12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Enamel Proteome shows that Gigantopithecus was an early diverging pongine.

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Gigantopithecus blacki was a giant hominid that inhabited densely forested environments of Southeast Asia during the Pleistocene 1 . Its evolutionary relationships to other great ape species, and their divergence during the Middle and Late Miocene (16-5.3 Mya), remains disputed 2, 3 . Hypotheses regarding relationships between Gigantopithecus and extinct and extant hominids are difficult to substantiate because of its highly derived dentognathic morphology and the absence of cranial and post-cranial remains 1, 3- 6 . Therefore, proposed hypotheses on the phylogenetic position of Gigantopithecus among hominids have been wide-ranging, but none have received independent molecular validation. We retrieved dental enamel proteome sequences from a 1.9 million years (Mya) old Gigantopithecus blacki molar found in Chuifeng Cave, China 7, 8 . The thermal age of these protein sequences is approximately five times older than any previously published mammalian proteome or genome. We demonstrate that Gigantopithecus is a sister clade to orangutans (genus Pongo) with a common ancestor about 10-12 Mya, implying that the Gigantopithecus divergence from Pongo is part of the Miocene radiation of great apes. Additionally, we hypothesize that the expression of alpha-2-HS-glycoprotein (AHSG), which has not been observed in enamel proteomes previously, had a role in the biomineralization of the thick enamel crowns that characterize the large molars in the genus 9, 10 . The survival of an Early Pleistocene dental enamel proteome in the subtropics further expands the scope of palaeoproteomic analysis into geographic areas and time periods previously considered incompatible with genetic preservation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new hominid from the Upper Miocene of Chad, Central Africa.

          The search for the earliest fossil evidence of the human lineage has been concentrated in East Africa. Here we report the discovery of six hominid specimens from Chad, central Africa, 2,500 km from the East African Rift Valley. The fossils include a nearly complete cranium and fragmentary lower jaws. The associated fauna suggest the fossils are between 6 and 7 million years old. The fossils display a unique mosaic of primitive and derived characters, and constitute a new genus and species of hominid. The distance from the Rift Valley, and the great antiquity of the fossils, suggest that the earliest members of the hominid clade were more widely distributed than has been thought, and that the divergence between the human and chimpanzee lineages was earlier than indicated by most molecular studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Generation times in wild chimpanzees and gorillas suggest earlier divergence times in great ape and human evolution.

            Fossils and molecular data are two independent sources of information that should in principle provide consistent inferences of when evolutionary lineages diverged. Here we use an alternative approach to genetic inference of species split times in recent human and ape evolution that is independent of the fossil record. We first use genetic parentage information on a large number of wild chimpanzees and mountain gorillas to directly infer their average generation times. We then compare these generation time estimates with those of humans and apply recent estimates of the human mutation rate per generation to derive estimates of split times of great apes and humans that are independent of fossil calibration. We date the human-chimpanzee split to at least 7-8 million years and the population split between Neanderthals and modern humans to 400,000-800,000 y ago. This suggests that molecular divergence dates may not be in conflict with the attribution of 6- to 7-million-y-old fossils to the human lineage and 400,000-y-old fossils to the Neanderthal lineage.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nuclear DNA sequences from the Middle Pleistocene Sima de los Huesos hominins.

              A unique assemblage of 28 hominin individuals, found in Sima de los Huesos in the Sierra de Atapuerca in Spain, has recently been dated to approximately 430,000 years ago. An interesting question is how these Middle Pleistocene hominins were related to those who lived in the Late Pleistocene epoch, in particular to Neanderthals in western Eurasia and to Denisovans, a sister group of Neanderthals so far known only from southern Siberia. While the Sima de los Huesos hominins share some derived morphological features with Neanderthals, the mitochondrial genome retrieved from one individual from Sima de los Huesos is more closely related to the mitochondrial DNA of Denisovans than to that of Neanderthals. However, since the mitochondrial DNA does not reveal the full picture of relationships among populations, we have investigated DNA preservation in several individuals found at Sima de los Huesos. Here we recover nuclear DNA sequences from two specimens, which show that the Sima de los Huesos hominins were related to Neanderthals rather than to Denisovans, indicating that the population divergence between Neanderthals and Denisovans predates 430,000 years ago. A mitochondrial DNA recovered from one of the specimens shares the previously described relationship to Denisovan mitochondrial DNAs, suggesting, among other possibilities, that the mitochondrial DNA gene pool of Neanderthals turned over later in their history.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                0410462
                6011
                Nature
                Nature
                Nature
                0028-0836
                1476-4687
                5 October 2019
                13 November 2019
                December 2019
                13 May 2020
                : 576
                : 7786
                : 262-265
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Evolutionary Genomics Section, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
                [2 ]Institute of Evolutionary Biology (UPF-CSIC), University Pompeu Fabra, Spain.
                [3 ]School of Earth Sciences, China University of Geosciences, China.
                [4 ]Anthropology Museum of Guangxi, China.
                [5 ]Computational Systems Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Germany.
                [6 ]Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
                [7 ]Lundbeck Foundation GeoGenetics Centre, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
                [8 ]CNRS FRE 2029 BABEL, Université Paris Descartes, Faculté de Chirurgie Dentaire, Montrouge, France.
                [9 ]Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
                [10 ]UMR7206 Eco-anthropologie, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Musée de l’Homme, France.
                [11 ]Institute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, China.
                [12 ]Catalan Institution of Research and Advanced Studies (ICREA), Barcelona, Spain.
                [13 ]Centre for Genomic Regulation (CNAG-CRG), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Spain.
                [14 ]Institut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain.
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding authors: E. Cappellini ( ecappellini@ 123456bio.ku.dk ), T. Marques-Bonet, ( tomas.marques@ 123456upf.edu ), F. Welker ( frido.welker@ 123456bio.ku.dk ), and W. Wang ( wangw@ 123456sdu.edu.cn ).

                Author Contributions

                F.W., E.C., F.D., and T.M.B. designed the study. W.W. conduced excavation of Chuifeng Cave. W.W. and W.L. carried out faunal analysis of Chuifeng Cave. W.W., W.L., and M.E.A. provided ancient samples. F.W., J.R.-M., M.K., P.G., D.S., M.M., M.deM. performed data generation and analyzed data with support from A.-M.B., J.C., C.L.-F., F.D. and T.M.-B. F.W., E.C., and T.M.-B. wrote the manuscript with contributions from all authors.

                Article
                NIHMS1541015
                10.1038/s41586-019-1728-8
                6908745
                31723270
                c8db17f7-c1aa-4508-9d1d-31c31b02cd51

                Reprints and permission information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.

                Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article