The sex files: cavemen, monkeys and beetles

Bayman recently pointed out that he finds Neanderthals sexy, and thinks that maybe different hominids experimented with interspecies sex, perhaps while in college. Yet he may not be alone with these views, some people have proposed that red hair for example was a Neanderthal trait introduced into our gene pool. One of the long-standing problem with that theory is that no hybrid bones were ever uncovered, although a recent finding in Gibraltar may change that... Still according to wikipedia:

"On November 16, 2006 Science Daily published scientific test results demonstrating that Neanderthals and ancient humans probably did not interbreed. Scientists with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) sequenced genomic nuclear DNA (nDNA) from a fossilized Neanderthal femur. Their results more precisely indicate a common ancestor about 706,000 years ago, and a complete separation of the ancestors of the species about 376,000 years ago. Their results show that the genomes of modern humans and Neanderthals are at least 99.5-percent identical, but despite this genetic similarity, and despite the two species having cohabitated the same geographic region for thousands of years, there is no evidence of any significant crossbreeding between the two."

Of course this makes sex with monkeys even less probable. In fact, Dave Chapelle once pointed out that AIDS could not have come from someone having sex with monkeys, because anyone who would have sex with a monkey, probably doesn't have sex with woman. Yet there has been experiments by a Russian scientist in the past:

"Dr. Il'ya Ivanov was a world-renowned expert on veterinary reproductive biology, but he wanted to do more in life than breed fatter cows. So in 1927 he traveled to Africa to pursue his vision of interbreeding man and ape. Thankfully his efforts weren't successful. To a great degree this was due to the native staff of the West Guinea research facility where he worked, from whom he constantly had to conceal the true purpose of his experiments. If they had found out what he was really doing, he wrote in his diary, "this could have led to very unpleasant consequences." The necessity of carrying out his work in secrecy made it almost impossible to do anything, although he did record two unsuccessful attempts to artificially inseminate female chimpanzees with human sperm."

He eventually tried to implant an orangutan embryo into a human womb, but the ape (Tarzan) died before the experiment could be performed, and he was sent to prison.

Still, sex with monkeys is probably more pleasant than sex with Bruchid beetles, at least for females. In this species the males unfurl an impressive penis covered with spikes and impales the female's reproductive tract. The female tries to kick the male to end copulation early and minimize damage. However she does get something out of it, she uses the copious amount of ejaculate to rehydrate and nourish herself. So the perfect female in beetles likes it quick and swallows...

In humans, kissing may also be a way for females to rehydrate: "Males, however, were more likely than females to initiate open mouth kissing and kissing with tongue contact. The researchers speculate that the exchange of saliva during kissing may have biological consequences in its own right. Male saliva contains measurable amounts of the sex hormone testosterone which can affect libido."

Tongue-tied: The evolution of speech

This comes from an old conversation that I was reminded of recently. Compared to the rest of the animal kingdom, humans fall short physically in a number of ways. Eyesight isn't as great as some, hearing and sense of smell worse than others. I could go on. Yet humans have dominated the face of the planet, and this is in no small part because of language. Sure, the ultimate reason is intelligence, which means we don't need to rely as strongly on pure physical assets. But what good are plans and ideas if they can't be communicated. An evolution beyond primal vocalization (grunts, growls, etc.) has allowed for the sharing of ideas, coordination of effort through communication and dissemination of knowledge and information. But when did the skill of speech being to arise?

In the 1970s, using human and chimpanzee models, the larynx of a neanderthal fossil was reconstructed leading the researchers involved in the study to conclude that neanderthal was incapable of human speech. This reconstruction was disputed based on the placement of they hyoid bone (which was unlike the position in newborn or adult humans, stillborn chimpanzees or adult chimpanzees and positioned on the basis of ability to swallow) and whether neanderthal man could speak remained uncertain.

In 1989, new neanderthal fossil evidence - a well preserved hyoid bone identical in size and shape to modern humans - indicated that indeed at least the skeletal structures and morphology necessary for speech were present at this stage in human evolution, and has changed little in the past 60 000 years. Of course, this alone doesn't prove that Neanderthal man was capable of speech, but along with other evidence - adequate brain development, and social organization that would necessitate some form of higher communication - certainly suggests that this was the case.

More recent computer simulations based on models of neanderthal vocal tracts demonstrated that if the larynx was posistioned like that of humans, the voice would have been extremely low and difficult to communicate effectively with. If it was positioned like that of a chimp, the words would be "slushy and difficult to understand."

The problem with any model of the vocal tract is that the ability to speak is dependent on the larynx, tongue and other soft tissues that don't fossilize well so their size and position in neanderthal man is speculative at best, but with evidence both for and against neanderthal speech a consensus in this debate is unlikely to be settled soon.

On the other hand, there may be a genetic answer to the neanderthal speech question: FoxP2. This highly conserved gene is required for some of the developments necessary for speech and tracing it's evolution could give answers as to when language developed.