Monday, October 12, 2015

Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa

Zimmer, Carl. "Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 12 Oct. 2015. 


“Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa”
Just recently, a huge achievement was made in the field of biology- the first genome from an ancient human in Africa was recovered. The genome was retrieved from a 4,500 year old human skeleton that was in Ethiopia. A genome is an organism’s complete set of DNA, including all of its genes. Understandably, it is quite remarkable that scientists were able to find a genome dating back so far. Once a living human or animal dies, its DNA starts to fall apart. The corpse is usually populated by bacteria, who leave their own DNA behind. However, scientists have been piecing together retrieved DNA fragments since the 1990s. In 2010, a genome of a Neanderthal was assembled from 38,000 year old fossils in Croatia. It was thought that genetic material would be destroyed in the heat and humidity of tropics, so scientists often looked at the opposite end of the spectrum for DNA in terms of climate. However, more recently it had been discovered that the type of bone may play a greater role in the preservation of DNA than the climate. Ron Pinhasi, an archaeologist at University College Dublin, found that the bone surrounding the inner ear can hold lots of genetic information for longer than other bones. Their success in pulling genomes from the ear bones of thousands of years old skeletons in Europe inspired them to look for DNA in African skeletons. The genome of the African skeleton, referred to as Mota, was recovered entirely from the inner ear bone, which proved that genomes can be recovered from warmer and more humid climates. Mota was also helpful in helping scientists closely examine the “backflow” of genes. Recently scientists have discovered DNA segments in Ethiopians and other Africans that closely resemble the genes of people from Europe and Asia. From this information they were able to propose that there was a backflow of genes, which they speculated was about 3,000 years ago. Mota, about 1,500 years old, has no trace of Eurasian DNA in his genome, which fits the timeline. Dr. Pinhasi stated, “It’s an African without the backflow.” With this new genome, scientists were able to look at the spread of Eurasian genes into Africa through new eyes, and found the source of the DNA to be that of ancient farmers in the Near East. Mota’s genome has already lead to several discoveries, and will continue to do so in the future.
The discovery of Mota’s genome is definitely relevant to today’s society. Joseph Pickrell, an expert on ancient DNA at the New York Genome Center stated, “It’s a major milestone in the field.” This genome, thousands of years old, can help scientists study the genetic makeup of ancient beings and how it evolved and changed, as well as look into more specific things like backflow and the spread of genes. Mota’s genome also proved that genomes can, as a matter of fact, be recovered from warm, humid climates. That means that scientists can now start looking in other warm climates, not just Africa, for skeletons to recover DNA from, and even more can be learned and discovered about ancient DNA. Mota’s genome truly opened a door to many possibilities and discoveries for scientists to make in  both the near, and distant, future. So while this current event may not directly relate to everyone right now, the discoveries that will be made because of this genome will relate to everyone. When speaking about recovering older genomes from Africa, Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist, said, “I would bet it’s not that far in the future.”
Overall, I enjoyed reading this article and thought that it supplied a sufficient amount of information without making the article too long or confusing. The author did a nice job of making the topic clear and easy to understand through giving just enough detail and using vocabulary that is understandable to people who aren’t scientists. The author also included many quotes from scientists and experts on ancient genomes, so I knew that the information was from a reliable source and all the claims that were made by the author could be backed up. One thing that the author could have done better would be to include more information on “backflow”. The reader was never really given a clear definition of what backflow is, so it was a bit difficult to understand that part of the article and I had to make some assumptions and conclusions after rereading that were not obvious the first time I read the article. So, one improvement that could be made by the author would be to more clearly describe backflow. Another suggestion I have for the author would be to get to the point of the article faster. The beginning was a little bit slow and boring to read, so the author could have cut down a bit on the introduction to get to the main idea quicker. However, I did definitely learn a lot from this article and found it pretty interesting.

5 comments:

  1. Zimmer, Carl. "Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.
    .

    Maddie,
    I thought your review of “Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa” was rather interesting. I can’t believe that the genome from a 4,500 year old human skeleton from Ethiopia was discovered even after all these years, especially since DNA starts to fall apart after organisms die as their cells stop functioning. It has been thought that DNA would be quickly wrecked in warmer climates than cooler climates. However, new discovery has shown that the type of bone in the organism may play a greater role in preserving the genome than the climate. Though this could be a hard topic to understand, I thought you did a great job of summarizing and providing the readers with the major points in order to fully understand the story. I also thought that you did a great job of incorporating reliable sources into your review. For example, when you quoted Dr. Pinhasi, Pickrell, and Lee Berger, it makes the entire review feel more credible. I could really also understand why this is relevant to today and how it is just an important discovery. Lastly, I thought your review flowed very well because it was so nicely written.

    I don’t really have much to complain about your review. One small thing that I would have like to know is what is a Neanderthal, so maybe explaining that would help us understand even more clearly how old these are and how incredible it is to have discovered that. Maybe it’s a common term that I just don’t know so I had to search it up. You said that “Ron Pinhasi, an archaeologist at University College Dublin, found that the bone surrounding the inner ear can hold lots of genetic information for longer than other bones.” I was just wondering how he was able to find out about it. This however may not have been provided in the article, so that might be why you didn’t include it. Lastly, I was a bit confused near the end of the first paragraph when you talked about the Mota. So is Mota a specific skeleton or was it just the general name for those old skeletons, and how did it connect to those in Eurasia? I think you just have to clarify that a bit.

