Natural Selection Kept Neanderthal DNA in Modern Humans

Interbreeding with Neanderthals appears to have reintroduced genetic sequences related to innate immunity that had been lost as humans migrated out of Africa. 

By Anna Azvolinsky | December 29, 2016

FLICKR, ERICH FERDINANDThe human genome is peppered with the DNA of extinct hominins—Neanderthals and Denisovans—as a result of interbreeding with early Homo sapiens. According to some reports, the Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA retained at specific loci, such as immune system-related genes, likely conferred adaptive advantages against infectious microorganisms. In a study published last month (November 29) in Genome Biology, researchers provide strong evidence that the Neanderthal DNA present at one such locus within the modern human genome is likely the result of positive selection.

The study authors also suggest that this Neanderthal haplotype is not unique to Neanderthals. Rather, interbreeding reintroduced the beneficial genetic variant present in early African humans that had been lost during the out-of-Africa migration and population bottleneck.

“This is an important study contributing to a growing body of work that combines population and functional genomic analyses to learn about archaic alleles,” Sriram Sankararaman, a computational biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the work, wrote in an email to The Scientist.

“This study and previous work suggests that acquiring Neanderthal and Denisovan sequences provided access to alleles that were better adapted to the novel selective pressures our ancestors experienced as they migrated Out of Africa into new geographic regions,” Joshua Akey, an evolutionary and computational biologist at the University of Washington, who was also not involved in the work, wrote in an email to The Scientist.

Luis Barreiro of the Université de Montréal and his colleagues focused on the oligoadenylate synthetase (OAS) locus, which consists of three genes—OAS1, OAS2, and OAS3—that encode enzymes involved in the innate immune response against viruses. “These are among the core genes that are important to stop viral replication,” Barreiro told The Scientist.

The locus is one of the first identified as a region that was introgressed from Neanderthals and is frequently found in individuals of European descent. Although others had suspected that these genes underwent positive selection, prior studies did not provide strong enough evidence because the statistical power of the standard test for neutrality or positive selection of the locus was too low, noted study author Aaron Sams, who was a postdoctoral fellow at Cornell University when he conducted this work. 

To better test for positive selection, Barreiro and his colleagues relied on two different statistical simulations, comparing data on the history of human populations to sequencing data from living human populations as well as a relatively new dataset of 230 ancient Eurasian individuals. All of the analyses showed a high probability that natural selection had a hand in keeping the locus in modern human genomes through interbreeding with Neanderthals outside of Africa.

“Often, in genome-wide simulation studies, we use uniform recombination rates for simplicity, rather than consider the local recombination rates in specific parts of the genome. Not considering the local context of OAS could, in part, explain why previous studies have disagreed about whether Neandertal OAS genes were under positive selection in the human population,” Sams explained.

“Demonstrating adaptive introgression is very challenging, and I was happy to see multiple lines of evidence based on different evolutionary simulations and statistics,” Tony Capra, who studies evolutionary genomics at Vanderbilt University and who was also not involved in the work, wrote in an email to The Scientist.

Akey agreed. “Conclusively proving an adaptive explanation is very difficult.”

The Neanderthal allele results in a splice variant of the OAS1 gene, which produces a smaller protein that, researchers previously showed in human cells, produces higher enzymatic activity than other variants of the gene. 

In the current study, Barreiro’s group demonstrated in two different immune cell types derived from human blood samples that the Neanderthal haplotype influences the expression of the OAS genes depending on the cell type and the infectious agent used to stimulate the immune cells. When either macrophages or peripheral blood mononuclear cells from individuals harboring the Neanderthal DNA at the OAS locus were challenged with either Salmonella typhimurium or one of several live viruses, the microbe activated the OAS genes to a different extent than in immune cells derived from individuals that did not harbor the Neanderthal allele.

“This paper contributes to the evidence provided by several recent studies that regions of our genome involving our bodies’ interaction with the environment, such as the immune system, are the most likely targets of adaptive introgression,” wrote Capra. “It is likely that Neanderthals were better adapted to the pathogens present in non-African environments than anatomically modern humans that had newly moved into these regions.

