Why am I not surprised?
Tuesday, 18th November 2008 – 15:22CET
Kangaroo genes close to humans
Australia’s kangaroos are genetically similar to humans and may have first evolved in China, Australian researchers said today. Scientists said they had for the first time mapped the genetic code of the Australian marsupials and found much of it was similar to the genome for humans, the government-backed Centre of Excellence for Kangaroo Genomics said. “There are a few differences, we have a few more of this, a few less of that, but they are the same genes and a lot of them are in the same order,” centre Director Jenny Graves told reporters in Melbourne. “We thought they’d be completely scrambled, but they’re not. There is great chunks of the human genome which is sitting right there in the kangaroo genome,” Graves said, according to AAP.
Humans and kangaroos last shared an ancestor at least 150 million years ago, the researchers found, while mice and humans diverged from one another only 70 million years ago. Kangaroos first evolved in China, but migrated across the Americas to Australia and Antarctica, they said. “Kangaroos are hugely informative about what we were like 150 million years ago,” Graves said.
17 Comments Comment
Reply to Zizzu Click here to cancel reply
Kangaroos are mammals too, so the finding of the research is not surprising at all. Something that IS surprising is that whales are genetically closer to hippos than to any other creature living in the sea…which suggests that an ancestral species of whales lived on land. A very good book I would suggest would be Richard Dawkins’ “The Ancestor’s Tale (A pilgrimage to the dawn of life)”.
I wonder what “..a few more of this, a few less of that” means!..in the meanwhile I’m gonna skip into my bed…
Maybe that explains why the ‘reds’ are so hopping mad at the ‘blues’.
A little correction. After I logged off yesterday, I went to check on the hippo-whale thing, and found I didn’t get it exactly right. Actually it is the hippo that is genetically closer to whales than to any other land-living species alive today.
“There is great chunks of the human genome which is sitting right there in the kangaroo genome,” Graves said, according to AAP.”
But she has to specify exactly which chunks are “identical”
Kangaroos are marsupials, i.e. not even placentals … they are “restricted” to Australia. Of course, they have pretty much our own “structural” arrangement .. head at the top, legs at the bottom and everything in between in approximately the same place, and that information is definitely indirectly coded for in the genome. (Indirectly because a genome can only code for proteins, which in turn regulate everything else).. . and that’s a hell of information to contain.
Besides, 150M years ago is so long ago … just think … the “popular” Jurassic was only 65M years ago … going that far, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that we share “huge chunks” of DNA with earthworms …
… and we don’t talk of “humans” older than half a million years or so… A few millions if you choose to include the little bush-baby-like creatures from which all primates evolved.
*sorry* minor cock-up. The Cretaceous ended 65M years ago. The 150M years ago is approx right for Jurassic. Looked it up.
@ Andrea: “..a few more of this, a few less of that” refers to genetic information in the genome.
_________________________________________
@ Zizzu: You are perfectly right to suggest that we should not read too into this story. Genes don’t only produce their effects in isolation. Some genes work by interaction with other genes. Therefore a single gene change might make a huge difference, both in form and/or behaviour.
Correction: @ Zizzu: You are perfectly right to suggest that we should not read too much into this story…
Kenneth,
I know!I was joking…never mind, I am used to it…people don’t get my jokes some times;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skippy_the_Bush_Kangaroo
and sometimes even misprints happen to me;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skippy_the_Bush_Kangaroo
@ Andrea: No problem ;) Since you mentioned you were going to bed, I assumed that you were in a hurry and so really did not understand. Now I know that yours was just a light comment…I should have known…its not rocket science after all!
“A little correction. After I logged off yesterday, I went to check on the hippo-whale thing, and found I didn’t get it exactly right. Actually it is the hippo that is genetically closer to whales than to any other land-living species alive today.”
Those things are what is so fascinating about genetics. You never know what to expect. There are some studies that indicate that cows are closer related to whales than they are to horses.
Now about the claim in the article, it does sound a bit faulty to say we are closely related to marsupials. 150 million years ago is quite some time. We are closer related to bats than that.
Kenneth,
kangaroos seem to be everywhere all of a sudden.
http://de.news.yahoo.com/1/20081119/ten-knguru-jagd-auf-der-autobahn-45cd332_1.html
It is a german article, sent it just for the proof, a kangaroo escaped a transporter yesterday on a german “autobahn”.
Enough joking now, orrite;-))
[Kenneth Cassar – which suggests that an ancestral species of whales lived on land.]
Of course. Whales and other sea mammals are descendants of primitive land mammals who took to the sea, and evolved to be sea-dwellers.
“Moggy Thursday, 20 November 1330hrs
Of course. Whales and other sea mammals are descendants of primitive land mammals who took to the sea, and evolved to be sea-dwellers.”
That’s from where mermaids evolved I guess.