Back to Homepage
Page 3 of Part 2: Who Was Mitochondrial Eve’s Husband?
People often issued a challenge: Y chromosome Adam and mitochondrial Eve they were born tens of thousands of years away, how could a couple? They really can not be husband and wife. Mitochondrial Eve is the Y chromosome old grandfather's wife, while the Y chromosome Adam married the following mitochondrial Eve grandchildren many generations of women.
Ⅰ. Mitochondrial Eve: our maternal “most recent common ancestor”
1. The time period when our maternal ancestors lived
(1) Evidence-based estimation: The relationship between mitochondrial DNA mutations and the dates when these events happened, it is obvious that regardless of how many generations we back track the maternal ancestors, we must rely on three evidences: a. There must be at least two who reproduced into ethnic groups of the present time; b. There must be difference in mutations in these two individuals’ mitochondrial DNA; c. There is a known “mutation rate”.
Three conditions must be fulfilled: a. There are two base points representing the two ethnic groups lasting until the present time; b. The two base points separated by a predetermined distance which represents “the difference in the mitochondrial DNA mutation”; c. There is a certain upward slope representing the “mutation rate”. One can depict two intersecting straight lines on account of these three conditions. The point of intersection can represent our deduced ancestors.
(2) We must be aware that out of the intersection of our maternal ancestors who regardless of whether they were the oldest or youngest, they must have at least two daughters. Moreover, they descendants must have reproduced until the present time. The only way to be sure of these two base points, because it is to search from the blood samples of modern human beings. If our maternal ancestors only had one daughter or just one daughter’s descendants reproduced up to the present time, then we cannot deduce her existence or the period of time she lived ( Please see Figure 2-11 The Mitochondrial lineage tree in last page).
2. Mitochondrial Eve was our “most recent common ancestors” by deducing
“Our most recent ancestors” can be abbreviated MRCA. There must be other females who lived at the same time as mitochondrial Eve. However, their descendants failed to survive up to the present time. Nonetheless these females must be the female siblings of mitochondrial Eve from the same maternal genetic. Their mitochondrial DNA sequence must be very similar to that of mitochondrial Eve.
Obviously, mitochondrial Eve should have a mother, grandmothers or else who gave birth to her? How it is that we cannot deduce them? The reason is because her aunts, grand aunts and their descendants did not survive until the present time. It is impossible to deduce if the condition, namely, “ the need to have at least two daughters and their descendants must survive until the present time”, is not met.
Moreover, we need to pay attention to the fact that in order to be our maternal ancestors, the females must of 23 pairs of chromosomes and their mitochondrial DNA must be basically the same as ours.
Ⅱ. How much of a difference is there between mitochondrial Eve and us?
1. The difference is less than one in one thousand:
Figure 2-12 Mitochondrial Eve and our differences
The 2006 report released by the National Human Genome Research Institute-NHGRI states:
About Whole Genome Association Studies
“When researchers completed the final analysis of the Human Genome Project in April 2003, they confirmed that the 3 billion base pairs of genetic letters in humans were 99.9 percent identical in every person. It also meant that individuals are, on average, 0.1 percent different genetically from every other person on the planet.”
2. Mitochondrial Eve resembles Hillary more than Michelle
Because the DNA replication process, with accurate replication and replication error correction function, therefore, the number of DNA mutations in human generation between the previous generation and is very small. If a mother, about 20 years old gave birth to two daughters, the eldest daughter who has assumed 50 mutation is different from the mother, two daughters also has 50 mutations. Because human nuclei contain up to 60 million DNA base pairs, random mutation point two daughters, it is impossible at the same location. So, the difference between the daughter, is 100 mutation points, while their mother difference, just a 50 point mutations.
