Page 1 of 2

[请教]Y染色体的突变能够提供这么多的确定性信息吗?

Posted: 2006-05-15 8:34
by 狸狸
从别人的博客上看来的,前几段是杂志的内容,后半部分是作者整理的“以前存留的文摘”。

-----------------------------

中国人的基因旅途--by lanlingwangzhe

看《国家地理杂志》(中文版)2006.3的封面专题《人类最伟大的迁徙旅程》:
人都

Posted: 2006-05-15 8:41
by Jun
This is all wrong. Everyone in the world now is derived from 1 single family/tribe (and probably 1 single "mother") that left Africa at some point. All of us. No such thing as 1 group left Africa for Europe, then another did for Asia, and another group to Polynesia/Australia. All the same tribe!

And the key piece of genetic message to prove this is mitochondrial DNA, which is passed on from mothers to offsprings UNCHANGED. No mixing and matching from both parents like nuclear chromosomes. Mitochondrial DNA has a single source and thus far more stable in projecting the genetic lineage.

Posted: 2006-05-15 9:44
by gigi
???????????????DNA??mixing and matching??????????????????????????DNA???????????????"??" (bottle neck)???"??"???????????????

Posted: 2006-05-15 9:59
by 森林的火焰
狸狸收藏的这篇根据数据写出来的激情散文好象是另一个计算,和上面那个根据线粒体的不是一次研究。但是写得有点儿骇人听闻,根本没有考虑人类亚种的产生和迁徙的时间性,民族的社会分法和自然分法。。。感情充沛但非常含糊。作者好象以为基因突变是流感一样,隔一段时间爆发一次似的。

Posted: 2006-05-15 10:09
by tiffany
森林的火焰 wrote:作者好象以为基因突变是流感一样,隔一段时间爆发一次似的。
好像确实是过上若干百万年就发一次。

Posted: 2006-05-15 10:16
by 森林的火焰
啊?不是细水长流,只是可见性状的要积累多久才能发现的嘛?
露怯露怯。。。 :action077:

Posted: 2006-05-15 10:25
by tiffany
基本上来讲,现代人类所有人都是从非洲走出来的一只雄性猴子的后裔。

Posted: 2006-05-15 11:26
by 火星狗
还是一只母猴子的后裔?
公猴子繁殖好像有点困难哪。 :-P

Posted: 2006-05-15 11:28
by Jun
I think the theory is that we are all descendents of 1 female early human. A few years ago there was an article in Nature (Science?) about searching for Eve. Eve's father, then, would be the single male origin of all modern humans (ie, Adam).

Posted: 2006-05-15 11:34
by 火星狗
很怀疑有没有Adam。如果说Eve's mother或者Eve的“无性”祖先,我还是觉得有可能的。

Posted: 2006-05-15 11:34
by tiffany
I remember there are 7 "Eve" and 1 Adam.... fuzzy memory 21.
Of course they did not live in the same period.

Posted: 2006-05-15 11:55
by silkworm
我觉得引文没有大的概念性错误。上面几位把两个事搞混了。

分子钟(molecualr clock)有两个方向。

最先“发现”的分子钟(Nature 1987, Rebecca Cann, Mark Stoneking, and Allan C. Wilson),是根据只由母系遗传的mitochondria(线粒体)DNA上的突变。这个方法把人类起源追溯到15-20万年前一个(a single)非洲女人,命名为Eve(夏娃)。

这个线粒体DNA只由母系遗传的理论,近年来有争议,有人发现母系和父系线粒体DNA之间是有交换的。这个发现,恐怕使得母系分子钟的理论需要有些修正。

稍后“发现”的分子钟,是根据Y染色体上的突变,当然显然只能查男人,不能查女人。这个方法把男性人类起源追溯到6万到 9万年前一个(a single)非洲男人,命名为Adam(亚当)。明显的,亚当和夏娃之间还差着N多年,但这就是目前的认识。

另,我不认为突变是流感那样爆发的,而是细水长流的。
正因为有这种细水长流的突变,根据DNA的突变率(比如线粒体DNA的突变率是2% to 4% every million years),才可以根据两个个体之间DNA的差异率,追溯出他们之间的时间关系和迁徙关系。

Posted: 2006-05-15 12:01
by silkworm
纠正一点,我们不是猴子的后裔。这在进化意义上,用词不当。

由线粒体突变为依据确定分子钟的时候,特意拿了人类(古人类和活人)的DNA和猴子、大猩猩、黑猩猩比较的,差老鼻子了。

我们是非洲某女人和某男人的后裔。

on the same line,我们老说:中国人的老祖宗是北京人,这也是错的。北京人(Pekin erectus)和欧洲的Neandertal,爪哇的Java erectu,其实都是进化路程中消亡的dead-end的品种。

Posted: 2006-05-15 12:26
by Jun
这篇文章讲得好象每次Y染色体一突变, 人类就大迁徙一次似的. 其实不是啦. 迁徙是一个连续不断的过程, 不是被某几个基因所推动的. 这几个MXXX 基因是被人孤立出来辨别人类种族分枝的surrogate标志, 因为大多数中国人有Mxx基因而大多数白人有Myy基因, 从这里可以推断出人种的分支过程而已.

