Ancient DNA and its application to human evolution

Keynoter lecture by Svante Pääbo (Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Germany) at Human Evolution: Fossils, Ancient and Modern Genomes (20-22 November 2017), organised by Wellcome Genome Campus Advanced Courses and Scientific Conferences.
The conference was held at the Wellcome Genome Campus Conference Centre.

[@garyk.nedrow8302]

Dr. Paabo’s research is outstanding and the quality of his science is superb. However he is difficult to understand. Subtitles would be helpful - if they can be added without obscuring the slides.
The last section of this lecture is particularly interesting, with regard to sequencing DNA to find what distinguishes humans from older hominids, genetically. It would also be interesting to sequence recent human DNA in the same manner, screening for differences over the last 5,000 years. While human morphology has changed very little, it is likely that subtle changes in biochemistry have occurred - and may still be occurring in contemporary humans, particularly in the biochemistry and structure of the brain.
Although not discussed in this video, it is useful to remember that Neanderthals are not homogenous. They too changed over time, from very early Neanderthals that were genetically similar to very early homo sapiens to the very late Neanderthals in Europe, who were, by then, so different genetically that interbreeding with humans produced sterile male offspring - much as we find when the horse (64 chromosomes) and donkey (62 chromosomes) are bred to produce a sterile offspring (hinnies and mules). Horses and donkeys are classified as separate species in the same genus, Equus based largely on morphology. (Hinnies and mules cannot breed and are considered hybrids, not a species). But in classifying hominids, we must consider more than structural similarities and include intellectual evolution. It is the intellect that distingusihes homo sapiens from Neanderthals and Denisovans.
In fact, the intellectual differences between homo sapiens and earlier hominids is sufficiently great that an argument can be made that Neanderthals and Denisovans ought to be classified as late stage members of the genus Australopitchecus, or else given their own distinct genus. Classifying hominids on the basis of morphology and structure alone is misleading; the distinguishing difference is intellectual. Taxonomic classification of hominids suffers from erratic development over the past 100 years as fossils were found, here and there, from widely different periods of time. This patch work approach to classification has led to some unfortunately named specimens. If the hominid fossil and genetic record we have today were viewed objectively, ab initio, it seems likely that homo sapiens and Neanderthals would not be classified in the same genus.

[@usrine]

Great lecture. Svante is so iconoclastic.

[@matthewperry5121]

Thanks good stuff