How big is the difference between mitochondrial Eve and her descendants? The difference between Michelle and Hillary is the result of the accumulation of two different maternal developments. Since the accumulated DNA difference is just one in one thousand, therefore, the difference on this maternal line is half of one in one thousand. That is to say, the DNA difference between Michelle and Hillary vs. mitochondrial Eve is merely half of one in one thousand. From the viewpoint of DNA, mitochondrial Eve more resembles Hillary than Michelle or we can say compared to Hillary, mitochondrial Eve more resembles Michelle. Mitochondrial Eve was thinner may be because her nutrition was not as good as Michelle or Hillary. In this way we can construct the image of mitochondrial Eve. She should look in between Michelle and Hillary. Because she had lived in Africa where the sunlight was intense, her skin color was closer to that of Michelle.
She must be equally beautiful and smart as Michelle and Hillary. Unlike Michelle and Hillary, the only thing she lacks was the fruits from mankind’s accumulated knowledge in science and technology which these two women enjoy today. To put it simply, she was very much like us. In reality, she was like a country girl who lived in the mountains. If you gave her the opportunity, she (the mitochondrial Eve) could become an outstanding student at Princeton or Yale University. Are all these far exceeding your expectations?
II. Who was mitochondrial Eve’s husband?
1. The time when Y chromosome Adam lived
In principle, the estimation of the dates of Y chromosome DNA as well as the mitochondrial DNA are the same, namely by “just observing the number of years of separation which can tell us how many accumulated mutations occurred in each ethnic group.” Simply speaking, we are still dealing with two base points arising from a plane field. These two base points or lines each having a certain slope and the point of intersection is merely a problem in geometry. The Y chromosome is formed by 50,000,000 DNA nucleobase pairs which far exceed the 16,569 nucleobase pairs in the mitochondrial DNA. Therefore, to determine the date when Y chromosome Adam had lived is more difficult than determining the date when mitochondrial Eve had lived.
As a result of the mutation rate and the basis of different information in different research reports and proposed a different era. Listed below are four years and report generation Y chromosome Name: (age, study published time, thesis title)
(1) 270,000 years ago, 1995, “Absence of polymorphism at the ZFY locus on the human Y chromosome.”[Reference 1]；
(2) 59,000 years ago (95% probability between 40,000 years to 140,000 years) 2000, “Y chromosome sequence variation and the history of human populations” [Reference 2]；
(3) 140,000 years ago, 2011, “A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa” [Reference 3]
(4) 160,000 years ago, 2012, Re-Examining the "Out of Africa" Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) in Light of DNA Genealogy[Reference 4] .
Many people claim that Y chromosome was born around 59,000 years ago. In fact, this is incorrect. From the latest research, the time of birth of Y chromosome Adam should have been 150,000 years ago.
Figure 2-13 Mitochondrial Eve’s husband was an ancestor of Y chromosome Adam
2. Who was mitochondrial Eve’s husband?
Y chromosome was the common great, great grandfather of all mankind. He lived around 150,000 years ago. Likewise, mitochondrial Eve was the common great, great, great grandmother of all mankind. She lived around 200,000 years ago. On the surface it seems absurd but it is a very accurate conclusion. Please pay attention to the fact that it purposely add one word “great” to mitochondrial Eve to show that they did not belong to the same generation.
Figure 12-14 Descendants’ DNA hereditary intersection might create the error of generation seniority
Let us take a look at a simple map of a family’s pedigree. This family pedigree consists of four generations, one great grandfather and great grandmother. Their 4th generation has three girls and four boys. Even though these boys and girls have the same great grandfather and great grandmother, using the aforementioned principle, one can deduce from the girls’ mitochondrial DNA their great grandmother. However, from the boys’ Y chromosome DNA one can only deduce their grand father who of course was not the husband of their great grandmother
From this example, one can clearly understand the relationship between mitochondrial Eve and Y chromosome Adam. Mitochondrial Eve’s husband was the male ancestor of Y chromosome Adam who was born 50,000 years Earlier than Y chromosome Adam.
