What do you think?
Rate this book
أسلافنا في جينومنا - العلم الجديد للتطور البشري
للتنزيل:
https://archive.org/download/EugeneE....
او
http://www.mediafire.com/file/w700ru1...
https://archive.org/download/EugeneE....
او
http://www.mediafire.com/file/w700ru1...
Unknown Binding
First published October 1, 2014
34 people are currently reading
415 people want to read
About the author
Eugene E. Harris
2 books5 followersEugene E. Harris is Professor of Biological Sciences and Geology at the City University of New York, and a Research Affiliate of the Center for the Study of Human Origins at New York University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
May 31, 2021
Who Da’ Daddy?
Palaeontology and genetic biology are not for intellectual sissies. Nuclear physics may be hard for the layman to understand, but the developmental history of our species is a subject of equal complexity, with at least as many unsolved mysteries. And Harris lets us know about these without mercy.
If you thought that Darwinesque Natural Selection was all you needed to know about evolution, forget it. Its far more complicated than that. While reading Harris I found it useful to consider genetic analysis as a sort of quantum physics in reverse. The basic building blocks of analysis are genetic mutations, random alterations in DNA, which are like quantum events. Whereas physicists work forward from the events to their consequences, genetic researchers work backwards from how things stand now to the underlying events. Both disciplines have the problem of connecting their elementary events to the world as we see it - the physicist to the non-quantum world of perception, and the geneticist in the existing morphology of our species.
And this connection ain’t easy to make. As Harris says, “The field of genetics has not, by and large, been able to determine the exact genetic basis for most morphological features. When we are comparing DNA nucleotides we know when we are comparing apples with apples or oranges with oranges. With morphological features, one could very well be comparing apples with oranges.” There are an enormous (infinite?) number of ways that a feature, like a bone or a shape, can be genetically generated. Gene mutations have complex interactions with each other. Thus, for example, the mutations promoting large human brain size occur with others that reduce the size of the digestive tract which has also been adapted to process cooked meat. The result is an animal with sustainably high energy consumption... that talks; and thanks to yet another mutation, sweats over its entire body.
So there are differences in species-trees (the classification of evolutionary forebears by what they look like and who can mate with whom successfully) and gene-trees (the apparent sequence of evolution of mutations themselves). Sorting these differences out involves some complex logical analysis which takes into account things like Homologous vs Homomorphous traits, Gene Coalescence, Parapatric vs Allopatric (or even Sympatric!) speciation, Internode Times, Effective vs Census Populations, Junk DNA, and Genetic Drift. As I said: not for sissies.
So although some things about human evolution are fairly clear - like our separation from chimpanzees about 5 million years ago; and that about one third of our genetic material is shared with more primitive apes - it’s not all that certain who are our cousins and who are our grandparents. Even with the completion of the genome mapping for many of the relevant species, and the application of substantial computing power, no one really understands the route from forest ape to human biped. In fact genetic science itself casts a shadow on some of the most basic concepts of evolution: “the question of exactly how to define a species, remains a conundrum for biologists.”
There are also some other intriguing questions raised rather than answered by recent advanced research. For example, how a relatively small population of our genetic forbears got the jump on other larger populations which might also have resulted in humanoids. Or why the fossil record along with DNA analysis shows an almost catastrophic decline in the population of some fairly recent groups of our ancestors. Apparently we are not very good genetic adapters during our trek(s) out of Africa.
It’s all more than a bit like the television show Who Do You Think You Are but on a level of the species. Instead of finding out that great great grandpa was a drunken brothel keeper, we discover that our supposed superiority as a species is really just hubris. For example: our defective DNA is what allows us to contract AIDS and dementia while chimps and gorillas don’t. Rats and many other ‘inferior’ animals, it turns out are far better equipped genetically than humans to adapt to environmental changes. So where we sit on the hierarchy of species is really only a matter of what scale one chooses. Since other apes aren’t typically given a vote... well, it’s rigged ain’t it?
This is a serious book for non-specialists. Harris writes clearly and there is a logical development to the whole. But he doesn’t spoon feed the material. So be prepared to pay attention if you pick it up. Or alternatively... wait until you’re a bit more evolved.
Palaeontology and genetic biology are not for intellectual sissies. Nuclear physics may be hard for the layman to understand, but the developmental history of our species is a subject of equal complexity, with at least as many unsolved mysteries. And Harris lets us know about these without mercy.
If you thought that Darwinesque Natural Selection was all you needed to know about evolution, forget it. Its far more complicated than that. While reading Harris I found it useful to consider genetic analysis as a sort of quantum physics in reverse. The basic building blocks of analysis are genetic mutations, random alterations in DNA, which are like quantum events. Whereas physicists work forward from the events to their consequences, genetic researchers work backwards from how things stand now to the underlying events. Both disciplines have the problem of connecting their elementary events to the world as we see it - the physicist to the non-quantum world of perception, and the geneticist in the existing morphology of our species.
And this connection ain’t easy to make. As Harris says, “The field of genetics has not, by and large, been able to determine the exact genetic basis for most morphological features. When we are comparing DNA nucleotides we know when we are comparing apples with apples or oranges with oranges. With morphological features, one could very well be comparing apples with oranges.” There are an enormous (infinite?) number of ways that a feature, like a bone or a shape, can be genetically generated. Gene mutations have complex interactions with each other. Thus, for example, the mutations promoting large human brain size occur with others that reduce the size of the digestive tract which has also been adapted to process cooked meat. The result is an animal with sustainably high energy consumption... that talks; and thanks to yet another mutation, sweats over its entire body.
