremely powerful, by adding more Jackie could have improved the overall quality of her review. Another change that she could make would be to include the title and the author in her review. This is very important to the reader, and is important in order to give credit to the author of the article. Jackie did include the link above, howver I think it would have been better to include the author and title in her review. One thing that really surprised me was the fact that the discovery of just a thighbone could have such a monumental impact on our perception of history. I am very curious to know what sort of discoveries are made as a result of this find. It is amazing to think that there is still so much more to learn about the history of our own species.
ReplyDeleteMy peer, Jackie Saralegui, did a great job in reviewing the interesting New York Times article about recently discovered fossils. One thing I think Jackie did well was presenting the information from the article in a very clear and precise manor. It definitely helped the readers get a strong grasp on the article even without reading it. Another thing I think she did particularly well was connecting the findings in the article to humanity. It is undeniable that these recent findings will change the way we look at evolution and Jackie made that clear. A final thing I think she did very well was critiquing the article. Although the article was very well written, Jackie did a great job in seeing where improvement was needed and offered up insightful additions that could have helped the article.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Jackie did a great job reviewing the article, there are a few things that could have been improved. One thing she could have done differently is the incorporation of more quotes from the original article. Utilizing only one, I feel that Jackie could have made her review that much stronger if she used more. Another thing Jackie could have done differently is when she criticizes the article for going off topic multiple times. Any reader would be interested to know about these other topics talked about. Regardless, Jackie still did an exceptional job in reviewing the article.
One very astounding thing I learned about from this article and Jackie’s review was the discovery of new fossils in Spain that are linked to early human civilizations. I was amazed to read that this discovery can lead to completely new understanding of our evolution. I feel like we as humans know so little about ourselves and it is discoveries like this that will change that. I can’t wait to see how this develops.
For this cycle’s current events reviews, I read Jackie’s commentary on the article “Baffling 400,000-Year-Old Clue to Human Origins,” by Carl Zimmer. Her review concisely and clearly summarized an article that was at times lengthly and confusing. Jackie also explained the connection to society very well, and even though it was quite obvious that is connected to humans, since the topic pertains to the origins of human kind, she took that a step further and saw how much more important the DNA from the thigh bone will be once the DNA is studied from the Spanish fossil. I also think that Jackie chose a good quote to incorporate into her review and did a great job giving the background of the speaker and context for what Beth Shapiro was saying. Overall, Jackie did a wonderful job of presenting and critiquing the article that she chose.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are a few things that I wish she would have done a bit differently. Although the quote that she chose was great, I wish that she would have explained it after, and not have just ended her paragraph with a quote. Jackie also mentioned how the generic image of human evolution is disproved by the discovery of this bone, but I would have liked if she’d have explained a little more what that evolution looked like, and how exactly this discovery changes that. Still, even without these minor changes, the review that Jackie wrote was very well written and interesting and I was glad to have read it.
I found the topic that Jackie wrote about to be very intriguing and important. These are certain images from science that are in our brains since we were in elementary school, and one of those is the classic evolution from an ape like animal to a human, but this discovery could change how we view evolution forever. I think that more information on this topic will soon be released and it will be very interesting to follow that research.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI read Jackie’s review of the “Baffling 400,000 Year-Old Clue to Human Origins.” One of the best aspect of Jackie’s review was the lack of spelling and/or grammatical errors. From reading these reviews over the course of this year I have found that sometimes there are clear mistakes that should have been corrected if the writer had proof read their article. Another aspect of Jackie’s review that was well presented was her paragraph on why the discovery is important to life and particularly humans. The fact that most of our understanding of human evolution can be changed by one discovery is astounding. From Jackie’s second paragraph I could appreciate and understand the discovery of the Denisovan’s DNA. Finally a third thing Jackie did well was her review in general. After reading the article myself I do believe that Jackie has a difficult time determining which information to write about in her own review. The aspect of also making sure her peers understood the information being presented was articulated well, in Jackie’s article. While Jackie did a wonderful job overall there are a couple of characteristics that could be changed to help Jackie’s review. The first is that Jackie should have included one or two more quotes. BY adding these quotes the reader can get a better understanding of how the scientists feel about the subject. It can also allow for more scientific information to be added to the review. A second thing that could have been improved was that Jackie could have mentioned the title and author of her article. The title of an article determine whether or not someone will read the article, so it is an important and viable thing to be placed into the review. One thing I learned is that the scientific understanding of human evolution needs to be completely changed. The fact that there may be hundreds of extinct species of humans out there is astounding. Something like this shows us that there is no limit to the discoveries and understanding that science can have. Just when we think we understand something, we are proven wrong.
ReplyDelete