Hi the national geographic sponsered migration tracing projet at madurai has identified a marker gene in a piran malai kalla family. this gene is common to all migrants who left africa 70000 years ago. they are in australian aborigines, papua new guinea earlier. details in deccan chronicle of 4th april
This just means that that one gene has ancestors in Africa 70000 years back. Other genes in the body might and will have equally exotic "journeys" through evolutionary time. These sort of news items never make much sense to me. I mean if 99.5% of our genome is similar to the chimps, that means we share a number of genes with them. So?:)
I know Venketesh, but what I mean is that every gene has its own history through the ages.. .thinking of any one particular gene as a marker gene is really not quite right. Read Richard Dawkins "The Selfish Gene" and other books.. It is well worth a read.
Yes. I agree with Arun. Genetics though much hyped about is not the final one to decide. As Arun said, the gene difference between human and chimp is only 250. SO if we replace those 250 genes in chip, will it become a human? In theory yes, but in practice?
Recently I read Michale Crichton's ' 'Next'.. amazing novel about the good/bad effects of Genetics. Though scientist claim there is a gene for everything, it doenst make sense. Then if we implant the gene which suppresses bad thoughts then the whole world becomes a peaceful place, which is not at all possible.
How can they say that the marker gene originated in Africa 700000 years ago. Even if could have originated in gummudipoondi 5000 years ago. Its all theories.
Sify News desk Friday, 04 April , 2008, 19:23 Last Updated: Friday, 04 April , 2008, 19:25 Chennai: Come April 16 and Discovery Channel is ready to treat viewers to `the Story of India' an epic journey into the world's most ancient surviving civilisation. The new six-part series has been conceived as a chronological history of India, one that will reveal the wonders of India, the diversity and richness of its people, cultures and landscapes and its intense past.
The programme will also focus on a 30-year old systems administrator hailing from a small Tamil Nadu village who has been identified as one of the direct descendants of the first ever settlers in India. The DNA of Virumandi Andithevar matched the white chromosome marker `M130' which incidentally is found only amongst the descendants of African migrants who had spread across the world long ago.
Speaking to reporters in Chennai on Friday, Deepak Shourie, executive vice-president and managing director, Discovery Networks India, said the series would showcase the intense journey of a nation which has over the centuries regenerated itself several times.
It would focus on the present and past even as it seeks clues to India's past and future. The series would bring to the fore fascinating facts like the first Indians who had walked out of Africa some 70,000 years ago, as well as the discovery of the first Indians' DNA in Tamil Nadu, he said.
A preview of the film, narrated by the eminent historian Michael Wood , showed some brilliantly photographed sights and sounds of the country.
As the world's most ancient surviving civilisation, India has been at the centre of world history. So how did this vast land come into being? Who were its first inhabitants? Can they be traced? These are some of the questions which `The Story of India' shall attempt to answer, every Wednesday at 8:00 pm, come April 16.
Part 1 at 07:30 mins talks about the "Virumandi Andithevar" who is having "M130" gene which is explained by Madurai Kamaraj University Professor Ramaswamy.
Hi Venketesh, Certain genes can be traced to certain populations. A common example is the gene for *haeomophilia* that affects males in the British and related Royal families. This can act as a marker gene since it is inherited as part of mitochondrial DNA and that an only be inherited from the mother. Hence, in this case, that particular gene can be used as a marker for that family and for that particular condition.
However, every gene has its own history. In a sense, we (all living things) are vessels for genes to propogate. Those genes that are present in us are the successful genes that have beaten out the competition. It is not necessary that all genes have the same history.. in fact they most probably don't and have different ancestors. Hence, this whole notion of an ancestral eve is wrong. There are probably as many ancestral genes as there are genes in our genome (about 30000-40000 for humans). Hence for one particular mitochondrial gene, yes, there could be an ancestral eve 70,000 years ago. But it is a tree structure. If you go back even further, that ancestral eve will have her own ancestral eve and so on. And remember, this is for just one particular gene. We could build such individual ancestral trees for all genes.
I hope I have been clear. If not, the fault is all mine :) And maybe I can try to explain it better another time!
Thanks SPS Aiyya. Hope things are fine.. have been quite busy and also lurking :) Didn't want to intrude into some rather erudite discussions where I couldn't have contributed much. Thought it better to shut up and learn from the more knowledgeable members!
