Evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran and anthropologist John Hawks claim to have found evidence of a huge increase in the rate of human evolution in the more recent period of human evolution of the last 40,000 years.
Human evolution has been speeding up tremendously, a new study contends—so much, that the latest evolutionary changes seem to largely eclipse earlier ones that accompanied modern man’s “origin.”
Contrary to the common view that humans have changed little since out-of-Africa Cochran and Hawks think big changes have come since humans emerged as a distinct species.
“The origin of modern humans was a minor event compared to more recent evolutionary changes,” wrote the authors of the research, in a presentation slated for Friday in Philadelphia at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.
Cochran and Hawks see a 2 orders of magnitude acceleration in human evolution in the last 40,000 years.
Hawks and Cochran analyzed measurements of skulls from Europe, Jordan, Nubia, South Africa, and China in the past 10,000 years, a period known as the Holocene era. They also studied European and West Asian skulls from the end of the Pleistocene era, which lasted from two million years ago until the Holocene.
“A constellation of features” changed across the board, Hawks and Cochran wrote in their presentation. “Holocene changes were similar in pattern and... faster than those at the archaic-modern transition,” the time when so-called modern humans appeared. But these changes “themselves were rapid compared to earlier hominid evolution.” Hominids are a family of primates that includes humans and their extinct, more ape-like though upright-walking ancestors and relatives.
Hawks and Cochran also analyzed past genetic studies to estimate the rate of production of genes that undergo positive selection—that is, genes that spread because they are beneficial. “The rate of generation of positively selected genes has increased as much as a hundredfold during the past 40,000 years,” they wrote.
Humans were already spread over large areas of land 40,000 years ago and were evolving to better fit their local environments. If human evolution has been rapid then different population groups likely possess important unique adaptations to local circumstances and the differences between groups are larger than politically correct people would like us to believe.
This reminds me of a recent paper in Nature Genetics that found a quarter of genes show different expression levels in Europeans and East Asians.
Ethnicity stems not just from differences in genetic sequence, but also from differences in the expression of genes shared by ethnic groups, according to a new study in Nature Genetics. The authors found that 25 percent of genes show different expression levels in Asian and European individuals, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in regulatory elements likely account for many of these variations.
...
To see if some of these polymorphisms could cause differences in gene expression levels, researchers led by Richard Spielman of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia assayed gene expression differences between ethnic groups.
Spielman and his colleagues measured expression levels of more than 4,000 genes in lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from individuals from three different populations: Chinese, Japanese, and European. They found that gene expression levels from the Chinese and Japanese groups were largely the same, but that expression levels between the Asian groups and the European group differed significantly for more than 1,000 genes.
Local selective pressures produced so many differences.
Also see the March 2006 Plos Biology paper A Map of Recent Positive Selection in the Human Genome by Jonathan K. Pritchard and colleagues at the University of Chicago.
Cheaper DNA testing technologies are going to produce a huge flood of reports on human evolution and human differences.
March 2009 Update: This work has since become the basis for an excellent book by Cochran and Harpending entitled The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution.
By Randall Parker at 2007 March 28 07:50 PM Trends, Human Evolution | TrackBackThis makes sense relative to the major selection events, involving the amerind and aboriginals, etc., are relatively recent in evolutionary time, and nothing like those could have occurred except in the more recent centuries.
So what do you make of this Paracas skull?
http://www.world-mysteries.com/skull_1d.jpg
Just another head-binding?
Its the cone-heads!
One of Steve Martin's long-lost ancestors.
Well, this has been known for a long time. Anyone who studies evolution will notice that increasinglymore intelligence species have evolved in exponentially shorter times.
I found another article on accelerating change, across multiple areas. Fascinating stuff.
Does this change hold true for lawyers and law teachers, anarchists, libertarians, athletes, school bus crossing guards, and dental hygiene assistants? Or just regular folks?
I've really noticed it in this past couple of generations, natural selection that is. The MO is greatly unhindered: If it doesn't satisfy me to hell with it; well you know.
Check your high school yearbook. Chicks are a lot hotter than they used to be. Random mutation or natural selection?
Without really researching, I'd hazard to guess the linked skull gained that shape through disease. It basically looks like a normal skull with additional calcified growths. Ever get a look at John Merrick's bones?
You might find Inequality of interest.
I look at athletic ability and IQ.
Check your high school yearbook. Chicks are a lot hotter than they used to be. Random mutation or natural selection?
Better makeup, hairstyle and eyeglass frames, and lowered clothing standards.
Perhaps some of the evolution is due to diseases which require large concentrations of people to be viable. Think of how many people were killed by the Black Plague for example or the peoples of the Americas when they were exposed to European diseases.
If no one has blamed global warming yet, please name this theory after me.
Yes, overall rings true to me. I also think it quite cool that the evolution is accelerating.
Having said that, in regard to group differences, we should also remember that the statistical differences between DNA are important in terms of biodiversity by not in terms of humanity. Last I looked the ethnic groups interbreed just fine. We remain and are one species. In other words, I am more similar to my ethnic group but not terribly different from other ethnic groups. Just because I can resolve folks into statistical groups that mirror ethnic groups does not, in of itself, mean I have penetrated an essential difference. I merely have acheived statistical resolution of the fact that branches of humanity have evolved in geographic seperation. We should not exagerrate the differences because we now have a statistical microscope.
These DNA differences in the long run have application in terms of individualized medicine and targeted therapy.
But as the poster on inequality mentioned, the politically correct have merely over-generalized the Founding Father's comment on equality of the law.
Assuming a constant rate of change of 1 mutation per conception, how is this surprising? If you have 100x the number of people, you have 100x the number of conceptions, so you have 100x the number of beneficial mutations.
I put up a page awhile ago, http://burtleburtle.net/bob/future/diversity.html, where I tried to integrate the world population over time to find the distribution of genetic diversity in the human race. There were 100x more people in 1AD than in 1 million BC, and 60x more now than in 1AD. Over half the human diversity (that wasn't already with us at 1 million BC) appeared after 1750AD. So those beneficial mutations are mostly confined to tens to thousands of people each, often confined to one village somewhere, with about the same overall distribution as the human population.