So there are differences in species-trees (the classification of evolutionary forebears by what they look like and who can mate with whom successfully) and gene-trees (the apparent sequence of evolution of mutations themselves). Sorting these differences out involves some complex logical analysis which takes into account things like Homologous vs Homomorphous traits, Gene Coalescence, Parapatric vs Allopatric (or even Sympatric!) speciation, Internode Times, Effective vs Census Populations, Junk DNA, and Genetic Drift. As I said: not for sissies.
So although some things about human evolution are fairly clear - like our separation from chimpanzees about 5 million years ago; and that about one third of our genetic material is shared with more primitive apes - it’s not all that certain who are our cousins and who are our grandparents. Even with the completion of the genome mapping for many of the relevant species, and the application of substantial computing power, no one really understands the route from forest ape to human biped. In fact genetic science itself casts a shadow on some of the most basic concepts of evolution: “the question of exactly how to define a species, remains a conundrum for biologists.”
There are also some other intriguing questions raised rather than answered by recent advanced research. For example, how a relatively small population of our genetic forbears got the jump on other larger populations which might also have resulted in humanoids. Or why the fossil record along with DNA analysis shows an almost catastrophic decline in the population of some fairly recent groups of our ancestors. Apparently we are not very good genetic adapters during our trek(s) out of Africa.
It’s all more than a bit like the television show Who Do You Think You Are but on a level of the species. Instead of finding out that great great grandpa was a drunken brothel keeper, we discover that our supposed superiority as a species is really just hubris. For example: our defective DNA is what allows us to contract AIDS and dementia while chimps and gorillas don’t. Rats and many other ‘inferior’ animals, it turns out are far better equipped genetically than humans to adapt to environmental changes. So where we sit on the hierarchy of species is really only a matter of what scale one chooses. Since other apes aren’t typically given a vote... well, it’s rigged ain’t it?
This is a serious book for non-specialists. Harris writes clearly and there is a logical development to the whole. But he doesn’t spoon feed the material. So be prepared to pay attention if you pick it up. Or alternatively... wait until you’re a bit more evolved.
Read
February 10, 2022Üçüncü Şempanze ve Göl İnsanları - Evrim Sürecinden Bir Kesit kitaplarından bu yana böyle güzel, sarsıcı, bilgi verici bir kitap okumamıştım. Şu sıralar hayatımda çok şey değişti.
Öncelikle Mersin'den Ankara'ya tayin olmam, bir kızımın dünyaya gelmesi, artan iş yoğunluğu, pandemi... Buralara bakmamı güçleştirdi. Okumalarım da daha çok işle alakalı oldu son zamanlarda. Ancak bu koşuşturmada fırsat buldukça buraya bakıp kim ne okumuş, ne okuyor takip ettim.
Elime aldığım birkaç kitabı bıraktığım oldu ama bu kitap diğerlerinden farklı. Hemen sardı. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind gibi bütün suçu insan türüne yıkıp kapitalizmi aklamaya çalışmıyor, siyasi hiçbir amacı yok. Sadece bilimsel gelişmeleri yorumluyor, anlatıyor. Saf bilgi var bu kitapta. Üstelik herkesin kafasına takılabilecek sorulara son gelişmeler ışığında yanıt vermeye çalışmış.
Neandertaller'e ne oldu?
İnsanın ataları kimler? Nerede yaşadılar?
Bunlar ve benzeri bir çok soruya genlerin izini sürerek cevap vermeye çalışmış. O kadar güzel, dolu dolu bilgiler edindim ki! Neendertal genlerinin hiç Y kromozomunda olmadığını, dolayısıyla Sapiens-Neendertal ilişkilerinden doğan erkek çocuklarının ölmüş olabileceği veya düşük olmuş olabileceği gibi şaşırtıcı bilgiler de bunların arasında... Ve kafamda yeni sorular bıraktı.
Evrene, dünyaya, tarihe, karanlığa yöneltilen yepyeni sorular.
Öncelikle Mersin'den Ankara'ya tayin olmam, bir kızımın dünyaya gelmesi, artan iş yoğunluğu, pandemi... Buralara bakmamı güçleştirdi. Okumalarım da daha çok işle alakalı oldu son zamanlarda. Ancak bu koşuşturmada fırsat buldukça buraya bakıp kim ne okumuş, ne okuyor takip ettim.
Elime aldığım birkaç kitabı bıraktığım oldu ama bu kitap diğerlerinden farklı. Hemen sardı. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind gibi bütün suçu insan türüne yıkıp kapitalizmi aklamaya çalışmıyor, siyasi hiçbir amacı yok. Sadece bilimsel gelişmeleri yorumluyor, anlatıyor. Saf bilgi var bu kitapta. Üstelik herkesin kafasına takılabilecek sorulara son gelişmeler ışığında yanıt vermeye çalışmış.
Neandertaller'e ne oldu?
İnsanın ataları kimler? Nerede yaşadılar?
Bunlar ve benzeri bir çok soruya genlerin izini sürerek cevap vermeye çalışmış. O kadar güzel, dolu dolu bilgiler edindim ki! Neendertal genlerinin hiç Y kromozomunda olmadığını, dolayısıyla Sapiens-Neendertal ilişkilerinden doğan erkek çocuklarının ölmüş olabileceği veya düşük olmuş olabileceği gibi şaşırtıcı bilgiler de bunların arasında... Ve kafamda yeni sorular bıraktı.
Evrene, dünyaya, tarihe, karanlığa yöneltilen yepyeni sorular.
January 14, 2020
For anyone with a general interest in genomics and human evolution this book provides a lot of interesting information. It is written for a non-technical audience and covers a wide range of topics. What it does best is fill in the details about the kinds of facts you may have heard before. For instance, we know that humans are most closely related to chimpanzees, but how do we know it, and how do we know when the split occurred? The answers are not as cut and dried as you may think.
