Well, the New York Times reports that scientists analyzing the evolution of the dog can agree on how it happened, but not where. Why? because population genetics is itself an evolving science, and very often these days fossil data and genetic g=data tell different stories, as do different genetic samples. We are still sorting the mess out, and studies on the domesticated dog are instructive for telling us how hard it can be to get conclusions for messy data sets.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/science/wolf-to-dog-scientists-agree-on-how-but-not-where.html?ref=science
So with THAT in mind, take a look at THIS article about some recent genetic studies of ancient human remains:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?src=recg
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/science/wolf-to-dog-scientists-agree-on-how-but-not-where.html?ref=science
So with THAT in mind, take a look at THIS article about some recent genetic studies of ancient human remains:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?src=recg
No comments:
Post a Comment