I think the argument is kind of misleading. I agree that there are 30000 to 40000 genes in humans. M130 is a gene present in Y chromosome. Y chromosome is the chromosome passed to the next male generation. The main assumption is there was a single ancestor from whom the whole human population have migrated to different parts of the world. The other marker that is derived from maternal side is the mitochondrial DNA. Hemophilia is also a marker, but it is not enough to answer the question "Where did we originate from?" The answer lies in Y chromosome haplogroups and mitochondrial DNA. Pitchiappan sir's group in Madurai Kamaraj University, have identified the nearest M130 haplogroup in a population that havent got much diversified.
I think the following link explains beautifully how the genetic marker, and why we need to trace our roots back.
> Pitchiappan sir's group in Madurai Kamaraj University, have identified > the nearest M130 haplogroup in a population that havent got much > diversified. >
I happened to Meet Dr. Pitchappan once. he was telling us how difficult it was to persuade people to give blood for a dna sample. " kelviyellaam kElunga , pathil solrOm. aanaa, intha raththam ellaam edukkakkuudaathu....
finally they settled on the mouth wash of people to extract dna.
Its very interesting to see a genetic discussion in this group. As a molecular biologist I thought I'll add my 2 cents worth.
For a start all nuclear genomes (from microbes to plants and humans) have genes and non-genic region. The non-genic region being the bulk of genome about 98% in humans. so ppl who believe that we can replace gene x and y and make a whole new species are grossly mistaken.
markers on the genome can be genes(as was pointed out earlier), a short stretch of code sometimes even just 1 base(or letter). these are changes that happened during evolution that can be tracked. These are not chosen b'cos someone likes them, but have stood various panels of tests and have provided consistent results.
For people in the it industry imagine this to be a comment line in the legacy source code of version 10 of the S/W. if u see it all the way up to version 1.5 then that is where it was introduced (even though back then it might have been doing a different role)
Even though the difference between human and chimp is just 1.5%, thats 1.5% of 3.2 billion and all that difference is not concentrated at one place. Also these changes did not happen overnight it has taken millions of years to make them better survive in their environment.
In most cases the genes across species (from mouse to man) are pretty much the same, u can technically replace one with the other and won't see any difference in them. Its primarily the regulation (when and where and how they are used) makes all the difference.
think of it like 2 people cooking with the same set of ingredients, the out come can be very different depending upon when what and how much of any given component is used.
Hi i should thank kalki for uniting under one forum so many experts in such diverse fields. I cant beleive this. we are running a full fledged debate on bio-tech just because it was used as a tool in historical studies.
hi bhuvana, ragothaman and arun krishnan guys we are proud to be amidst you. venketesh
It just happens to be what we work on .. so no big deal in knowing something in that. What you guys know in the field of history and everything else is amazing... The reason for my long silence is mainly because I realized I would learn more stuff from you all that way :)
Yes, this is something ive noticed too. We seem to have experts on everything and not just amateurs but full fledged scholars on most issues. I was surprised to see a couple of mails on Golf a month or so ago but this genetic stuff literally blows everything away. Im sorry but im unable to understand even a single line in these mails. I dont know how many in this group feel this way. I just request Arun,Bhuvana&Co to explain in smaller,simpler mails whats going on. With less high sounding words like "Computational Biologist"..appideena yennanu sathiyama yenakku theriyaadhu..Yenna koduma sar idhu :):):)
you are one of our experts too. i still recall your mail on how building a pyramidal structure was the easiest.
I guess to understand what these bio technologists are talking about you need to know the issue. the simple issues is a guy near madurai( go get his autograph) has a gene that is called a marker which is common to all descendants of the original migrants from africa 70,000 years
so we are being explained the nature of this marker gene and whether this system is fool proof. purinchuthaa???/
I am too not able to understand the intricacies of the genetic engineering, but am able to get the outline.
Is there a definite proof that all these people with the marker gene trace their migration to africa? why cant it be other way round? Probably the marker gene in africa got actually migrated from other part of the world, even Tamil nadu, who knows and who can prove that? All theories...nothing can be proved...
This is a very interesting thread and thanks for all the information and links! Another recent work on DNA and history was when archeologists in Lebanon found an ancient Phoenician site with DNA material. They were able to analyze the DNA and find that people in Lebanon, Malta and Syria shared this DNA (irrespective of their religion). This was actually also practically useful as it helped dispel some politically motivated myths about who (Lebanese Muslims or Christians) were the true descendants of the Phoenicians.
