William Golding imagined a prehistoric encounter between Neanderthals and our ancestors, Homo sapiens. In 1955, when he wrote the novel describing a preliterate society gradually exterminated by a more modern civilization, our understanding of this Stone Age encounter was sketchy. Scientists could not even say whether Homo sapiens sapiens had lived at the same time as Neanderthals, or instead were descended from them. But in the last 10 years, a much more complete picture has emerged of what happened--40,000 years ago--when the last two branches of the human family tree met, and one prevailed.
Neanderthals were not as primitive as they are often portrayed in popular culture. They were humans like us, and their brains were at least as big as ours. They were larger and stronger, and were successful hunters of big and small game. They probably even had language, which is generally thought to have arisen between 300,000 and 400,000 years ago. They were, in any case, anatomically capable of speech. Their stocky bodies are thought to have made them well adapted to the northern latitudes and glacial climates of Europe, where they lived for at least 300,000 years--far longer than we have.
Evolution, Primatology, Human Ancestry, Physical variationanimation0118
Anthropology
REFERENCES:
Ember, C. (2007). Anthropology. Singapore: Pearson Educational South Asia.
Ember, C., Ember, M., & Peregrine, P. (2009). Human evolution and culture: Highlights of anthropology. (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, Inc.
Ervin, A. (2005). Applied anthropology: Tools and perspectives for contemporary practice. Boston: Pearson.
Kottak, C. (2011). Anthropology: Appreciating cultural diversity. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.
Kottak, C. (2008). Anthropology: The explanation of human diversity. Boston: Mc Graw-Hill.
Launda, R. (2010). Core concepts in cultural anthropology. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Nanda, S. (2007). Cultural anthropology. Belmont, California: Walsworth/Thomson Learning.
Evolution is a process that results in changes that are passed on or inherited from generation, which help organisms survive, reproduce, and raise offspring. These changes become common throughout a population, leading to new species.
Biological evolution explains how all living things evolved from a single common ancestor, but any two species may be separated by millions or billions of years.
This species was bipedal, fully erect, and capable of grasping tools and weapons with its forearms. These fossil specimens have a larger brain size of 600 cubic centimeters (37 cubic inches), as well as a jaw and tooth size more akin to modern humans.
-Fossil skulls contain tangible evidence of unequal brain development, which is mirrored in the way stone tools were formed.
-The earliest of our ancestors to show a significant increase in brain size and also the first to be found associated with stone tools
A brief information about the SCOP protein database used in bioinformatics.
The Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) database is a comprehensive and authoritative resource for the structural and evolutionary relationships of proteins. It provides a detailed and curated classification of protein structures, grouping them into families, superfamilies, and folds based on their structural and sequence similarities.
Evolution, Primatology, Human Ancestry, Physical variationanimation0118
Anthropology
REFERENCES:
Ember, C. (2007). Anthropology. Singapore: Pearson Educational South Asia.
Ember, C., Ember, M., & Peregrine, P. (2009). Human evolution and culture: Highlights of anthropology. (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, Inc.
Ervin, A. (2005). Applied anthropology: Tools and perspectives for contemporary practice. Boston: Pearson.
Kottak, C. (2011). Anthropology: Appreciating cultural diversity. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.
Kottak, C. (2008). Anthropology: The explanation of human diversity. Boston: Mc Graw-Hill.
Launda, R. (2010). Core concepts in cultural anthropology. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Nanda, S. (2007). Cultural anthropology. Belmont, California: Walsworth/Thomson Learning.
Evolution is a process that results in changes that are passed on or inherited from generation, which help organisms survive, reproduce, and raise offspring. These changes become common throughout a population, leading to new species.
Biological evolution explains how all living things evolved from a single common ancestor, but any two species may be separated by millions or billions of years.
This species was bipedal, fully erect, and capable of grasping tools and weapons with its forearms. These fossil specimens have a larger brain size of 600 cubic centimeters (37 cubic inches), as well as a jaw and tooth size more akin to modern humans.
-Fossil skulls contain tangible evidence of unequal brain development, which is mirrored in the way stone tools were formed.
-The earliest of our ancestors to show a significant increase in brain size and also the first to be found associated with stone tools
A brief information about the SCOP protein database used in bioinformatics.
The Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) database is a comprehensive and authoritative resource for the structural and evolutionary relationships of proteins. It provides a detailed and curated classification of protein structures, grouping them into families, superfamilies, and folds based on their structural and sequence similarities.
Introduction:
RNA interference (RNAi) or Post-Transcriptional Gene Silencing (PTGS) is an important biological process for modulating eukaryotic gene expression.
It is highly conserved process of posttranscriptional gene silencing by which double stranded RNA (dsRNA) causes sequence-specific degradation of mRNA sequences.
dsRNA-induced gene silencing (RNAi) is reported in a wide range of eukaryotes ranging from worms, insects, mammals and plants.
This process mediates resistance to both endogenous parasitic and exogenous pathogenic nucleic acids, and regulates the expression of protein-coding genes.
What are small ncRNAs?
micro RNA (miRNA)
short interfering RNA (siRNA)
Properties of small non-coding RNA:
Involved in silencing mRNA transcripts.
Called “small” because they are usually only about 21-24 nucleotides long.
Synthesized by first cutting up longer precursor sequences (like the 61nt one that Lee discovered).
Silence an mRNA by base pairing with some sequence on the mRNA.
Discovery of siRNA?
The first small RNA:
In 1993 Rosalind Lee (Victor Ambros lab) was studying a non- coding gene in C. elegans, lin-4, that was involved in silencing of another gene, lin-14, at the appropriate time in the
development of the worm C. elegans.
Two small transcripts of lin-4 (22nt and 61nt) were found to be complementary to a sequence in the 3' UTR of lin-14.
Because lin-4 encoded no protein, she deduced that it must be these transcripts that are causing the silencing by RNA-RNA interactions.
Types of RNAi ( non coding RNA)
MiRNA
Length (23-25 nt)
Trans acting
Binds with target MRNA in mismatch
Translation inhibition
Si RNA
Length 21 nt.
Cis acting
Bind with target Mrna in perfect complementary sequence
Piwi-RNA
Length ; 25 to 36 nt.
Expressed in Germ Cells
Regulates trnasposomes activity
MECHANISM OF RNAI:
First the double-stranded RNA teams up with a protein complex named Dicer, which cuts the long RNA into short pieces.
Then another protein complex called RISC (RNA-induced silencing complex) discards one of the two RNA strands.
The RISC-docked, single-stranded RNA then pairs with the homologous mRNA and destroys it.
THE RISC COMPLEX:
RISC is large(>500kD) RNA multi- protein Binding complex which triggers MRNA degradation in response to MRNA
Unwinding of double stranded Si RNA by ATP independent Helicase
Active component of RISC is Ago proteins( ENDONUCLEASE) which cleave target MRNA.
DICER: endonuclease (RNase Family III)
Argonaute: Central Component of the RNA-Induced Silencing Complex (RISC)
One strand of the dsRNA produced by Dicer is retained in the RISC complex in association with Argonaute
ARGONAUTE PROTEIN :
1.PAZ(PIWI/Argonaute/ Zwille)- Recognition of target MRNA
2.PIWI (p-element induced wimpy Testis)- breaks Phosphodiester bond of mRNA.)RNAse H activity.
MiRNA:
The Double-stranded RNAs are naturally produced in eukaryotic cells during development, and they have a key role in regulating gene expression .
Nutraceutical market, scope and growth: Herbal drug technologyLokesh Patil
As consumer awareness of health and wellness rises, the nutraceutical market—which includes goods like functional meals, drinks, and dietary supplements that provide health advantages beyond basic nutrition—is growing significantly. As healthcare expenses rise, the population ages, and people want natural and preventative health solutions more and more, this industry is increasing quickly. Further driving market expansion are product formulation innovations and the use of cutting-edge technology for customized nutrition. With its worldwide reach, the nutraceutical industry is expected to keep growing and provide significant chances for research and investment in a number of categories, including vitamins, minerals, probiotics, and herbal supplements.