The split between the two species is believed to have taken place no earlier than 5.4 million years ago, but is usually given as a range of 4-6 million to account for the considerable amount of interbreeding that seems to have taken place after the genetic mutations that resulted in Homo (keeping in mind that the first members of our genus probably looked a lot more like apes than modern humans).
The differences between us an our nearest cousins are slight. Across the three billion base pairs that make up the human genome, “Humans and chimpanzees differ at about one out of every one hundred DNA nucleotides, making us only 1% different. However, this amounts to thirty million DNA differences….”(p. 87) Furthermore, we can use a biological clock to estimate how long it has been since two species diverged. “Using the DNA differences between humans and orangutans, we can establish how many DNA differences arise every million years. Doing the math, we find that 0.238 DNA differences per 100 bases accumulated between species every 1 million years (we call this the phylogenetic mutation rate.” (p. 43)
The book begins with a discussion of which of the many ape species gave rise to us. Without preserved DNA scientists have to examine the bones to see which ancient species has the telltale skeletal signatures that indicate they were in our family tree. This is made harder by things such as convergent evolution, where similar features develop to meet similar needs in unrelated species. As an example of this, the wings of bats and birds look superficially similar but evolved separately; the last common ancestor of the two lived long before either were flying. An additional complication is that around twenty different species of great apes existed 13 million years ago, some with upright features and bipedalism, but which were entirely outside the human evolutionary tree. Every new fossil find reopens the debate: human ancestor, ape ancestor, or evolutionary dead end?
There is a good discussion of population expansions and crashes, and what evidence they leave within the human genome. Modern Homo sapiens are generally believed to have evolved about 200,000 years ago, perhaps in South Africa, perhaps in East Africa, or perhaps in a more complicated geographic range including both regions and additional areas, and many different populations. Another theory is that we emerged from a mosaic of different pre-human species over a vastly longer time. In any event, the breeding population of modern humans was much smaller than the apelike ancestors they came from, and DNA evidence shows that some time around 50,000 years ago that already small group experienced a massive population crash, being reduced by around 90% to perhaps only 4500 individuals.
Fifty thousand years ago is also the presumed out-of-Africa migration, but that too is more complicated than most people believe. There had to have been a more ancient exodus, since Homo erectus fossils two million years old have been found in Asia. There also had to be an earlier Homo sapiens migration, perhaps about 85,000 years ago, to account for the early human populations in Southeast Asia.
Since only one part of the total Homo sapiens population left Africa, non-Africans today show far less genetic diversity than the humans who remained. “Eurasian peoples show about 30% fewer genetic differences than do African peoples. If we compare the full genomes between individuals as far apart as Asia and Europe, we find many fewer DNA differences between them than between two Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert of southern Africa.” (p 129)
Early humans would have been dark skinned as protection against the strong UV rays of equatorial climates. As they migrated out of Africa their skins gradually lightened, but the process by which this happened was different in Asia than it was in Europe. The book discusses several additional examples of processes like this. For example, the changes that allowed lactose tolerance in adults are different in the European, African, and Middle Eastern peoples who developed that ability. Similarly, adaptations for living at high altitudes are different for people in the Andes than for those in Tibet. Another observation that arises from these studies is that very few adaptations are single-gene changes; most of them involve multiple genes spread across the genome.
There are places in the book where it starts to read like a paper for a professional journal. Some of this is due to the writing style, but some is also due to the nature of the subject. There is, after all, a minimum amount of technical data that needs to be presented in order to explain the topics without dumbing them down too much. Overall I found a lot of useful information here about where we came from and how we arrived where we are today.
We’ve found that the human species appears to be most closely related to chimpanzees across roughly two-thirds of our genome. But for a remaining third of our genome, the data reveal that we are not the chimpanzee’s closest cousins. For those genes, humans are either genetically more closely related to gorillas than to chimpanzees or chimpanzees are genetically more closely related to gorillas than to humans.” ( p. 33)
The split between the two species is believed to have taken place no earlier than 5.4 million years ago, but is usually given as a range of 4-6 million to account for the considerable amount of interbreeding that seems to have taken place after the genetic mutations that resulted in Homo (keeping in mind that the first members of our genus probably looked a lot more like apes than modern humans).
The differences between us an our nearest cousins are slight. Across the three billion base pairs that make up the human genome, “Humans and chimpanzees differ at about one out of every one hundred DNA nucleotides, making us only 1% different. However, this amounts to thirty million DNA differences….”(p. 87) Furthermore, we can use a biological clock to estimate how long it has been since two species diverged. “Using the DNA differences between humans and orangutans, we can establish how many DNA differences arise every million years. Doing the math, we find that 0.238 DNA differences per 100 bases accumulated between species every 1 million years (we call this the phylogenetic mutation rate.” (p. 43)
The book begins with a discussion of which of the many ape species gave rise to us. Without preserved DNA scientists have to examine the bones to see which ancient species has the telltale skeletal signatures that indicate they were in our family tree. This is made harder by things such as convergent evolution, where similar features develop to meet similar needs in unrelated species. As an example of this, the wings of bats and birds look superficially similar but evolved separately; the last common ancestor of the two lived long before either were flying. An additional complication is that around twenty different species of great apes existed 13 million years ago, some with upright features and bipedalism, but which were entirely outside the human evolutionary tree. Every new fossil find reopens the debate: human ancestor, ape ancestor, or evolutionary dead end?
