Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday March 23 2018, @10:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the bad-to-the-bone? dept.

I'm not saying it was aliens. Not any more:

Tests on a six-inch-long mummified skeleton from Chile confirm that it represents the remains of a newborn with multiple mutations in key genes.

Despite being the size of a foetus, initial tests had suggested the bones were of a child aged six to eight.

These highly unusual features prompted wild speculation about its origin.

Now, DNA testing indicates that the estimated age of the bones and other anomalies may have been a result of the genetic mutations.

Details of the work have been published in the journal Genome Research.

In addition to its exceptionally small height, the skeleton had several unusual physical features, such as fewer than expected ribs and a cone-shaped head.

The remains were initially discovered in a pouch in the abandoned nitrate mining town of La Noria. From there, they found their way into a private collection in Spain.

Some wondered whether the remains, dubbed Ata after the Atacama region where they were discovered, could in fact be the remains of a non-human primate. A documentary, called Sirius, even suggested it could be evidence of alien visitations.

[...] "What was striking and caused us to speculate early on that there was something strange about the bones was the apparent maturity of the bones (density and shape)," said Garry Nolan, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the Stanford University School of Medicine in California.

[...] Prof Nolan says further research into Ata's precocious bone aging could one day benefit patients. "Maybe there's a way to accelerate bone growth in people who need it, people who have bad breaks,"

Atacama skeleton.

Also at NYT and CNN.

Whole-genome sequencing of Atacama skeleton shows novel mutations linked with dysplasia (open, DOI: 10.1101/gr.223693.117) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 24 2018, @04:34AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 24 2018, @04:34AM (#657364)
    Do remember that in evolution there is no such thing as 2% more "advanced" than humans. That implies that there is a purpose or direction to evolution. Here's a simple question: what creature is more advanced, a human or a jellyfish? If you answered "human" I'd dispute that, since if you dropped a human in the middle of the ocean they would probably die from drowning in relatively short order, while if you dropped a jellyfish in the ocean, not only would it not die, it would be an effective hunter. Which creature is more advanced now? The point is, evolution is not teleological. It produces species that are reasonably well adapted to the environments which these species inhabit, no more, and no less. It is not attempting to produce humans, and a human that is 2% "more advanced" might not necessarily mean more intelligent. It might mean better adapted to the heat of a warmer planet (perhaps meaning that they might have darker skin!), better adapted to fending off the new diseases coming out, etc. In general they would be better able to reproduce itself in the environment of the planet.