Richard's aventures in two entangled wonderlandsRichard Gill
Since the loophole-free Bell experiments of 2020 and the Nobel prizes in physics of 2022, critics of Bell's work have retreated to the fortress of super-determinism. Now, super-determinism is a derogatory word - it just means "determinism". Palmer, Hance and Hossenfelder argue that quantum mechanics and determinism are not incompatible, using a sophisticated mathematical construction based on a subtle thinning of allowed states and measurements in quantum mechanics, such that what is left appears to make Bell's argument fail, without altering the empirical predictions of quantum mechanics. I think however that it is a smoke screen, and the slogan "lost in math" comes to my mind. I will discuss some other recent disproofs of Bell's theorem using the language of causality based on causal graphs. Causal thinking is also central to law and justice. I will mention surprising connections to my work on serial killer nurse cases, in particular the Dutch case of Lucia de Berk and the current UK case of Lucy Letby.
Deep Behavioral Phenotyping in Systems Neuroscience for Functional Atlasing a...Ana Luísa Pinho
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) provides means to characterize brain activations in response to behavior. However, cognitive neuroscience has been limited to group-level effects referring to the performance of specific tasks. To obtain the functional profile of elementary cognitive mechanisms, the combination of brain responses to many tasks is required. Yet, to date, both structural atlases and parcellation-based activations do not fully account for cognitive function and still present several limitations. Further, they do not adapt overall to individual characteristics. In this talk, I will give an account of deep-behavioral phenotyping strategies, namely data-driven methods in large task-fMRI datasets, to optimize functional brain-data collection and improve inference of effects-of-interest related to mental processes. Key to this approach is the employment of fast multi-functional paradigms rich on features that can be well parametrized and, consequently, facilitate the creation of psycho-physiological constructs to be modelled with imaging data. Particular emphasis will be given to music stimuli when studying high-order cognitive mechanisms, due to their ecological nature and quality to enable complex behavior compounded by discrete entities. I will also discuss how deep-behavioral phenotyping and individualized models applied to neuroimaging data can better account for the subject-specific organization of domain-general cognitive systems in the human brain. Finally, the accumulation of functional brain signatures brings the possibility to clarify relationships among tasks and create a univocal link between brain systems and mental functions through: (1) the development of ontologies proposing an organization of cognitive processes; and (2) brain-network taxonomies describing functional specialization. To this end, tools to improve commensurability in cognitive science are necessary, such as public repositories, ontology-based platforms and automated meta-analysis tools. I will thus discuss some brain-atlasing resources currently under development, and their applicability in cognitive as well as clinical neuroscience.
Mammalian Pineal Body Structure and Also Functions
BIOSYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTION.pptx
1. BIOSYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTION
CULTURAL REVOLUTION OF HOMO
NEANDERTHALENSIS
SUBMITTED BY
M. HEMA
21MZO306
I – M.SC. ZOOLOGY
GOVT. ARTS COLLEGE
COIMBATORE
SUBMITTED TO
PROF.K KRISHNAMOORTHY
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
DEPT. OF ZOOLOGY
GOVT. ARTS COLLEGE
COIMBATORE
2. Homo neanderthalensis – The Neanderthals
■ Neanderthals co-existed with modern humans for long periods of
time before eventually becoming extinct about 28,000 years ago.
■ The unfortunate stereotype of these people as dim-witted and brutish
cavemen still lingers in popular ideology
■ but research has revealed a more nuanced picture.
Source: images.theconversation.com
3. Background on discovery
■ This species lived between 28,000 and 300,000
years ago.
– early Homo neanderthalensis from about
300,000 years ago
– classic Homo neanderthalensis from about
130,000 years ago
– late Homo neanderthalensis from about
45,000 years ago
Source: serviciodeviajes.com
4. Important fossil discoveries
■ The first Neanderthal fossil was found in 1829, but it
was not recognised as a possible human ancestor until
more fossils were discovered during the second half of
the 19th century.
■ Since then, thousands of fossils representing the
remains of many hundreds of Neanderthal individuals
have been recovered from sites across Europe and the
Middle East.
■ These include babies, children and adults up to about
40 years of age.
■ As a result, more is known about this human ancestor
than about any other.
Source: nhm.ac.uk
5. Key specimens:
Le Moustier
■ A 45,000-year-old skull discovered in Le Moustier, France.
■ The distinctive features of Neanderthals are already apparent in this
adolescent individual.
■ This shows that these characteristics were genetic and not developed during
an individual’s lifetime.
Source: donsmaps.com
6. Shanidar 1
■ Upper jaw with teeth.