There is a good discussion of population expansions and crashes, and what evidence they leave within the human genome. Modern Homo sapiens are generally believed to have evolved about 200,000 years ago, perhaps in South Africa, perhaps in East Africa, or perhaps in a more complicated geographic range including both regions and additional areas, and many different populations. Another theory is that we emerged from a mosaic of different pre-human species over a vastly longer time. In any event, the breeding population of modern humans was much smaller than the apelike ancestors they came from, and DNA evidence shows that some time around 50,000 years ago that already small group experienced a massive population crash, being reduced by around 90% to perhaps only 4500 individuals.
Fifty thousand years ago is also the presumed out-of-Africa migration, but that too is more complicated than most people believe. There had to have been a more ancient exodus, since Homo erectus fossils two million years old have been found in Asia. There also had to be an earlier Homo sapiens migration, perhaps about 85,000 years ago, to account for the early human populations in Southeast Asia.
Since only one part of the total Homo sapiens population left Africa, non-Africans today show far less genetic diversity than the humans who remained. “Eurasian peoples show about 30% fewer genetic differences than do African peoples. If we compare the full genomes between individuals as far apart as Asia and Europe, we find many fewer DNA differences between them than between two Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert of southern Africa.” (p 129)
Early humans would have been dark skinned as protection against the strong UV rays of equatorial climates. As they migrated out of Africa their skins gradually lightened, but the process by which this happened was different in Asia than it was in Europe. The book discusses several additional examples of processes like this. For example, the changes that allowed lactose tolerance in adults are different in the European, African, and Middle Eastern peoples who developed that ability. Similarly, adaptations for living at high altitudes are different for people in the Andes than for those in Tibet. Another observation that arises from these studies is that very few adaptations are single-gene changes; most of them involve multiple genes spread across the genome.
There are places in the book where it starts to read like a paper for a professional journal. Some of this is due to the writing style, but some is also due to the nature of the subject. There is, after all, a minimum amount of technical data that needs to be presented in order to explain the topics without dumbing them down too much. Overall I found a lot of useful information here about where we came from and how we arrived where we are today.
February 22, 2024
If you’re looking for a dense primer on population genetics this is your book, otherwise pass on this one. The latter chapters, when Harris delves into Neanderthals and Denisovans, are the most interesting—but even those are a bit dry and dated. Overall, I liked it but I didn’t love it.
December 23, 2014
Ancestors in our Genome was a great overview of cutting edge findings in the field of human genetics and evolution.
Harris frames the book by how closely we are related to our "nearest relatives". This makes the book somewhat chronological. Along the way, we discover our nearest ape relative, and how genetics helped us put this ancient controversy to bed (it's the chimp). Also, what do scientists do when they are studying genomes and the science behind it all. Ancestors in our Genome was really educational for someone like me, I picked up a lot of evolutionary biology such as the difference between gene trees and species trees, selective sweeps and genetic drift. The last few chapters explore some of our closest relatives such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. (Thanks to genetics, we were able to extract DNA from these humans from a single finger bone. Nothing else has been found of this mysterious relative.) While it has leaked into popular science that modern humans interbred with Neanderthals and even Denisovans, it was exciting to see the science behind it. The science throughout the book was top-of-the-shelf. Harris has taken great trouble to report on the newest findings in the field, and in a field like human genetics, a book like this is excellent for keeping on top of things.
While Harris makes his best efforts to take people along, quite a bit of this book was hard reading. Added to this, since the book I was reading was an ARC, it lacked quite a few of the figures, and the diagrams were unintelligible. This is not taking away from the book, but I review what I read. There's a nice glossary at the end though, and a peak at it regularly won't hurt. The writing otherwise is flowing and while you don't get sucked in, you don't get bored either.
Overall, Ancestors in Our Genome was great science reading, especially for people in some background in this area.
Full Disclosure: I received an ARC from the publisher in exchange for a review.
Harris frames the book by how closely we are related to our "nearest relatives". This makes the book somewhat chronological. Along the way, we discover our nearest ape relative, and how genetics helped us put this ancient controversy to bed (it's the chimp). Also, what do scientists do when they are studying genomes and the science behind it all. Ancestors in our Genome was really educational for someone like me, I picked up a lot of evolutionary biology such as the difference between gene trees and species trees, selective sweeps and genetic drift. The last few chapters explore some of our closest relatives such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. (Thanks to genetics, we were able to extract DNA from these humans from a single finger bone. Nothing else has been found of this mysterious relative.) While it has leaked into popular science that modern humans interbred with Neanderthals and even Denisovans, it was exciting to see the science behind it. The science throughout the book was top-of-the-shelf. Harris has taken great trouble to report on the newest findings in the field, and in a field like human genetics, a book like this is excellent for keeping on top of things.
While Harris makes his best efforts to take people along, quite a bit of this book was hard reading. Added to this, since the book I was reading was an ARC, it lacked quite a few of the figures, and the diagrams were unintelligible. This is not taking away from the book, but I review what I read. There's a nice glossary at the end though, and a peak at it regularly won't hurt. The writing otherwise is flowing and while you don't get sucked in, you don't get bored either.
Overall, Ancestors in Our Genome was great science reading, especially for people in some background in this area.
Full Disclosure: I received an ARC from the publisher in exchange for a review.
March 14, 2020
İnsanın biyolojik evrimi hakkında güncel bilgilerle dolu muhteşem bir popüler bilim kitabı.
Yazar, primat evrimini anlamada morfolojinin ve genetik biliminin yöntemleri arasındaki farklılıklardan bahsederek başlamış. Evrimsel akrabalık ilişkilerini anlamakta morfolojiyi tek başına kullanmanın geçmişte ne kadar yanıltıcı olduğu güzel örneklerle anlatmış. Kitabın geri kalanında, bugün yaşamakta olan insan türünün ve diğer arkeik insan türlerinin evrimsel geçmişlerini ortaya çıkarmak için yapılan çalışmalara bir çok örnekler verilmiş.
