• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Headlice provided clues to modern human origins

Mighty_Emperor

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
19,406
Extinct humans left louse legacy

By Paul Rincon
BBC News Online science staff

Some head lice infesting people today were probably spread to us thousands of years ago by an extinct species of early human, a genetics study reveals.

It shows that when our ancestors left Africa after 100,000 years ago, they made direct contact with tribes of "archaic" peoples, probably in Asia.

Lice could have jumped from them on to our ancestors during fights, sex, clothes-sharing or even cannibalism.

Details of the research appear in the open access journal Plos Biology.

We either battled with them, or lived with them or mated with them. Regardless, we touched them
David Reed, Florida Museum of Natural History

The evidence comes from a genetic analysis of the human head louse ( Pediculus humanus ). Researchers found two types living on humans today.

One group has a worldwide distribution, while another, less common, type is found only in the Americas.

Of lice and men

Because head lice are unable to survive more than a few hours or days away from a human, their evolutionary history is tied in very closely to that of their hosts.

Just like Homo sapiens , the group of head lice found worldwide underwent a so-called population "bottleneck". This is an event that cuts the amount of genetic diversity in a population.

One explanation is that the human population was reduced in size before it expanded again after 100,000 years ago, as small bands of hunters left Africa. As human populations mushroomed, so did those of head lice that lived on them.

However, the less common group of lice do not exhibit this signature. Their genes suggest population sizes in the past were much more stable.

The analysis revealed the two different groups of head lice diverged from each other around 1.18 million years ago.

The study authors propose that the less common group evolved on an extinct group of humans which remained isolated from our ancestors until some tens of thousands of years ago, when they re-established contact with each other.

Known exchanges

David Reed, from the Florida Museum of Natural History and the lead author on the new research, commented: "We either battled with them, or lived with them or mated with them. Regardless, we touched them, and that is pretty dramatic to think about."

There's good evidence to place Homo erectus and modern humans together in time, but not necessarily spatially together
Frank Huffman, University of Texas at Austin

Professor Chris Stringer, head of human origins at London's Natural History Museum, told BBC News: "Some degree of human contact would have been necessary to reunite the two lineages of head lice found in recent humans, although the contact was not necessarily extensive or prolonged."

It is well known that our ancestors overlapped for thousands of years in Europe with that continent's original inhabitants, the Neanderthals.

"There is indirect evidence of contact between modern humans and Neanderthals in Europe in the form of exchanges of concepts or actual items of body decoration," said Professor Stringer.

"However, the lice divergence date looks too ancient for the inferred separation time of Neanderthals and modern humans."

American mystery

The paper's authors agree and instead suggest that it may fit a more ancient separation between the human lineage that led to Homo sapiens and one that led to a species known as Homo erectus .

This split probably occurred anywhere between 1.8 million years ago and 1.2 million years ago.

"If you do the calibrations on the split, that's the only one that makes any sense," co-author Dr Vince Smith, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, told BBC News.

By one million years ago, Homo erectus was established both in Africa and in East Asia. In Asia, erectus could have remained isolated until a second wave of migration out of Africa brought modern humans into contact with them - and their lice - after 100,000 years ago.

Dates on animal teeth recovered with erectus fossils at Ngandong on the island of Java, places them there between 53,000 and 27,000 years ago - at a time when our own ancestors were appearing elsewhere in the world.

However, this does not explain why the louse lineage that evolved on archaic humans is restricted to the Americas.

"There must have been some contact between archaic humans and modern humans in Asia. The modern humans then moved into the New World via Beringia (an ancient land bridge between Siberia and Alaska)," said Dr Smith.

"But there are still a lot of questions that need to be resolved."

Sex connection

The researchers now want to study other human parasites to discover whether similar patterns are written in their DNA.

In particular, a genetic study of pubic lice would help support or refute theories of intimate contact, says Smith.

But Frank Huffman, an anthropologist at the University of Texas at Austin, US, is cautious about making the link between Homo sapiens and H. erectus in Asia.

"There's good evidence to place Homo erectus and modern humans together in time, but not necessarily spatially together," he told BBC News.

The research has pleased proponents of the Out of Africa theory of human evolution, in which Homo sapiens replaced earlier human groups throughout the world.

It would also, therefore, seem to reject the so-called Multiregional Hypothesis, in which modern humans evolved from "archaic" populations like Homo erectus and the Neanderthals already established throughout the Old World.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3715132.stm

Published: 2004/10/06 08:44:37 GMT

© BBC MMIV
 
Gorillas Gave Us the Itch

"raises some interesting questions about what gorillas and our hominid ancestors were doing in such close proximity to share each other's lice."

Spanking the monkey?

Gorillas Gave Us the Itch
By Elizabeth Pennisi
ScienceNOW Daily News
7 March 2007

Among primates, humans have the dubious distinction of having not one, but two types of sucking lice--one that nests on the head and the other that calls pubic hair home. Where did these buggers come from? A new study suggests that while we've been sharing head lice with chimps since before we were even separate species, pubic lice came from gorillas--and not very long ago.

Each year, 3 million people in the United States catch a case of pubic lice, otherwise known as "crabs." It's an important public health problem, but evolutionary biologist David Reed of the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainesville prefers to look at it as an evolutionary conundrum. Typically, lice share the same evolutionary history as their hosts. For example, if a population of hosts splits into two and each of the isolated populations begins to evolve into separate species, then the parasites evolve too. Human head lice, for example, share a common ancestor with a chimp-based louse, and the two lice are closely related--just as chimps and humans are. But the closest relative to human pubic lice is not found in chimps, but rather gorillas, which are more distant kin from humans. Reed wanted to know why.

He and his colleagues compared the DNA sequences from two genes in various lice and calculated when the different species appeared. As expected, human and chimp Pedicululus (head lice) began to diverge about the same time as hominids and chimps started down independent evolutionary paths, about 6 million years ago. The gorilla and pubic lice (both Pthirus species) split just 3.5 million years ago, however, about 4 million years after gorillas and the line that led to chimps and hominids diverged. Thus rather than co-evolving with our ancestors from the very beginning, these lice were acquired at a later point in time, Reed and his colleagues report today in BMC Biology.

Because lice rarely survive more than a few hours off their hosts, this jump required close contact between the two species. "They must have been in the same place at the same time," Reed points out. Vincent Smith, a cybertaxonomist at the Natural History Museum in London, says the study "raises some interesting questions about what gorillas and our hominid ancestors were doing in such close proximity to share each other's lice."

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/co ... 2007/307/3
[/b]
 
Back
Top