PDA

View Full Version : Science Finds DNA Change Accounts for White Skin


KeJia Sista
Dec 22nd, 2005, 01:59 PM
Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 16, 2005; A01

Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.

The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.

Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.

In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.

"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."

The work raises a raft of new questions -- not least of which is why white skin caught on so thoroughly in northern climes once it arose. Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.

The work also reveals for the first time that Asians owe their relatively light skin to different mutations. That means that light skin arose independently at least twice in human evolution, in each case affecting populations with the facial and other traits that today are commonly regarded as the hallmarks of Caucasian and Asian races.

Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group.

Even study leader Keith Cheng said he was at first uncomfortable talking about the new work, fearing that the finding of such a clear genetic difference between people of African and European ancestries might reawaken discredited assertions of other purported inborn differences between races -- the most long-standing and inflammatory of those being intelligence.

"I think human beings are extremely insecure and look to visual cues of sameness to feel better, and people will do bad things to people who look different," Cheng said.

The discovery, described in today's issue of the journal Science, was an unexpected outgrowth of studies Cheng and his colleagues were conducting on inch-long zebra fish, which are popular research tools for geneticists and developmental biologists. Having identified a gene that, when mutated, interferes with its ability to make its characteristic black stripes, the team scanned human DNA databases to see if a similar gene resides in people.

To their surprise, they found virtually identical pigment-building genes in humans, chickens, dogs, cows and many others species, an indication of its biological value.

They got a bigger surprise when they looked in a new database comparing the genomes of four of the world's major racial groups. That showed that whites with northern and western European ancestry have a mutated version of the gene.

Skin color is a reflection of the amount and distribution of the pigment melanin, which in humans protects against damaging ultraviolet rays but in other species is also used for camouflage or other purposes. The mutation that deprives zebra fish of their stripes blocks the creation of a protein whose job is to move charged atoms across cell membranes, an obscure process that is crucial to the accumulation of melanin inside cells.

Humans of European descent, Cheng's team found, bear a slightly different mutation that hobbles the same protein with similar effect. The defect does not affect melanin deposition in other parts of the body, including the hair and eyes, whose tints are under the control of other genes.

A few genes have previously been associated with human pigment disorders -- most notably those that, when mutated, lead to albinism, an extreme form of pigment loss. But the newly found glitch is the first found to play a role in the formation of "normal" white skin. The Penn State team calculates that the gene, known as slc24a5, is responsible for about one-third of the pigment loss that made black skin white. A few other as-yet-unidentified mutated genes apparently account for the rest.

Although precise dating is impossible, several scientists speculated on the basis of its spread and variation that the mutation arose between 20,000 and 50,000 years ago. That would be consistent with research showing that a wave of ancestral humans migrated northward and eastward out of Africa about 50,000 years ago.

Unlike most mutations, this one quickly overwhelmed its ancestral version, at least in Europe, suggesting it had a real benefit. Many scientists suspect that benefit has to do with vitamin D, made in the body with the help of sunlight and critical to proper bone development.

Sun intensity is great enough in equatorial regions that the vitamin can still be made in dark-skinned people despite the ultraviolet shielding effects of melanin. In the north, where sunlight is less intense and cold weather demands that more clothing be worn, melanin's ultraviolet shielding became a liability, the thinking goes.

Today that solar requirement is largely irrelevant because many foods are supplemented with vitamin D.

Some scientists said they suspect that white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance may also be the product of "sexual selection," a phenomenon of evolutionary biology in which almost any new and showy trait in a healthy individual can become highly prized by those seeking mates, perhaps because it provides evidence of genetic innovativeness.

Cheng and co-worker Victor A. Canfield said their discovery could have practical spinoffs. A gene so crucial to the buildup of melanin in the skin might be a good target for new drugs against melanoma, for example, a cancer of melanin cells in which slc24a5 works overtime.

But they and others agreed that, for better or worse, the finding's most immediate impact may be an escalating debate about the meaning of race.

Recent revelations that all people are more than 99.9 percent genetically identical has proved that race has almost no biological validity. Yet geneticists' claims that race is a phony construct have not rung true to many nonscientists -- and understandably so, said Vivian Ota Wang of the National Human Genome Research Institute in Bethesda.

"You may tell people that race isn't real and doesn't matter, but they can't catch a cab," Ota Wang said. "So unless we take that into account it makes us sound crazy."