Neandartel ve Denisova arkeik insanlarının Homo sapiens ile olan evrimsel ilişkilerinin bu kadar derli toplu ve anlaşılır şekilde anlatıldığı bir kitaba daha önce rastlamamıştım.
Çok beğendim kitabı!
Yazar, primat evrimini anlamada morfolojinin ve genetik biliminin yöntemleri arasındaki farklılıklardan bahsederek başlamış. Evrimsel akrabalık ilişkilerini anlamakta morfolojiyi tek başına kullanmanın geçmişte ne kadar yanıltıcı olduğu güzel örneklerle anlatmış. Kitabın geri kalanında, bugün yaşamakta olan insan türünün ve diğer arkeik insan türlerinin evrimsel geçmişlerini ortaya çıkarmak için yapılan çalışmalara bir çok örnekler verilmiş.
Neandartel ve Denisova arkeik insanlarının Homo sapiens ile olan evrimsel ilişkilerinin bu kadar derli toplu ve anlaşılır şekilde anlatıldığı bir kitaba daha önce rastlamamıştım.
Çok beğendim kitabı!
December 6, 2014
Ancestors in Our Genome: The New Science of Human Evolution
by Eugene E. Harris
I found this book to be very concise and personable to the general public. Taking a difficult topic of Genetics and placing it like Carl Sagan did the universe in the Cosmos series. It was so interesting that I had to purchase my own copy to continue diving into the subject. I learned many interesting facts that I may use in my research, and would highly recommend this book to those who question the ideas of Genetics, and the human Genome. This book is a great introductory book on the subject of evolution and the development of the human Genome.
by Eugene E. Harris
I found this book to be very concise and personable to the general public. Taking a difficult topic of Genetics and placing it like Carl Sagan did the universe in the Cosmos series. It was so interesting that I had to purchase my own copy to continue diving into the subject. I learned many interesting facts that I may use in my research, and would highly recommend this book to those who question the ideas of Genetics, and the human Genome. This book is a great introductory book on the subject of evolution and the development of the human Genome.
October 20, 2014
'Ancestors in Our Genome' is a comprehensive approach to the nuances of current genome studies and the implications that the study of genetic material has for the human population and the world around us. It is an excellent introductory book for those making the transition to studying life sciences in higher education. However, despite its clear explanations, it is not a book for a complete novice, because the reader must first have a firm grasp of the complex structure of DNA, its constituents and how they are relevant to cell function. This is necessary in order get their head around the astounding number of ways the genome can be studied, as well as how the research can be at odds with traditional studies of anatomical form and function and natural selection with regards to species development and evolution. This said, anyone prepared to take the time to do this ground work will be rewarded with a book rich with information and description as they immerse themselves in the fascinating world of genetic study, particularly because of its relevance to humans in their everyday lives and what that knowledge might mean for us in the future. The book is certainly a heroic task and clearly a labour of love from someone whose passion for the subject exudes from every page.
October 31, 2024
This is a good primer on human evolution, drawing on what paleogenetics can teach us. However, 2014 was the stones ages of ancient DNA work. This is now very dated. There are still a lot of evolutionary science ideas that are valuable and largely timeless, which can make it worth reading to anyone. However, for those looking for more detailed and contemporary insights in modern human populations and recent human evolution, I recommend David Reich's research and his book Who We Are And How We Got Here as an updated version, though Reich's book has less deep evolution-related content but more recent population history insights.
October 24, 2015
A clearly stated and cheerful response to the morphology crowd in paleoanthropology. Until recently the only obvious method of characterizing evolutionary genealogies was through comparisons of form; essentially humans have a shape most similar to that of the apes, ergo humans are apes. To determine evolutionary decent then, the best outcome was to find a place for a fossil creature that fit well as an intermediary step between others on an evolutionary tree. This is how evolution was documented for more than a century, and with the exception of occasional refinements such as cladistics this process essentially defined paleoanthropology until the very recent past.
Then came the genetics revolution. Final sequencing of the human genome in 2001, better techniques for recovering partial sequences, and the arrival of sequencing technologies with high throughputs threw open the doors to testable theories of ancestral research. This is where Harris comes in. Where the old process of discussing which fossil form most closely resembles modern humans was mostly a matter of authority, the new genetic based process removes the emphasis from how things look and puts it upon measurable changes in the actual agent of evolutionary change. Harris presents a clear and cogent explanation of the problems in identifying when and where two species diverged, and how they can be understood in the context of populations rather than individuals. There is a great deal of discussion in the closing chapters of the book about genetic drift, the effects of small populations, and where humanity's future evolutionary path may lead, but this was of less interest to me than the earlier chapters explaining the limits and apparent paradoxes of genetic dating of speciation, which are very informative. No doubt, given the newness of the field and the relatively small datasets the field is working with, the theories and examples in this book are probably already out of date, but this introduction into the state of the field as of last year was eye opening and engaging.
Then came the genetics revolution. Final sequencing of the human genome in 2001, better techniques for recovering partial sequences, and the arrival of sequencing technologies with high throughputs threw open the doors to testable theories of ancestral research. This is where Harris comes in. Where the old process of discussing which fossil form most closely resembles modern humans was mostly a matter of authority, the new genetic based process removes the emphasis from how things look and puts it upon measurable changes in the actual agent of evolutionary change. Harris presents a clear and cogent explanation of the problems in identifying when and where two species diverged, and how they can be understood in the context of populations rather than individuals. There is a great deal of discussion in the closing chapters of the book about genetic drift, the effects of small populations, and where humanity's future evolutionary path may lead, but this was of less interest to me than the earlier chapters explaining the limits and apparent paradoxes of genetic dating of speciation, which are very informative. No doubt, given the newness of the field and the relatively small datasets the field is working with, the theories and examples in this book are probably already out of date, but this introduction into the state of the field as of last year was eye opening and engaging.