    I chose this review to read because the article’s title seemed interesting. I still can’t believe how far we have progressed in mapping our genome and the genomes of those that are over 1000 years old. It’s interesting to see how everyone is connected, even if they are from different countries or from completely different eras. Not only that, but the discovery that warm/hot climate may not prevent archaeologists from discovering more about skeletons from Africa can really expand our horizons. From this one discovery, so many more other discoveries can be known about the past and the present.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maddie chose to do her current event on the finding of the first human genome of ancient human from Africa. She did a great job of giving a summary of the article, and including the important information. Another good aspect of Maddie´s review was that she included a quote. Therefore, the reader can understand other people's opinion on the topic. A third aspect that Maddie did really well, was she included the definition of a genome, “an organism’s complete set of DNA, including all of its genes.” So, in case someone needed a reminder as to what a genome is before reading the review.
    Although, this review was very well written and Maddie met all the requirements for the assignment, there are a few things that would make it even better. One improvement, could be to add, into the second paragraph, how this will personally affect her life. In order to clearly understand why she chose to read this article. Another improvement could be to shorten the first paragraph, even though it is important to add all the significant information, the summary should not be too long.
    It was very interesting to learn that scientists have been putting the pieces together of the DNA fragments since the 1990s. This shows how important this is to scientist that they have spent so much time trying to solve this “puzzle.” Also, it reveals how complicated it has been to come to this discovery. I chose to read this review because it sounded really interesting, and I wanted to learn more.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maddie, I really enjoyed reading your review of the article “Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa.” There were many aspects of your review that stood out. First, I liked how you quoted a scientist. This made your review stronger because you had the opinion from a professional in that field. Second, I liked your summary. It was quick to the point, and didn’t have more than it needed. You had enough so I understood the topic, but not too much, that I got bored. Third, I liked your critique of the article because I would also like to know more about the “backflow.” Although I really enjoyed your review, there are some things you could do to make it even better. First, maybe you could go a little more into the significance of this discovery. Obviously, this discovery helps biologists understand genomes better, but what else. Second, if you added a little less about the article and more how it could affect the average human. This would allow more readers to feel affected by this article. Upon reading this article, I was amazed at the progress biologist have made with understanding and discovering the genome. By finding this skeleton, scientists can further understand how humans have evolved over time. Again, I really enjoyed reading your review.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really enjoyed reading your review on "Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa." One of the things that you did very well in your review was define the terminology necessary for understanding the context of the article, making it easy and enjoyable for all audiences, as opposed to just those familiar with biology. In addition, you laid out the reasons why this discovery is important in a very clear and precise manner, which contributes to the direct yet easy tone of your review. Lastly, you included a lot of specific information within your review, as opposed to simply summarizing. For example, your inclusion of the name of African skeleton, “Mota”, was a small detail that grabbed my attention while reading your review.
    While there are many things that you did well in your review, there are also a few things you could improve. For example, your review seemed a little long, and as a result, seemed redundant at times. Second, there are a few typos within the reading, which takes away from the overall strength of your writing.
    Overall, I found the review very intriguing, and found that the article made me more interested and excited about possible revelations in the evolution of human beings. Hopefully, this discovery can allow them to trace human ancestry further back and eventually find the missing link.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I thought Maddie’s review on the article “Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa” by Carl Zimmer, was very interesting and well written. I thought she did a great job with structuring the review so that it was organized and flowed well. She began by setting up a foundation and by explaining why this discovery is so important to biology and how rare the possibility of it actually happening is. She then went on to explain how the genome was pieced together over many years to create what they have today. Secondly, she did a good job of explaining each point, especially the beginning of the review when she explained why it is hard to obtain the entire genome of such an old skeleton, and then how the scientists were able to get around this and discover that the ear actually holds a lot of genetic information. She was able to form a strong base which helped me understand the rest of the review and why it is so important to biology. Lastly, she also did a nice job of including quotes, which really added to the piece. She integrated it well and showed the opinion of the scientists working on this study, which really helped clarify and connect the review.
    Overall, she did a great job explaining and shortening the article so that we could comprehend what was happening. However, I think she could have explained what backflow of genetic information was, because it seemed to be one of the main points of the article, but it was unclear to me what exactly backflow was. I also think she could have broken down the significance and shown more about how it relates to us as humans, rather than its impact on scientific research. She does a good job explaining how research will change in terms of how to extract DNA, but she didn’t explain how this would impact our lives. She did describe it a little, but adding a sentence or two, would have made it less vague and more understandable.
    This article was very interesting, and I think it's amazing that we can extract the genome of this skeleton who lived so long ago. This study opens up a lot more questions about the way our genes evolved as we migrated, and how different environments might have affected our DNA make up.

    ReplyDelete