Satish, As I mentioned, there is no one single person all of us can trace back to. We can always go back further in time and trace each of our genes to different individuals. Hence, to me, all this talk of one single ancestor 70,000 years ago is just ridiculous.
By the way, the dominant hypothesis states that there were not just one, but two or more migrations out of Africa spread over thousands of years. SO yes, if you go way back, all of us can probably trace some part of our genome to some African ancestors. [
Rahul, All it means is that I am not a real biologist :) like Bhuvana. I use computer models, mathematical techniques and algorithms to study biological systems unlike say Bhuvana who would be carrying out experiments in the lab. We are poor cousins to our more illustrious molecular biology colleagues :)
Great to see another computational biologist in this forum. Hi Dr. Arun. :)
Yes you are right that there are three different migrations out of Africa traced out on the basis of mitochondrial DNA. The common thing that the three different routes have is that all the three have same root in Africa. So no one is counter arguing the point that we came from Africa.
But in your whole argument, you say that any gene can be a marker. I think you are not taking a major point into consideration. In Y chromosome, majority of the genes taking part in recombination is very very less almost nil. In other words, the gene in Y wouldnt have changed so much from the ancestor say 80,000 yrs ago. So, it is quite easier to see from where the gene has traveled. In other words, using any gene from my Y chromosome, I can trace back my ancestors. A Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup is a haplogroup defined by differences in the non-recombining portions of DNA from the Y chromosome (called Y-DNA).
Now the other chromosomal genes undergo more recombination events from both maternal and paternal side. Hence, I cant really say where the gene came from after few ancestoral generations...It gets more complicated and fuzzy. Also, here no one is trying to pinpoint one person in Africa as the ancestor..they are trying to pinpoint say a group of people/community from where say one guy was a rebel and he took his family for greener pastures :)
Choice of a gene for tracing the root is subjective, I agree as there are more than one gene that can be studied in Y. At the same time, selection of chromosome is not subjective. Say Y chromosome or mitochondrial DNA. Thats why people are studying those two DNA population...
One thing I would say is M130 is not the only haplotype or marker.. (this is being hyped by the media) there are others as well. The common thing is it is from Y or mitochondrial DNA and not from other chromosomes.
As said before, other genes cannot answer the question "Where we originated from?" Adding to that, one is trying to answer the question from Y chromosome/mtDNA "If from single ancestor, how did we travel to other parts of the world?".....
I agree with what you have written. My point was that (and here I agree with Richard Dawkins) is that in a sense our bodies are vehicles for the genes. Hence, we could build hapmaps using any gene of interest. You are right in that the Y chromosome and the mitochondrial DNA can help us be a little "surer" of where we come from.. but that helps only if one is looking at our evolution as Humans. What about before that? The book by Dawkins "The Ancestor's Tale" is fascinating in that he traces evolution back through several millenia. And hence, if one accepts evolution as the best theory that can explain observed phenomenon, then 70,000 years is really nothing special :)
. And hence, if one accepts evolution > as the best theory that can explain observed phenomenon, then 70,000 years > is really nothing special :)
hi evolution is a very logical theory but pity most religions are against it. we 'd like to beleive god made man in his mould. though some claim dasavatharam to be hinduism's acceptance of man evolving from a distant water creature its tough for them to accept that we came from the monkey.
like this american soldier who wants to marry a japenese girl. the suit is rejected on grounds of anscestory. "she is descended from the moon goddess and you from a monkey" they said
70,000 years might be nothing for you guys in field of that study. But for us it matters :-)
In the video the University professor mentioned that though we can trace back 70,000 years, the language and other things developed just 10,000 years ago. I wonder, what they would have done for 60,000 years :-)
There are religions which believe that God created the world only few thousand years ago and anything early is against it. When Jean Francois Champollion tried to decipher egypt Hieroglyphics the religion gave him permission/funds to go to Egypt on the ground that he shouldn't reveal any truth which is against the religion, at the end he didn't and it was revealed only after his death.
I am a bit confused by all the theories. According to one theory (which I personally believe so)... India was a part of Africa (along with South america). http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/continents.html
The truth of growing Himalayas and language strains of african tribes with ancient Tamil. Dna strains of Aborginees to Africans to Indian natives etc.
What puzzles me is that this happened some 65 million years ago, when humans (not homosapiens but startig from Homo habilis) were on earth some 800K years ago.