KeJia

seoulbrotherno1
Dec 23rd, 2005, 12:22 AM
So what I wanna know is whether or not it is true that Dr. Yacub selectively bred these recessive-gene-having humans in order to create a race of evil.

sb1

nskripchun
Dec 23rd, 2005, 02:12 AM
so the article is saying white people's white skin is the result of a mutation, eh?


...


...


...


...


WHITE FOLKS = MUTANTS.

hahaha, yeah I just had to say that.

Liang
Mar 9th, 2007, 03:26 AM
WHITE FOLKS = MUTANTS.

hahaha, yeah I just had to say that.

And not the X-men kind either

Tyger Durden
Mar 12th, 2007, 11:16 PM
...Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.


uh oh...this what happens when you read stuff more closely. Who would ever think to posit the latter?

Televangelist
Mar 13th, 2007, 03:59 AM
Anything's possible. "Attracting mates" is the currently-agreed-upon scientific explanation for why blond hair evolved some 20,000 years ago in Europe. Unlike in more fertile regions of the world, the soil wasn't good enough for the sedentary agriculture that would allow women to reliably feed themselves regardless of the success of their hunter mates, who travelled away from shelter for long periods of time to hunt scarce game. Blond hair served as one more useful mutation for a female to trigger the man's "Ooh, shiny!" reflex, and increase her chances of survival to procreate and pass on the gene.

I have a hard time imagining white skin working in the same way, but I don't know enough about the science behind it to say for certain.

Nothing says that these genetic traits have to carry the same meanings in a modern context, anyhow.

minbo
Mar 13th, 2007, 07:55 AM
Anything's possible. "Attracting mates" is the currently-agreed-upon scientific explanation for why blond hair evolved some 20,000 years ago in Europe. Unlike in more fertile regions of the world, the soil wasn't good enough for the sedentary agriculture that would allow women to reliably feed themselves regardless of the success of their hunter mates, who travelled away from shelter for long periods of time to hunt scarce game. Blond hair served as one more useful mutation for a female to trigger the man's "Ooh, shiny!" reflex, and increase her chances of survival to procreate and pass on the gene.

I have a hard time imagining white skin working in the same way, but I don't know enough about the science behind it to say for certain.

Nothing says that these genetic traits have to carry the same meanings in a modern context, anyhow.

Not quite true.

The only "currently-agreed-upon scientific explanation" for Blond hair is that it IS somehow linked to evolution. Sexual selection, environmental selection, biological selection.... ONE of the many theories is that blond hair evolved strictly for sexual selection, and even then, if you want to pay attention to the sexual selection theories only, people have a lot of potential reasons as to why it was sexually beneficial. Reasons for the prevalence of blond hair is about as agreed upon as if chocolate is a better flavour than vanilla.

Amongst the many other theories, for example, is that blond hair (and blue eyes) is linked to another unknown gene that provides a beneficial effect, thus these recessive traits were hitchhikers, just along for the ride. Biological selection. Another theory is that blond hair, rather than being simply a cosmetic trait, was a visible physical marker for age. Originally going after a blond haired person assured you that you were screwing around with a young 'un. This is why some people posit that the majority of blonds start their lives blond, but eventually in their teens or early 20s their hair darkens. Biological selection. People who stay blond their whole lives evolved later as a predatory enhancement taking advantage of the "youthful" marker of being blond. Sexual selection.

Televangelist
Mar 13th, 2007, 12:32 PM
I defer to Minbo on this one, as he clearly knows more about the topic than I do.

That does jibe with my original thesis, though, which I should have applied to the blondes as well as to 'whiteness' - just about anything's possible in terms of the actual reason it came about.

Tyger Durden
May 21st, 2007, 04:32 PM
...Blond hair served as one more useful mutation for a female to trigger the man's "Ooh, shiny!" reflex, and increase her chances of survival to procreate and pass on the gene...

how do one explain Polar Bears then? Do they have a "Ooh, shiny!" reflex too?

atlasien
May 21st, 2007, 04:42 PM
This is why some people posit that the majority of blonds start their lives blond, but eventually in their teens or early 20s their hair darkens. Biological selection. People who stay blond their whole lives evolved later as a predatory enhancement taking advantage of the "youthful" marker of being blond. Sexual selection.

Makes sense. Many Australian Aborigine children are born blond, although I think their hair turns dark black long before they are teenagers.

http://www.patrickgeorgephoto.com/images/aussie-kids1.jpg