III. Have Michelle and Hillary evolved differently?
1. Race is a social concept and not a scientific fact:
Someone once asked the famous American chief expert of the American Genome Project, Dr. J. Craig Venter, “Are people with different skin colors differ in their genetic makeup?” His answer was this:
“In 2000, the Human Genome Project finally answered one of the most fundamental questions about race: What, if anything, is the genetic difference between people of different skin colors — black, white, Hispanic, Asian? The answer: nearly nothing. As it turns out, we all share 99.99 percent of the same genetic code — no matter our race — a fact that, geneticist J. Craig Venter claimed, proves that race is a social concept, not a scientific one.” And “Race is a social concept, not a scientific one” said Dr. J. Craig Venter.
Dr. Venter’s remarks led to an important change in our thinking. In the past, we base our understanding on the origin of mankind, race and racial differences on comparing the skin, skeleton and fossils. From these lines of evidence we arrive at the conclusion that mankind is the product of evolution. At the same time, we believe that evolution created these differences as well as superior and inferior races. However, the arrival of DNA decoding completely demolished this theory.
2. Theory of evolution’s concept of race
In Darwin’s book “The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex”, he Given the data that proved by Dr. J. Barnard Davis :
“by many careful measurements, that the mean internal capacity of the skull in Europeans is 92.3 cubic inches; in Americans 87.5; in Asiatics 87.1; and in Australians only 81.9 cubic inches.”(Chapter II. On the Manner of Development of Man from Some Lower Form.)
Obviously, Darwin believed that there are superior and inferior human beings based on the dimension of the skull bone and the brain volume. Moreover, he said:
“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”(Chapter VI - On the Affinities and Genealogy of Man)
This is brought from Darwinism "survival of the fittest" principle, the predicted inferior races will be gradually phased out. But after a hundred years, blacks in South Africa Nelson Mandela became president, white South African regime is no longer the rule. The original backward nation, has been the rapid rise of the economy, and the "high-end" Caucasians (whites) did not become more civilized. These facts clearly prove Darwin's prophecy is completely wrong.
3．Michelle and Hillary did not evolve differently.
Nowadays, molecular anthropology relies on DNA decoding to provide proof and thereby provides us with a completely new way of conducting research, a completely new way of thinking and perspectives of our world. Mankind did not evolve. Between human beings, there is no scientific evidence of any difference. There is no such thing as racially inferior or superior. As stated in the American’s Declaration of Independence:” All men are created equal.” All the conclusions about mankind based on Darwin’s theory of evolution are either misunderstanding or lies.
President Obama’s wife, Michelle, and the former President Clinton’s wife, Hillary, have completely different skin colors. Nonetheless, the difference in their DNA is merely thousandth, even ten thousandth. If we measure mankind’s history with the thousand year measurement, we can say that Michelle is from Africa and Hillary’s ancient ancestors left Africa for Europe several tens of thousands years ago. Both are equally smart, equally outstanding, and equally beautiful. Even though we do not know which DNA haplogroup they belong nor do we know the history of their ancestors, but we can be certain that they do not have the difference predicted from Darwin’s theory of evolution. The DNA in their blood is 99.9% similar. Therefore, the difference is merely thousandth or even ten thousandth. The difference in skin color merely reflects ones adaptation to the intensity of the sunlight and has nothing to do with Darwin’s theory of evolution.
If Michelle and Hillary are products of evolution, then, they must have evolved from two different genetic lines with notable evolutionary differences. Are such evolutionary differences seen in these two women? If so, who is more advanced in evolution? Some say this:” Michelle is a special case of evolution.” This remark is ridiculous and indicative of the speaker being influenced by the theory of evolution. In Africa, there must be many people like Michelle with recent common ancestors. These ancestors merely separated from our outstanding Michelle for around 200 years, but they were separated from Hillary for tens of thousands of years. We can say with certainty that there was a special evolution in 200 years after they have immigrated to North America. Therefore, those who still live in Africa are just as outstanding as Michelle.
In sum, we can see this from DNA decoding: Since modern humans’ mitochondrial Eve appeared in Africa 200,000 years ago (or even earlier) until human being today, mankind has not undergone evolution, not even microevolution. We can even predict that 200,000 years from now that there would not be much difference between us and our great grandchildren. The difference in the DNA between us and them should be less than thousandth.