从非洲跑出来的有许多apes, 大家都是差不多水平的, 忽然一下子被某个tribe暴长, 挤掉了所有竞争对手, 是什么理由呢? 现在的看法是关键在于语言的出现. 这个语言的出现一定是在这个tribe走出非洲前就产生的.

而且种族的分类也就是概括地分分, 说到具体个人, 某中国人的基因共同点可能跟某个非洲或欧洲人比较近, 而跟其他中国人远, 如果祖上有民族融合的成分的话. 皮肤的颜色不能说明问题. 亚洲, 欧洲, 阿拉伯, 北非, 这些地区都没有特别纯的基因意义上的种族, 一直在混合. 太平洋和美洲的原住民就比较纯, 因为一直分隔的.

Posted: 2006-05-15 12:42
by 森林的火焰
天,发现我学了这些年,很多事情还是模模糊糊的。 :let_me_die:

Posted: 2006-05-15 13:05
by Jun
这篇文章的口气很有点误导. 其实是倒过来的: 科学家抓来一帮人, 不同种族或相同种族的, 然后测他们的基因之共同和不同点, 看看有多少差别, 变异在何处. 发现汉族人, 比如说, 90% 有Ma的基因而只有10%的其他种族人有, 那么Ma基因就成为一个marker, 用来推断汉族人的历史分支点和相对其他种族的关系远近. 假如某族既有Ma又有Mb(例如非洲人)基因, 那么此种族应该是从汉族人直接分出来的. 但是如果他们长得象汉人而只有Mb 没有Ma基因, 就说明他们不是从汉族里分出来的, 而是跟汉族平行分出来的. 假如美洲印地安人有欧洲和亚洲人共有的基因markers, 或者二者都没有, 就说明他们分出来很早, 说明他们不是直接从亚洲人传下来的, 而是在欧亚分离之前就过到美洲去了.

就这么简单, 这个作者的讲法, 我觉得很乱, 很容易理解错.

Posted: 2006-05-15 13:51
by Lilly
如果有人有兴趣的话,可以读一下儿richard dawkins的书 "the ancestor's tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution"。挺有意思的,写的也不算深奥难懂。像我这样和生物一点也不沾边的人也能理解。

Posted: 2006-05-15 15:25
by Knowing
狸狸这个问题提的好!多么长知识,兴奋的说。 :admir001: :admir001:

Posted: 2006-05-15 15:45
by silkworm
“每一滴人血都藏著一本基因

Posted: 2006-05-15 15:46
by Jun
I don't have authoritative sources on hand, but IIRC, genetic analyses have determined that native Americans are NOT direct descendants of Eastern Asians. They branched out across the Bering Strait long before the ancestors of modern Mongoloids settled in Asia. They share more genetic commonality with Europeans. We, eastern Asians, migrated from the south upward to settle in Asia. They, Native Americans, came from the tribes from the north, from Europe to Siberia to Bering Strait to North America then to South America. So Chinese, Japanese, Korean are closer to Southeast Asians (Malaysia, Vietnam, etc.); they are closer to Europeans.

Something about the emergence of language on a recent NPR program:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=5369313

Posted: 2006-05-15 17:32
by gigi
A review paper from Nature Genetics
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v33/n3s/pdf/ng1113.pdf

The paragrphaphs discussing the differences of mtRNA and NRY (non-recombining part of Y chromosome) genealogies:
kya=kilo years
TMRCA=the most recent common ancestor
It is important to stress that such estimates of TMRCAs do not imply that the human population contained only one woman at 230 kya (the time of the mtDNA-based TMRCA, assuming constant mutation rates) or only one man at 100 kya (the time of the NRY-based TMRCA). The only implication is that all human mitochondria existing today descend from that of a single woman living 230 kya, and all NRYs descend from that of a single man living 100 kya. In both cases, it is likely that there were many more human individuals alive at the TMRCA—whether they were of the same species as Homo sapiens is hard to determine, but descendants of other species are either absent or extremely rare.