■ The front teeth of Neanderthals often show heavy wear, a characteristic that is
even found in young Neanderthals.
■ It is probable that they used their teeth as a kind of vice to help them hold
animal skins or other objects as they worked.
Source: humanorigins.si.edu
7. La Ferrassie 1
■ A 50,000-year-old skull discovered in 1909 in La Ferrassie, France.
■ This skull of an elderly male has the features associated with ‘classic’
European Neanderthals.
Source: media.sciencephoto.com
8. Amud 1
■ A 45,000-year-old skull discovered in1961 by Hisashi Suzuki in Amud, Israel.
■ This individual was more than 180 centimetres tall and had the largest brain of any
fossil human (1740 cubic centimetres).
■ Neanderthals probably migrated to the Middle East during times of harsh European
winters.
■ These individuals had less robust features than their European counterparts.
Source: donsmaps.com
9. Maba
■ A partial skull classifed as Homo sp. (species uncertain) and
discovered in Maba, China.
■ This partial skull, dated to about 120,000 – 140,000 years old,
shows remarkable similarities to European Neanderthals and its
discovery in southern China suggests the possibility that
Neanderthals travelled further east than once thought.
■ More fossil evidence from Asia is needed to understand the
significance of this specimen.
Source: peterbrown-palaeoanthropology.net
10. What the Neanderthal name means
■ Homo, is a Latin word meaning ‘human’ or ‘man’.
■ The word neanderthalensis is based on the location where the first major
specimen was discovered in 1856 – the Neander Valley in Germany.
■ The German word for valley is ‘Tal’ although in the 1800s it was spelt
‘Thal’.
■ Homo neanderthalensis therefore means ‘Human from the Neander
Valley’.
11. Distribution
■ Remains of this species have been found scattered across Europe and the
Middle East. The eastern-most occurrence of a Neanderthal may be
represented by a fossil skull from China known as ‘Maba’.
■ A study published in 2009 confirms the presence of three separate sub-
groups of Neanderthals, between which slight differences could be
observed, and suggests the existence of a fourth group in western Asia.
■ The study analysed the genetic variability, and modelled different
scenarios, based on the genetic structure of the maternally transmitted
mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
■ The study was possible thanks to the publication, since 1997, of 15
mtDNA sequences from 12 Neanderthals.
■ According to the study, the size of the Neanderthal population was not
constant over time and a certain amount of migration occurred among the
sub-groups.
12. Neanderthals key physical feature
■ Neanderthals are recognisably human but have distinctive facial
features and a stocky build that were evolutionary adaptations to cold,
dry environments.
Body and shape
■ Neanderthals were generally shorter and had more robust skeletons and
muscular bodies than modern humans
■ males averaged about 168 centimetres in height while females were
slightly shorter at 156 centimetres.
Source: drneurosaurus.com
13. Brain
■ Brain size was larger than the average modern human brain and
averaged 1500 cubic centimetres.
■ This is expected, as Neanderthals were generally heavier and more
muscular than modern humans.
■ People that live in cold climates also tend to have larger brains than
those living in warm climates.
Source:. i.ytimg.com
14. Skull
■ Distinctive skull shape that was long and low, with a rounded brain
case
■ Back of the skull had a bulge called the occipital bun and a depression
(the suprainiac fossa) for the attachment of strong neck muscles
■ Thick but rounded brow ridge lay under a relatively flat and receding
forehead
■ Mid-face region showed a characteristic forward projection (this
resulted in a face that looked like it had been ‘pulled’forward by the
nose)
■ Orbits (eye sockets) were large and rounded
■ Nose was broad and very large
Source:. uploads-ssl.webflow.com
15. Jaws and teeth
■ Jaws were larger and more robust than those of modern humans and
had a gap called the retromolar space, behind the third molars
(wisdom teeth) at the back of the jaw.
■ Jaw lacked the projecting bony chin that is found in Homo sapiens.
■ Teeth were larger than those of modern humans.
Source:. upload.wikimedia.org
16. Limbs and pelvis
■ limb bones were thick and had large joints which indicates
they had strongly muscled arms and legs
■ shin bones and forearms tended to be shorter than those of
modern humans. These proportions are typical for people
living in cold climates.