A further comparison of OAS sequences among human populations revealed that this OAS Neanderthal allele is found in about 60 percent of individuals in Africa. However, outside of Africa, it is only found in individuals that harbor the Neanderthal haplotype. Based on this evidence, “we think that this allele was lost during the out-of-Africa migration and that the Neanderthal haplotype resurrected this allele after the bottleneck following the human migration out of Africa,” said Barreiro.

“An important point raised by this study is that instances of archaic adaptation are being missed by existing approaches that are not sensitive to the features of these alleles,” wrote Sankararaman.

The results also highlight the need to better understand the types of pathogens that were present in the environments where introgression likely took place, noted Capra, but acknowledged that this would be challenging to accomplish.

“It’s clear that our interactions with archaic hominins contributed to phenotypic diversity and disease susceptibility in present day humans, but we still have a lot to learn about the molecular mechanisms that Neanderthal sequence variation acts through,” added Akey.

A. J. Sams et al., “Adaptively introgressed Neandertal haplotype at the OAS locus functionally impacts innate immune responses in humans,” Genome Biology, 17:246, 2016.

Correction (December 30): In paragraph 13, we incorrectly attributed the quotes to Joshua Akey, but they were written by Tony Capra. The Scientist regrets the error. 


Add a Comment

Avatar of: You



Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo


Avatar of: theot58


Posts: 3

December 29, 2016

Natural selection is real and observable.

Macro evolution is a popular myth which has never been observed.

We need to clear in precise to be good scientists.

Dr John Sanford (Geneticist) said it well:

"The bottom line is that the primary axiom [of Macro evolution] is categorically false,
you can't create information with misspellings,
not even if you use natural selection".


Avatar of: theot58


Posts: 3

December 29, 2016

Natural selection is real and observable.

Macro evolution is a popular myth which has never been observed.

We need to clear and precise to be good scientists.

Dr John Sanford (Geneticist) said it well:

"The bottom line is that the primary axiom of Macro evolution

is categorically false,

you can't create information with misspellings,

not even if you use natural selection".


Avatar of: waddell


Posts: 1

December 29, 2016

theo old friend! you do get around. Micro evolution IS macro evolution but you are never going to get it

Avatar of: theot58


Posts: 3

Replied to a comment from waddell made on December 29, 2016

December 29, 2016

Merry Christmas Waddell - I trust you are well.

I got it already.!!

You are unwilling to admit that minor changes in an organism (adaptation) is fundamentally different to a bacteria developing a brain.

If you cannot see that they are different - then HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

Micro evolution is another way of saying that animals adapt to their environment - THIS IS REALLY PROFOUND.

But if we cut thorugh the sales BS that evolutionists use to confuse and intimidate. Macro evoltion can be stated simply as the following equation:

1) Start with a primitive simple cell

(It has no brain, no blood or circulation system, no skeleton etc)

2) Add lots of time

3) Add a large number of mutations

4) add natural forces like wind, rain, gravity etc

5) Apply Natural selection 


Resulting in a mindblowing complex organism like a human

(with a brain more powerful than all the worlds computers combined,

blood so complex that with all out technology we cannot make even one drop,


Has macro evolution been observed ? - NO

Is it proven to exists? - NO

Does it need A LOT of faith to believe it?  - sure does

So why do we teach it to students as a "scientific fact"?


Avatar of: wctopp


Posts: 110

January 2, 2017

I suspect there's more stuff in there than some immune capabilities.  As whole genome sequencing becomes routine we'll have piles of African and non-African data and I'd give it at least even odds that a lot more will be uncovered.  Considering what I'd have been 50,000 years ago and comparing that to a Neanderthal it's not obvious to me that 95%+ of my genes would be superior.

Avatar of: JC States

JC States

Posts: 4

January 18, 2017

So, if there was interbreeding and the DNA from these others has persisted in Homo sapiens DNA, then neanderthals and denisovans were not other species, variant subgroups. 

Popular Now

  1. How to Separate the Science From the (Jerk) Scientist
  2. Could a Dose of Sunshine Make You Smarter?
  3. Sweden Cancels Agreement With Elsevier Over Open Access
  4. Researchers Develop a Drug Against the Common Cold