March 7, 2015
Biology professor review: This book made a good presentation of the role that genomics analysis is playing in the field of human and primate evolutionary biology. The book was well-organized and fairly easy to read, though the diagrams and hypothetical examples for explaining different scenarios could have been a bit clearer. While fundamental concepts were explained clearly, knowledge of DNA, meiosis and genetic recombination, population genetics, genetic drift, natural selection, and current thinking about the human ancestral lineage were assumed, so this book is best for scientists in other fields looking to get the latest in evolutionary genomics, or laypersons already well-read in genetics and evolution. I would not recommend this as a starting point for a person with little knowledge of genetics or evolution. Because most of this research is based on mathematical and statistical analysis of genomic data sets, the research methodologies are not discussed in detail. The author incorporated the most recent research possible given the deadlines of publication, and this book was not a platform to promote his work, which some of these books are. This book is a factual reporting of research results, and does not include any "human-interest" stories about researchers or the process of research.
February 22, 2015
Loved this scholarly epic published by the Oxford University Press, written by a respected leader in the academic field. It should be of great interest to genealogists, genetic genealogists, geneticists, anthropologists, archaeologists, biologists, biochemists, and anyone who would like to update their beliefs with the latest advances in trusted research about the human species. The author tells us what makes us human: our bipedal stature, upright heads, less sharpened teeth, and how we descended, with illustrations, from earlier forms of man and split from chimpanzees many thousands of years ago. It's all about the science behind the evolution of man as proved by the work of scientists collaborating worldwide. Recent DNA genomic testing has proved our genetic relationship with earlier forms of hominids: Neanderthals, and excitingly, Denisovans. The breakneck speed, in relative terms, of scientific breakthroughs in this field make this book compelling reading. It helps us understand what we are made of and how we became human. Buy one for yourself, and another for a great gift to anyone in your family.
March 2, 2015
Ancestors in Our Genome: The New Science of Human Evolution by Eugene E. Harris (Oxford University Press, $27.95).
Genetic research and DNA sequencing have opened up a wide field of uses, and one of those is population genetics, the use of genetic evidence to determine the movements of entire groups. In Ancestors in Our Genome: The New Science of Human Evolution, Eugene E. Harris, a professor at NYU who studies human origins, explains how the information encoded in our genetic heritage can precisely track human evolution, including telling us which other species are our closest relatives and when we split off from the other species on the same branch of the evolutionary tree.
This is a little more detailed than a general interest book on evolutionary biology, but that’s because it’s so loaded with information about what our genome can tell us ...
Full review on Lit/Rant:
http://litrant.tumblr.com/post/110983...
Genetic research and DNA sequencing have opened up a wide field of uses, and one of those is population genetics, the use of genetic evidence to determine the movements of entire groups. In Ancestors in Our Genome: The New Science of Human Evolution, Eugene E. Harris, a professor at NYU who studies human origins, explains how the information encoded in our genetic heritage can precisely track human evolution, including telling us which other species are our closest relatives and when we split off from the other species on the same branch of the evolutionary tree.
This is a little more detailed than a general interest book on evolutionary biology, but that’s because it’s so loaded with information about what our genome can tell us ...
Full review on Lit/Rant:
http://litrant.tumblr.com/post/110983...
March 2, 2016
A very good description of the current state of science regarding our human and primate ancestors, from about 2 million years ago and to the present. Discusses the "out of Africa" hypothesis, the interaction between Homo sapiens and the Neanderthals, and the scientific theory and data behind it. Especially interesting for me was the description of the former battle between the fossil and the genetic approaches to paleontology, which has now basically been resolved in favour of genomes. However, the importance of fossils has been tremendously increased by the new methods for obtaining genome data from old bones. It nicely complements Karin Bojs recent book (in Swedish only, so far).
March 29, 2020
We live in an amazing era of discovery. As Harris says in the epilogue, "we are now firmly in a new scientific age - the age of genomes." By studying genomes, we can learn, or hope to learn, more about our earliest ancestors than we could have previously imagined.
When I was growing up in the 1970s, paleontology rested entirely on the morphology of discovered fossils. In popularized parlance, paleontologists were searching for the "missing link" between humans and apes. While that particular locution was always an over-simplification, today the reality of our evolutionary history has become inescapably more complex than a linear progression from "the apes."
An idea that Harris cements early on is that morphological studies can get evolutionary relationships wrong even for living species (he cites his own work as a student researcher, which occurred in the genitive ... period of genomic research).
Another important idea is that the very idea of a species is a "fuzzy" concept. A gene tree is not the same as the evolutionary tree of a species. A gene tree is "skinny", while the species tree is "fat": different genes branching off at slightly different times within the species tree. Harris quotes another researcher, Maddison: “[p]hylogeny is more like a statistical distribution than a simple tree of discrete thin branches...It has a central tendency, but it also has a variance because of the diversity of gene trees.” Maddison describes phylogenic research as “a cloud of gene histories” with an “inherent fuzziness” to them. Likewise, Jody Hey has also described species like clouds with diffuse boundaries.