Although the reconstructed genealogies of mtDNA and NRY are broadly similar, there are some notable differences, probably owing to social differences in migration customs. For example, patrilocal marriage has historically been more common than matrilocal84, which can explain differences in mtDNA and Y chromosome data in a number of populations85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93. Demographic differences between the sexes, such as greater male than female mortality, the greater variance in reproductive success of males than females and possibly the greater frequency of polygyny than polyandry, may explain the discrepancy between the NRY and mtDNA dates. These factors reduce the effective number of males and may explain the more than twofold difference between the NRY-based and the mtDNA-based TMRCA. Another attractive alternative explanation is that mutation rates in mtDNA are very variable, and when this variation is taken into account TMRCA of mtDNA could become closer to that of NRY.

Estimates of TMRCAs from autosomal genes are higher than those from mtDNA or NRY. In theory, they should be higher by a factor of four and the estimates are in this direction, although the number of autosomal genes studied is small and estimates of TMRCAs vary considerably94. For analyses of autosomal and X chromosomes, recombination can complicate genealogies and make TMRCAs impossible to estimate. There is also the possibility of heterozygote advantage, which has the potential to increase estimates of TMRCA. Heterozygote advantage may be widespread throughout the human genome but has been very difficult to show unequivocally, and the only fully confirmed example is sickle cell anemia, for which very large samples were required. There is some optimism, however, that the development of techniques that can detect heterosis for some genes in yeast95 may lead to greater success in other organisms, including humans.

Posted: 2006-05-15 18:09
by 森林的火焰
[quote="silkworm"]“每一滴人血都藏著一本基因

Posted: 2006-05-15 19:57
by 狸狸
开始几贴看得有些羞赧……然后发现火焰也露了怯 :f16: ,小K也8懂 :f59: ,就重新兴奋起来 :party004:
张爱玲的谈读书还是谈读书2里,也有长篇大论讨论种族迁徙的段落,当时我也是看得津津有味。不过不记得那是她几时写的,依据的是哪段时间的研究成果,只觉得被她一写非常有意思。
人们群众还是中意斩钉截铁的结论啊,挖掘自己内心深处对“信我者得永生”的渴望ing :cool2:

Posted: 2006-05-15 20:31
by Knowing
我为什么要懂?我本来就跟你是一个等量级的!

Posted: 2006-05-15 20:41
by gigi
拜托了白博,以后不要再说人类是从猴子进化来的了。一会儿宗教界人士又该哭着闹着追问,"我哪点儿象猴子?我哪点儿象猴子?"

官方说法是,现代人与猴子有共同的祖先。 :mrgreen:

Posted: 2006-05-15 21:36
by 森林的火焰
狸狸 wrote:开始几贴看得有些羞赧……然后发现火焰也露了怯 :f16: ,小K也8懂 :f59: ,就重新兴奋起来 :party004:
张爱玲的谈读书还是谈读书2里,也有长篇大论讨论种族迁徙的段落,当时我也是看得津津有味。不过不记得那是她几时写的,依据的是哪段时间的研究成果,只觉得被她一写非常有意思。
人们群众还是中意斩钉截铁的结论啊,挖掘自己内心深处对“信我者得永生”的渴望ing :cool2:
我恼羞成怒地说:闻道有先后,术业有专攻。我这不还是科学长路上的小走卒嘛。

Posted: 2006-05-16 8:15
by Jun
用autosomal chromosomal 基因 来sort out 遗传线路? 太复杂勒, 太复杂勒! (当然, 有必要研究, 尤其是观察各个基因流传和扩散的规律.) TMRCA (最近的共同祖先) 虽然只有一个(实际上是两个, 一男一女), 但是现代人身上的chromosomal 基因可是从TMRCA 加上许多不是TMRCA的人混合在一起的结果.

用Y染色体和mtDNA来追溯geneaology, 就是因为它们的一传到底的特点, 父传子, 或者母传女传女传女... 不会被父母双方的染色体混合打乱规律, 每一代都重新洗牌.

Posted: 2006-05-16 10:00
by Knowing
很外行的说:怎么也没法想象所有人都是一对男女的孩子,肯定是人类发展到某个阶段被什么自然灾害给大规模灭了,就剩那一小个同祖先的子集。想想真是的,咱们那么努力保存生物多样性啦,文化多样性啦,扑哧,大手一捏,烟消云散。 :( :(

Posted: 2006-05-16 10:04
by tiffany
不,小k我要跳出来说,这亚当夏娃好像不是一对儿,是否生活在同一世纪还待考,是吧,蚕博?

Posted: 2006-05-16 10:09
by Knowing
知道他们不在一个时间啊,所以我觉得是人类发展发展到什么时候被阿而法剪枝卡查了,然后又发展着发展着被阿而法剪枝卡查了。。。肯定发生过不止一回。就像恐龙灭绝了只剩些火鸡一样。--火鸡就是现代恐龙,是吧?心虚的问。

Posted: 2006-05-16 10:23
by silkworm
嗯哪,亚当和夏娃不是一辈儿人,夏娃老多了,可是再老的亚当推不上去了,目前。

我觉着这事儿可以打这么个比方。就好比同时有几个大家庭,同时男耕女织的,结果传了十几辈儿二十辈儿,只有其中一家人的某个儿子这一枝儿传下去了。其他的不是生病就是车祸,或者香火不旺,自己断子绝孙了。然后最后活着的,都是这某个儿子媳妇的后代。

Posted: 2006-05-16 11:49
by Jun
别忘了, 虽然只有一个女人的后代传下去, 不等于其他人就没有传下去, 因为这个女人跟好几个其他"家族"的男性结合生子女, 而这些子女又跟其他"家族"的男男女女结合生后代! 所以实际上其他"家族"并没有象恐龙一样灭绝掉, 而是混在一起, 只不过他们的mtDNA没有传下来罢了. 传下来的女人都是她的女儿的后代这一支. 其他人的基因也有传下来, 不过是通过男性方面传下来的.

所以说亚当和夏娃不是"一对男女". 重要的一点是, 那时候没有一夫一妻制的, 是混交的, 一个eve, 子女可以有相当大差别的DNA.

Posted: 2006-05-16 12:35
by Knowing
:hum: 头晕。 :hum: 头晕,那一个男人的基因是怎么回事呢?如果所有人类可以上溯到一个男人,也可以上溯到一个女人,那么至少有一条染色体都是从那个女人来的,和一条染色体都是从那个男人来的,只不过剩下的还是别人的?还是那个女人,和那个男人的染色体,有可能已经不再我们身体里了?

Posted: 2006-05-16 12:39
by 笑嘻嘻
深奥。 :uhh:

Posted: 2006-05-16 12:52
by Jun
没有某一条染色体是从某一个女人那里一直传下来. Remember, 女人没有Y染色体, 而是有XX. X染色体是男女都有的, 所以今天你的XX, 来源无法pin down. 天晓得从哪里来的, 要一个一个地去对基因(we don't know all the genes on a chromosome yet)才知道是从那里来的.

Y就不同了, 只能父传子, 所以是一条线下来的, 不受母亲方面的基因影响, 所以我说没有mixing and matching.

Mitochondrial DNA跟Y类似, 只能从母亲/卵子传到下一代/受精卵(因为精子不带细胞质, 只带细胞核, 所以受精卵中的线粒体都是从母亲那里来的). 所以不受父亲基因的影响, 所以可以拿来参考对比, 找出共同点.

Posted: 2006-05-16 13:02
by silkworm
Jun wrote:因为精子不带细胞质, 只带细胞核, 所以受精卵中的线粒体都是从母亲那里来的). 所以不受父亲基因的影响
嗯,这个是建立母系分子钟的assumption。
精子里也是带着自己的线粒体的,只不过一般情况下受精以后父系线粒体就死翘翘了。
但是像我前面说的,近年有研究表明,在很特殊的案例里(http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2716),也有父系线粒体遗传的情况。这个发现对母系分子钟的计算有不小的影响。

父系分子钟,细节我不是很了解。但是我怀疑,用来做marker的基因,应该是选相对遗传稳定的、交换(cross-over, recombination)发生频率较低的。否则也不能保证是父子相传。

Posted: 2006-05-16 13:06
by Jun
Yeah, what I said is the conventional, widely accepted, general knowledge. Heredity is very complex. I have not read about paternal mtDNA, but I have read about epigenetics before. In other words, heredity is not limited to DNA blueprints, but is also influenced by non-genetic elements, mechanisms outside the nucleus.

Posted: 2006-05-16 13:07
by tiffany
这个事情,我的理解,是这样的。y染色体跟线粒体染色体是探讨人类共同祖先的两条线。父系从y上上溯,母系从线粒体上上溯,从这不同的两根线,迄今,找到人类一个共同父系祖先,n个母系共同祖先。实际上寻找人类共同祖先这一个故事是两个故事,中间的交通尚不清楚。

Posted: 2006-05-16 13:19
by Jun
Think of it this way --- nobody is originally from nowhere. Everybody is from somewhere. Any cell in my (1 person) body contains elements that can be traced ALL THE WAY to the beginning, the origin, the first piece of DNA that could replicate itself.