■ Pelvis was wider from side to side than in modern humans
and this may have slightly affected their posture
Source:. csueastbay.edu
17. What happened to the Neanderthals?
■ Neanderthals persisted for hundreds of thousands of years in extremely harsh conditions.
■ They shared Europe for 10,000 years with Homo sapiens.
■ Today they no longer exist.
■ Beyond these facts the fate of Neanderthals has generated much debate.
18. Two main theories
■ Theory 1:
– They interbred with Homo sapiens sapiens on a relatively large scale.
– Followers of this theory believe that although Neanderthals as organisms no
longer exist their genes were present in early modern Europeans and may still exist
today.
– Interbreeding diluted Neanderthal DNA because there were significantly more
Homo sapiens sapiens.
– Neanderthals were a sub-species of Homo sapiens rather than a separate species
and hence their scientific name is Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.
19. Two main theories
■ Theory 2:
– They were essentially replaced by Homo sapiens.
– In this case, Neanderthals are a separate species from Homo sapiens.
– This model does allow for peripheral interbreeding but no significant genetic input from Neanderthals to modern
Europeans.
20. Why did they become extinct?
■ Various reasons have been proposed for the ‘replacement’ of Neanderthals by modern humans.
■ Today, most theories accept that Neanderthals displayed advanced behaviours and adaptive strategies and were not sluggish
brutes that stood no chance against the vastly superior Homo sapiens.
■ However,the incoming Homo sapiens were doing something that was different enough, and just that little bit more superior, to
give them an edge under the circumstances.
■ Exactly what was ‘a little bit more superior’is debated.
■ Of particular interest are a number of new studies that focus on the role of climate change and the subtle differences that
behaviour and biology play in these conditions.
21. Biological
■ Neanderthal reproductive success and survival rates appear poor
compared to Homo sapiens.
■ Neanderthal metabolic rates appeared to be much higher than modern
humans so would have required more food to survive.
■ Claims that Neanderthals could not run as well as modern humans over
long distances is supported by evidence from Neanderthal ankles.
■ Their heel bones are longer than modern humans’, resulting in a longer
Achilles tendon.
Source: cdn.sci-news.com
22. Social and behavioural
■ Neanderthal culture lacks the depth of symbolic and progressive thought displayed by
modern humans and this may have made competing difficult. Neanderthal culture
remained relatively static whereas the contemporary Homo sapiens were steadily evolving
a complex culture
■ By the time Homo sapiens arrived in Europe 40,000 years ago they had a highly
developed cultural system. This is despite the fact that 100,000 years ago there is
relatively no cultural difference between either species in the archaeological record.
■ Neanderthals may have had limited speech and language capabilities compared to Homo
sapiens and the extent of the differences may have played a role in their extinction.
■ Neanderthals may have lacked the adaptive nature of modern humans who had complex
social networks across wide areas.
■ The survival techniques of Neanderthals were not as developed as Homo sapiens. For
instance, studies on stress and build-up of tissue in Neanderthal bones indicate they may
have lacked systematic and directional planning in procuring food.
■ Neanderthals may not have used their brains they way modern humans do as their brains
were shaped differently – modern human brains have expanded parietal and cerebellar
regions.
■ Possible violent interactions with modern humans.
Source: imgix.bustle.com
23. Environment or climate
■ New data on the glacial period that occurred from about 65,000 to 25,000 years ago (known as
OIS-3) shows that it was a period of rapid, severe and abrupt climate changes with profound
environmental impacts.
■ Although Neanderthals were physically adapted to the cold, the severe changes in conditions
(within individuals' lifetimes in many cases) allowed no time for populations to recover.
■ Even small advantages in biology, behaviour or lifestyle, such as those mentioned above,
would mean the difference between life and death.
■ The archaeological record indicates that modern humans had a wider range of adaptations
which would have helped in survival.
■ There is another angle to the climate change theory.
■ Evidence based on extensive surveys of sites in Europe suggests that Neanderthal replacement
was not due to direct competition with modern humans.
■ Instead, evidence suggests that the severe conditions made the continent inhospitable for all
humans living in Europe - and all populations died out about 30-28,000 years ago.
■ However, there were other modern human populations living in Africa that were able to
recolonise Europe at a later date.
■ As there were no Neanderthal populations elsewhere, they became extinct. Source: scitechdaily.com