Considering the gene trees of human-chimpanzee pairings, a substantial fraction of them (just below half) are the same in both species and so are not useful for estimating speciation. Of those gene trees that do bifurcate, about 70% of them match a human-chimpanzee pairing, with the rest matching an alternate pairing. This illustrates how we are most closely related to chimpanzees, but also how our ancestry is a mosaic of diverse genes.
Emphasizing complexity, Harris is at pains to point out the limitations of much-publicized work concerning mitochondrial DNA, which indicates a severe population bottleneck at 50,000 years ago and which has led to a great deal of essentially speculative analysis. Studies of nuclear DNA show that without doubt, modern humans interbred with their archaic counterparts. Mitochondrial studies provided no hint of this.
Throughout the book, Harris refuses to speculate about things that are unknown, whereas I was very ready to speculate for myself, as he would not do it. For example, what are some practical implications of species existing as a “fuzzy cloud”? The existence of multiple versions of a given gene in a population? These have obvious bearing on our future evolution. Concerning future human evolution, Harris confines himself to what is obvious from the theoretical treatment he provides for genetic drift versus natural selection: given our vast population, natural selection will tend to be more effective at promoting slightly favorable mutations and at suppressing slightly unfavorable ones.
True to this thematic refusal to speculate, Harris ends a section concerning the origins of our "big brains" with a non-conclusion, simply identifying that researchers need to do more work to identify the specific meat-adaptive genes and to determine when they first emerged.
Similarly, recounting research I first learned of in Before the Dawn, Harris cites research on the differential times of genetic divergence between the head/body louse and the pubic louse. Unlike “Before the Dawn,” Harris refuses any inference of inter-species coupling. Exhibiting a curious fastidiousness, which seems at odds with notions of “fuzzy species boundaries” discussed earlier in the book, Harris says “while it is titillating to think that humans and gorillas might have engaged in cross-species sexual activity, it is more likely that humans came into contact with gorilla lice through some other means.”
Harris also passes but briefly over the possibility that our early African ancestors interbred with archaic hominins, saying only that confirmation of such a hypothesis will require the extraction of archaic hominin DNA. Here, though, he is talking about archaic hominins within Africa, who lived earlier than 50kya. By contrast, in light of nuclear DNA studies, Harris devotes an entire chapter to discussing what we know about the interbreeding between Sapiens, Neanderthalis, and other archaic species. In what for him is a wild flight of fancy, he writes:
When I was growing up in the 1970s, paleontology rested entirely on the morphology of discovered fossils. In popularized parlance, paleontologists were searching for the "missing link" between humans and apes. While that particular locution was always an over-simplification, today the reality of our evolutionary history has become inescapably more complex than a linear progression from "the apes."
An idea that Harris cements early on is that morphological studies can get evolutionary relationships wrong even for living species (he cites his own work as a student researcher, which occurred in the genitive ... period of genomic research).
Another important idea is that the very idea of a species is a "fuzzy" concept. A gene tree is not the same as the evolutionary tree of a species. A gene tree is "skinny", while the species tree is "fat": different genes branching off at slightly different times within the species tree. Harris quotes another researcher, Maddison: “[p]hylogeny is more like a statistical distribution than a simple tree of discrete thin branches...It has a central tendency, but it also has a variance because of the diversity of gene trees.” Maddison describes phylogenic research as “a cloud of gene histories” with an “inherent fuzziness” to them. Likewise, Jody Hey has also described species like clouds with diffuse boundaries.
Considering the gene trees of human-chimpanzee pairings, a substantial fraction of them (just below half) are the same in both species and so are not useful for estimating speciation. Of those gene trees that do bifurcate, about 70% of them match a human-chimpanzee pairing, with the rest matching an alternate pairing. This illustrates how we are most closely related to chimpanzees, but also how our ancestry is a mosaic of diverse genes.
Emphasizing complexity, Harris is at pains to point out the limitations of much-publicized work concerning mitochondrial DNA, which indicates a severe population bottleneck at 50,000 years ago and which has led to a great deal of essentially speculative analysis. Studies of nuclear DNA show that without doubt, modern humans interbred with their archaic counterparts. Mitochondrial studies provided no hint of this.
Throughout the book, Harris refuses to speculate about things that are unknown, whereas I was very ready to speculate for myself, as he would not do it. For example, what are some practical implications of species existing as a “fuzzy cloud”? The existence of multiple versions of a given gene in a population? These have obvious bearing on our future evolution. Concerning future human evolution, Harris confines himself to what is obvious from the theoretical treatment he provides for genetic drift versus natural selection: given our vast population, natural selection will tend to be more effective at promoting slightly favorable mutations and at suppressing slightly unfavorable ones.
True to this thematic refusal to speculate, Harris ends a section concerning the origins of our "big brains" with a non-conclusion, simply identifying that researchers need to do more work to identify the specific meat-adaptive genes and to determine when they first emerged.
Similarly, recounting research I first learned of in Before the Dawn, Harris cites research on the differential times of genetic divergence between the head/body louse and the pubic louse. Unlike “Before the Dawn,” Harris refuses any inference of inter-species coupling. Exhibiting a curious fastidiousness, which seems at odds with notions of “fuzzy species boundaries” discussed earlier in the book, Harris says “while it is titillating to think that humans and gorillas might have engaged in cross-species sexual activity, it is more likely that humans came into contact with gorilla lice through some other means.”
Harris also passes but briefly over the possibility that our early African ancestors interbred with archaic hominins, saying only that confirmation of such a hypothesis will require the extraction of archaic hominin DNA. Here, though, he is talking about archaic hominins within Africa, who lived earlier than 50kya. By contrast, in light of nuclear DNA studies, Harris devotes an entire chapter to discussing what we know about the interbreeding between Sapiens, Neanderthalis, and other archaic species. In what for him is a wild flight of fancy, he writes:
It is important to point out that the fractions of Neanderthal DNA in modern human genomes are very low. Indeed, the small fractions point to interbreeding rates that must have been quite low too, suggesting the two hominins had a strong avoidance to mating with each other. It could also mean that their hybrid offspring had low fitness. This makes us wonder about the contexts of the reproductive encounters between humans and Neanderthals. Were they mutual or forced interactions? Did they involve broader social ties or none at all? How did hybrid offspring fare in terms of their health, and which of the two hominin groups cared for them?YES! I know you want to speculate. But as that is not your job, allow me to jump in and speculate on your behalf, lavishly informed by this excellent book.
May 4, 2018
Up to date look at genomic evidence of our past
This book kept my interest all the way through. The conclusions have been talked about in articles and news before but the account and methods a t arriving at those conclusions is explained in laymen language.
This book kept my interest all the way through. The conclusions have been talked about in articles and news before but the account and methods a t arriving at those conclusions is explained in laymen language.
July 28, 2015
A great overview of how the science of genetics is being used to understand evolution
January 15, 2020
A fascinating account of human evolution with interesting asides about using genomic data to gain insights into the human condition.
November 22, 2015
Very good survey of the new methods and breakthroughs in our attempts at unraveling human evolution. Difficult for non-biologists.
May 3, 2016
homo sapience , chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan
Exploring the genetic branch point.
Exploring the genetic branch point.
February 26, 2018
fantastic book up to date data
January 20, 2020
This book was exactly what I was looking for! I've been fascinated by the spate of popular science articles about paleogenetics, and wanted to know more. Many of the books I flipped through seemed oversimplified; this one was sophisticated enough to hold my interest and avoid giving the impression of talking down to the reader, without assuming specialist knowledge. He gently, briefly reminds me what I learned in high school science and college science for the non-science major classes (nucleotides, proteins, amino acids) and then updates this foundation with new discoveries (e.g. from "junk DNA" to epigenetics) without boring me with details of lab procedures (glossed as simply, "a complex laboratory procedure" or "sophisticated computer modeling" that accomplishes a specific task or purpose, which is described). That said, I'm coming to this book as someone with a PhD in a social science/humanities field, so YMMV if you have a different educational background. Also, admittedly, it is a bit dry at times; I found it to be good bedtime reading, because I'd always hit the point of thinking "okay, I'm too tired to understand this now, time to sleep."
I like that his book sticks to the facts, explaining how our current knowledge developed and identifying what we don't know yet. I greatly appreciate that the author avoids the racist and sexist tropes that scientists who aren't thoughtful writers may uncritically seize upon when seeking metaphors to explain esoteric knowledge to general readers; but it is also decidedly scientific, not progressive myth-making or speculation. Its's focused on the evidence and the scientific process, yet perceptively connects the facts to the human search for meaning. It employs somewhat of a narrative style, without lasping into reductionist just-so stories.
I feel vindicated about all the seemingly dumb questions I asked about speciation in high school. Speciation actually IS complicated, and thanks to this book, it actually makes sense to me now.
I like that his book sticks to the facts, explaining how our current knowledge developed and identifying what we don't know yet. I greatly appreciate that the author avoids the racist and sexist tropes that scientists who aren't thoughtful writers may uncritically seize upon when seeking metaphors to explain esoteric knowledge to general readers; but it is also decidedly scientific, not progressive myth-making or speculation. Its's focused on the evidence and the scientific process, yet perceptively connects the facts to the human search for meaning. It employs somewhat of a narrative style, without lasping into reductionist just-so stories.
I feel vindicated about all the seemingly dumb questions I asked about speciation in high school. Speciation actually IS complicated, and thanks to this book, it actually makes sense to me now.
August 11, 2020
The science here is challenging for a lay person like me. But the subject is truly fascinating. We all know how DNA can be used to identify certain illnesses, potential relatives, criminals, and even rapists. It's a powerful tool for tracing both our relationships to others and who we physically are. But the same science and tools can be used to determine our long-ago relationships. This book covers when the human line diverged from the last common ancestor of our us and our cousins, chimps and bonobos. It covers why we know that humans mostly evolved in Africa, and how we are related to other human species that are now extinct, including Neanderthals, Denisovans, and even earlier humans. I loved it, and would recommend it to anyone who wants to get real, and get beyond "and God created Adam." This science story is perhaps not as literarily compelling, but it is certainly truer to the biology of who we are!
August 18, 2021
I’ve listened to a number of books about human and ancient genomes and what they tell us about our evolution. Some of them are very interesting and they can tell a dramatic story. This is not one of those books. It reads like a school assignment. State your point, support it, repeat it over and over again. It was not helped by the narrator who read in a very singsong voice. The glossary is read to you!
July 21, 2020
A fairly technical work that is required reading if you want to understand what genomics can do for you and the story of your origins. See my full review at https://inquisitivebiologist.com/2019...
October 13, 2020
An excellent overview of genomics in human evolution, giving a good grounding in the technical underpinnings. Covers most of the areas of doubt or controversy, but keeps well away from a few that challenge contemporary political sensitivities. Strongly recommended.
November 2, 2020
Bravo! I am an Evolution, Genomics and Bioinformatics professor. I loved every chapter of this book!
April 26, 2021
Well written and certain parts were interesting, but it felt very drawn out and repetitive. It was a struggle to finish.
April 23, 2022
Interesting and understandable for those like me that are interested in the topic but don't have a PhD in genetics or anthropology.
August 13, 2022
Informative with some very boring moments. Could have been half as long and still been equally informative.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews