Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 25 October 2007 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2007.197
News
Some Neanderthals were red-heads
Ancient DNA contains clues about complexion.
An analysis of 50,000-year-old Neanderthal DNA suggests that at least some of the ancient hominids probably had pale skin and red hair.
The findings, published this week in Science1, are based on the sequence of a single gene, called mc1r.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
Welllll. . . . .I seem to remember big headlines a few years ago claiming that the mc1r gene was present in Eurasia 100 kyr ago, and that somehow people in Scotland(known for the redheads among them), had some "Neandertal blood". Personally, I think intermixture, at some times and places, was much more likely than Lalueza-Fox seems to think it was. I also think that in the light of the recent discovery of the FOXP2 gene(similar if not identical to the "modern" variety), which supposedly allowed Neandertals to carry on chatty conversations, "they" were actually far more like "us" than some of "us" would like us to believe at the present time. Sure, they were "different" in some ways, but not that much. But that's just my opinion, and "another story" anyway. Anne G
Neanderthals are observed to have been adapted to the cold, near the glaciers environment e.g. oversized nose and sinus cavities for warming cold air before it enters the lungs. Since the hair of wooly mammoths and wooly rhinocerous found frozen in the permafrost has also been observed to be orange colored, does the red/orange hair color on Neanderthals indicate it is also a cold climate adaptation?
Hi All: It is quite likely that all Neanderthals were red-haired. Not because it was adaptive (though it may have become a species signal over time), but because it may have been an allele linked to an adaptation under positive, selective pressure, like pale skin. The sort of skin that red-haired Celts still have. (From a parallel evolution arising for the same reasons. Humans and chimps have a genetic drift towards pale skin not dark skin). The positive selection can be plausibly explained by limited vitamin D activity (from skin exposure to sun) in northern latitudes. Especially when covered for most of the year in fur clothing, so only the face is exposed. I say that red-hair is likely to have a high frequency because in all wild animals I know of within a freely-flowing gene pool (as distinct from domestic breeds or those geographically isolated) the most striking thing about them is their identical external form and appearance. This is most remarkable in wild herds in Africa. It is shaped by many factors and all of them would have operated on Neanderthals. Second, Neanderthals had at least 400,000 years to adapt to a roller-coaster series of European Ice-Ages. So they had sufficient time for adaptive alleles and their linked mutations to reach very high frequencies. We were only there for some 30,000 years and even so we did develop similar adaptations including skin and hair colouring. Once we enlarged our diet with farming, and vitamin D in dairy and other foods were consistently available, and the last Ice-Age ceased (10,000 years ago), then the alleles for red-hair and pale skin ceased to have adaptive significance. They won't actually decrease in frequency unless in this new environment they become a distinct disadvantage. This is unlikely to happen since these alleles are still positively selected for through sexual selection, as distinct from the process of natural (adaptive) selection. Also if you read the original papers closely you will see these revelations from the Max Planck Institute are arguments against the two hominin species interbreeding, they are not arguments for it. Cheers, Donald McMiken
Hi Anne. Long time, no chat. I hear you on interbreeding between the Neanderthals and modern humans. Certainly there must have been sexual intercourse between these groups when they came into contact. However, that is not a guarentee of gene flow: The offspring could have been sterile (as is the case for mules) or otherwise non-viable. For me, any proof of gene flow must demonstrate all of the following: 1) That a given allelle was not present in modern humans before they and the Neanderthals came into contact. 2) That the same allelle was present in Neanderthals before they and the modern humans came into contact. 3) That this allelle is or has been present in modern humans after they and the Neanderthals came into contact. (This may take the form of showing that the allelle in question or an obviously descendant allelle is present in modern populations.) Without all three being shown, there is IMO insufficent evidence to show that any gene flow has occurred. In this case, neither the first or (more importantly) the third criteria have been met.