The real question now is, if the DNA had continued from Africa to other parts of world when continents moved ? if so, how did this whole evolution happen at various spots at various times ? If India was a part of africa, then why could India not have been the crade of life ?
For some reason, I fail to believe or understand the concept of Darwin. Was darwin referring to mutated chimps or similar apes (as in evolution) to man ?
According to vedas or many other religious texts, man's existance came to be, which is supposedly embedded in the very minds of us, trying to find out our real past.
>It is quite natural and normal for every individual to think that the belief or view held by him is the right one but prejudice should not blind people to make them >averse to the acceptance of proven truths. The author has no moral authority or right to ask anyone to reconsider his beliefs or views but at the same time he >considers it as his moral duty to bring to others' notice all relevant facts available to enable them to come to their own conclusions. This is what the author has >attempted in this write-up.
I am not raising the controversy again, members pleas restrain from replying on this, this just a note. The BBC Story Of India Part 1 which was telecasted on Aug 2007 till thinks that The Veda and all of them came from outside India (Aryan!).
Have we discussed the references in Vedas with respect to evidences and proofs available as of today ?
Theories are always confusing. I too dont belive in much of these.
Egyptian pyramids which are around 5000 to 10000 years old - considered to be the epitome of human civilization..
aprart from other very few civilization, the Indus valey civilization is considered to be one of the advanced and Indian civilization based on this is considered to be the only surviving oldest civilization.
Egyptian pyramids have sculptors and figures and pictures, which are stil clear with distinct features. The eyes, nose - as we say in Tamil 'Thiruthamana' art. But the artifacts we get in Indus valey civilization - even difficult to figure out what it is. Later again the art flourishes from around 600 AD - mamallapuram, kanchi - we dont have evidences in north india as everything has been erased due to invasion
Considering the events in sequence - as a general trait of human civilization, best (Egypt) to ok (indus) to great (pallava) to - again today we dont have any artisan who can match tohse perfection.....
Everything is a cycle. Necessity is the mother of invention. I dont belive in saying that humans came into existence 70000 years ago and for 60000 years they were trying to invent language, fire, wheel etc.
We study samples to come to a conclusin for a larger population. Likewise, an example. MY father is very good in carpentery, electical work, electronics (not the current form, but till the transistor days. he used to repair our old b/w tv set himself) did almost most of our house wiring himself, good at mechanics, plumbing, masonary...he can mend any minor repairs in our house.
But me, fit for nothing :) dont know anything in the above said. May be my kid will be much worse, because atleast I know how to hold a screw driver, nail with a hammer etc.
A couple of generatins later, when the labour cost in India goes high as in the US, people will start learning things and do it themselves again.
Likewise, civilization also goes up and down. Fixing a date for things and coming up with theories - I just cant take it.
coming to the question of veda's - 2500 years back, buddism started in India but today is found more outside india than in India. But still we have the traces of the religion in India.
Likewise, if Veda started outside India, there should be a trace of it atleast till 1500 years back, because as per theory, its considered to be created around 3500 years back. But the history we have is that even before 2000 years back there was no trace of vedic tint outside India, atleast directly as we see buddist tint now.
So theories are theories and people who belive, lets keep beliving.
> > Egyptian pyramids which are around 5000 to 10000 years old - > considered to be the epitome of human civilization..
remember they were built without the wheel in the vougue. they had sleds to pull those 5 ton rocks
those interested please read "river god" by wilbur smith. how this great egyptin civilisation is owned by a lowly grazing community, the hittites because the latter had wheels.
> Egyptian pyramids have sculptors and figures and pictures, which are > stil clear with distinct features. The eyes, nose - as we say in > Tamil 'Thiruthamana' art.
I think all that depends on quality of rock. that differs from place to place. mahbalipuram is spoilt because of the salt air.
> - we > dont have evidences in north india as everything has been erased due > to invasion
quite a few exist if you know where to search for. rastra kuta art, mauryan art( b.c) silhara art are all spread over maharastra and madyapradesh. not that they vanished without a trace. sun temple, kajuraho, mahabodhi temple, linga raja temple are all comparable to big temple and contemprory in age.
> Everything is a cycle. Necessity is the mother of invention. I dont > belive in saying that humans came into existence 70000 years ago and > for 60000 years they were trying to invent language, fire, wheel etc.
yes. for so many years he was trying to protect himself from the sabre tooth tiger. gathering of food and hunting never let them stay in one place. not much culture or science sould develop when priorities were different.
> > > Likewise, civilization also goes up and down. Fixing a date for > things and coming up with theories - I just cant take it.
enna sathish? januray 2nd 44567 b.c na date solaraanga. thoraayama oru period set panraanga.
interesting read. one thing surprises me, is the level of sophistication in their coins - compared to ours - if you go as per the dates suggested - they predate ours chola coins by more than a few centuries...
In a way yes. It all depends on what we are looking at? Right from the beginning of life formation or after a certain point of time or an in between age.. With the limited knowledge and tools, people are trying to uncover bit by bit...lets see if for humans, is the picture becoming clearer or not.
Yes, 70,000 years seems like quite a large period...when comparing to the age of earth (approx. 4,567,000,000 years) it seems miniscule.. If the age of earth can be plotted on a 24 hour clock..then humans came after approx..23:30 hours only...quite recent in that angle...but not so quite recent if taken in a different angle...
I agree.. I think what I failed to realize and what struck me only after someone pointed it out here is that archaeologists work on much smaller time scales compared to evolutionary biologists :)
However, from a cultural standpoint, even finding a mitochondrial eve at 70000 years might be useless..
The Cankam age Pandian coins were detailed enough. But most of the coins found today are from the river beds and totally eroded. But you can still see the beautifully carved elephant and the 5 mangala signs clearly in most of these completely eroded coins.
The Cera coins of the same period show a relevance to the Greek/Roman coins and portrait the bust of the king in a simillar manner and eroded though.
We need better samples from this Cankam age. The contemporary Satavahana coins are better preserved and show a greater detail with Brahmi scripts often.
Post that period and until the Pallava era, we dont have any samples of coinage in TN. Some of the Pallava coins are so good. I could get hold of only 1 tiny Pallava coin so far. This coin is very tiny that it can be blown away with a simple breath.
Then comes the Chola era. For the cost of a pizza you can buy a handful of RRC copper coins in www.eBay.co.in and own a part of Chola history. These coins are called as "octopus man" coins, because of the way the king is struck there! What a name they have given to our RRC!
The aboundance of the RRC copper coins simply shows the monetary power of the Cholas. These type of coins were perhaps in circulation for say 300-400 years or so.
The octopus man copper coins are good, but the detailing is not clear. May be most of them are fake or eroded due to centuries of continuous usage. Perhaps they were cheap coins minted for volume usage.
The "Yuddha Malla" silver / gold coins of RJC are beautifully detailed. These are some of the good samples of Chola coinage. The Kulothunga coins are also good samples.
The Pandian copper coins of the same era are simillar to the octopus man coins and most of them are eroded.
Post this period, some how the Tamils lost the technology of minting coins. We see poorly struck coins of the Nayaks and other local chieftians.
The next wave of coins come after the European era. Pudukottai Amman coins & coins of the Trivancore kings are good samples which are properly die struck.
Probably during a next PS meeting, I can ask Mr. Raman to present to our group about Tamil coinage.
> > Yes, 70,000 years seems like quite a large period...when comparing to > the age of earth (approx. 4,567,000,000 years) it seems miniscule.. > If the age of earth can be plotted on a 24 hour clock..then humans > came after approx..23:30 hours only...quite recent in that angle
Hi
and the last hundred years out of the 30 minutes which is equivalent to a few seconds in your timetable, what scientific achievements man has done. also attained the power to wipe out mankind and blow up the earth. precisely what kalki avatharam was supposd to do.
According to many scriptures man has lost the knowledge. Last few thousand years the knowledge we have gained is more like katrathu - sinathil ethanai siru manal alavu... We seem to be focussing on miniature energy points such as fusion and fission bombs or similar work. When many scriptures talk of energy millions of times powerful and a race that even withstood the onslaught.
There seems to be some practical sense to the lines 'Rishi moolam - nadhi moolam thedathe' ...
You may be right. The Chola coins ( or even the Pallava coins ) dont compare well with that of Greek/Roman coins minted thousand years ago. For that matter, even with our own Gupta / Kanishka coins ( Which were perhaps modelled over the Greek/Roman ones.)
Why did the people that pioneer the "Chola Bronze" technology didnt do so well with the coins? The RRC "Octopus man" coins are reported to be modelled out of Ceylon coins. The RJC or Uttama Chola coins are only the better of the lot.
May be the embossing was lost, since in olden days they used to strike the coin against stone and distinguish original/fake from the sound made?
More research & hoards needed! I will later try to scan and post some coins I think better.