The Y chromosome today in every man's body has to come from somewhere. The same goes for mtDNA. The amazing thing is not that we all have similar mtDNA, but that our mtDNA are so darned close. Which means that 1) modern human "tribes" (ie, races, countries, ethnicities) were all originally from 1 single family/tribe (in the same sense that the origin of species happened only ONCE and branched out later), 2) the branching out occurred very recently and people mixed A LOT!


Posted: 2006-05-16 13:32
by silkworm
白博,不是N个母系共同祖先,也是一个,Eve。
你所说的7个母系祖先,也都是Eve的后代分出的岔儿,而且是限于欧洲,全世界还要多。(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Daughters_of_Eve

对呀,就象JUN说的,九牛一毛活到今天,容易么。

Posted: 2006-05-16 13:47
by Knowing
就是觉得不容易啊,不知道什么时候又被命运的大手就咯吃了。顿生四大皆空之感。
:f22:

Posted: 2006-05-16 14:07
by 笑嘻嘻
我生出跟四大皆空完全相反的及时行乐之感,就是该享受什么的,都赶紧的,没下回了。

Posted: 2006-05-16 14:16
by Lilly
I was actually feeling pretty depressive after reading the book "the ancestor's tale". Put in the perspective of the history of life, humans are nothing. And look at the world right now, and I feel like a major fight among human beings' growing population for the diminishing energy source available is inevitable. ANd it's not like catastrophic events didn't happen before in the long long history of evolution.
On this note, it might really be a blessing to be able to believe in GOd and not worry about a thing.

Posted: 2006-05-16 14:16
by Jun
1? 你们都错了, 正确的反应是你们要赶快生他一打两打孩子, 才能保证自己的基因蒸蒸日上, 千秋万代!

Posted: 2006-05-16 14:26
by Knowing
大家基因都是差不多的,费那么大事儿干吗。钻石的孩子跟咱们自己生的都一样,乐得让她费力气,咱们歇着! :mrgreen:

Posted: 2006-05-16 14:30
by tiffany
看,这就是为哈地球上恁多人口,都是打一个夏娃传下来的原因啊!

Posted: 2006-05-16 15:39
by 笑嘻嘻
tiffany wrote:看,这就是为哈地球上恁多人口,都是打一个夏娃传下来的原因啊!
此话怎讲?

Posted: 2006-05-16 16:10
by 密斯张三
只有一个夏娃勤劳苦干,肯费力气呗。――tiffany多打了个逗号。这个故事告诉我们,长句子不一定比短句子更容易让人产生误解。

Posted: 2006-05-16 20:09
by 猫咪头
Jun wrote: ..
用Y染色体和mtDNA来追溯geneaology, 就是因为它们的一传到底的特点, 父传子, 或者母传女传女传女... 不会被父母双方的染色体混合打乱规律, 每一代都重新洗牌.
Non, non, mon ami.





用Y染色体和mtDNA来追溯 because they are both junkyard where mutations once happened, are allowed to stay.

Our autosome and X chromasomes are so full of important genes and gene regulatory regions that mutaions have a higher chance of causing trouble, resulting the elimination of this new mutation from the gene pool. So these part of DNA we actually use (male or female) are very stable.

mt is a small organ in each of animal cell. That it has an independent DNA is evidence that Mt used to live an independent life. Now that Mt has been living in every animal cells since... the existance of animal cells, most part of mtDNA is no longer useful and hence allow mutations to acumulate.

The Y chromosome originated as a little pebble of juck material to pair up with X chromasome in cell division in the males.
In the begining, there is no Y. There are organisms with XX and there are organism with X. Then a little juck material began to stand besides X during cell division. This enhanced the efficiency of cell division in X. populations, and as a by producted, the little juck got preserved. Later the juck accumulated more juck and got somewhat bigger, and it copied 2 genes from the autosome.
But the basic line is, the Y contain NO unique essencial genes, and hence is the only place where mutation can accumulate in our own genome.

The fact that Y父传子, 或者 Mt DNA 母传女, is quite co-incidental.
As a genetist, I often wish that human beings has a pair of juck autosomes for us to study.

(But you see, a pair of juck autosomes would be easily lost during the years before apes come into being. Y got preserved only because X is life-essential.)

Posted: 2006-05-16 20:18
by Knowing
Man, this post is getting more and more exciting! :party004: :party004: :party004: