Can o Beans
(328 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:13 PM
Original message |
400,000 year old DNA found in bear tooth |
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060714/sc_afp/swedenspainscience_060714171218STOCKHOLM (AFP) - A Swedish-led team of scientists has discovered 400,000-year-old DNA in bear teeth, the Uppsala University in Sweden said.
The team, made up of Swedish, Spanish and German researchers, discovered the remains of the bear in a cave in Atapuerca, northern Spain.Doesn't do much to support or refute ID theory, but interesting nonetheless.
|
Ian David
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:16 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Godless eating machines that wanted our cave-women. n/t |
MidwestTransplant
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I guess bears really are scavengers! |
freethought
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Interesting! A "cave bear"! |
|
Edited on Fri Jul-14-06 03:25 PM by freethought
Skeletal remains of cave bears showed them to be nearly twice as large and a full size grizzly bear. That's a big animal. If the DNA is viable there may actually be a chance of cloning the animal.
|
Posteritatis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. 400,000 years is kinda prehistoric, yeah... (n/t) |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The oldest DNA found previously (that I can find data on, I could be wrong) is about 50ka, from a frozen mammoth. The article states "It is usually hard to find DNA that is older than 100,000 years." which may mean there is more recent data of something older.
Very cool! What I find surprising is that this find was of a bear found in a cave in Spain, which was probably hot and dry (which usually leads to desication and destruction of DNA). Generally the oldest DNA samples are from organisms found in permafrost.
|
NorCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Bears, the #1 Threat to National Security |
|
(just ask Stephen Colbert) :D
It's time for the Threatdown!!!
|
Lisa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
12. indestructible bears, at that! |
|
Stephen will have a field day with this one. Maybe he will put more paleontologists "on notice" (like the Journal of Paleolimnology, which I noticed is still on the board!).
|
HuckleB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:39 PM
Response to Original message |
7. What does support ID theory? |
|
And how can you refute religious belief?
|
RUMMYisFROSTED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
But some folks have their fingers crossed.
|
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
14. Didin't you hear? They found part of Noah's Ark!!!!!1!1 |
|
Either that or just a really old piece of wood.
But probly part of Noah's Ark.
|
HuckleB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 03:41 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Looks like the ID crowd got the story removed? |
nealmhughes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 04:18 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Cloned giant bears ---- on planes! |
SlipperySlope
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Is the DNA from the bear or from its lunch? |
|
I don't think the article says...
|
ozone_man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-14-06 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
Though I was wondering the same thing. A 400,000 year old lunch would be pretty old. I suppose if it was something that kept refridgerated in the permafrost and resurfaced suddenly. But no permafrost in Spain. Maybe if it was dried like beef jerky. :)
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 11th 2024, 02:19 AM
Response to Original message |