IV. Why is the difference in DNA in modern humans so small?
1. The accuracy of DNA replication is truly amazing
After the separation 200,000 years ago, every ethnic group experienced several tens thousand generations of inheritance. Every individual’s cells experienced cell divisions for several tens of generation starting with one pair of parents to 7 billion people. Despite several thousands billions of DNA sequence replications, the accuracy of DNA replication is indeed amazing because the difference in DNA sequence is merely thousandth. Why is the difference in mankind’s DNA sequence so small? Credit belongs to accuracy of DNA replication and the self-correction and repair functions.
During cell division, DNA undergoes very accurate self-replication during which the original DNA sequence is faithfully passed on to the next generation of cells. The mechanism to ensure the accuracy of self-replication is one type of “Semiconservative replication” process.
Figure 2-15 Semiconservative replication of DNA
Each one of the human chromosome contains a long chain of DNA double helix. The two chains each contain a string of nucleobases. The pairing of these nucleobases are strictly complementary following the pairing rule as follows: A pairs with T and G with C. If the left side is T, then the right side must be A and not G or C, or T. This pairing is similar to a zipper. During “Semiconservative replication”, the process is similar to opening the zipper then giving the left side of the zipper a new complementary pairs on the right side which must be the same as the original “right side of the zipper”. Likewise, to give the right side of the zipper a new complementary pairs, the left side must be the same as the original “left side of the zipper”. In this way, the replication of a complete zipper which is exactly identical with the “mother” zipper.
This is the mechanism by which the DNA Semiconservative replication operates in order for the chromosome and mitochondrial DNA sequences could be accurate passed on from one generation to the next regardless of how many times the human cells undergo division. “Incredibly, DNA synthesis can occur as fast as 100 nucleotides/second and must be as accurate as 1 wrong base in 10^9 nucleotide additions. . . . .”[Reference 5]
2. The wonderful DNA repair function
(This section is borrowed from the textbook of the Chinese University” Modern Molecular Biology and Genetic Engineering” Reference 6)
Even though the DNA replication process is a high fidelity process, however, invariably there exists a small amount of uncorrected error in the replicated progeny DNA. In order to avoid a large amount of mutations leading to the death of the body, DNA has a special repair function which occurs simultaneously during the strict replication of the DNA sequence. Unlike other molecules, DNA is very special because it can make self repair after replication-related damage or errors. The DNA repair function is another guarantee for the speedy and stable replication process. The different types of DNA repair are listed below: (1) mismatch repair ; (2) excision repair ;(3) Direct repair; (4) recombination repair;(5) error-prone repair; et.
The already very precise DNA sequence replication is made every more precise by the aforementioned repair mechanisms. However, during the replication process, very small “mistakes” are created. These “mistakes” are the “mutations” which is inherited by the next generation. Because of this, during the 200,000 years and thousands of generations of inheritance of modern humans, we have an explanation of why the difference in our DNA is merely thousandth. Even more amazing if the fact that within this difference is included all the mutation markers in Y chromosome as well as the mitochondrial DNA. Because of these genetic markers, not only can we trace our ancestors but also depict mankind’s migratory routes and history. Thus, from this viewpoint, these “mistakes” are no longer “mistakes”.
For example, M168 genetic marker’s letter ‘T’ remains unaltered on the same locus at the DNA sequence the Y chromosome that include 50 million nucleotide. This truly amazing inheritance relies on the aforementioned accuracy of DNA replication.
As mentioned before: there is “ the accuracy rate is one mismatched nucleobase pair in the replication of one billion nucleobase pairs” (Reference 5).Therefore, every time during the replication of the six billion nucleobase pairs within the cells (three billion from father and three billion from mother), the replication error is merely six letters. There are no more than 50 cell divisions in every human being during his or her lifetime. Therefore, each generation, only 300 “mistakes” or mutations are accumulated.
From mitochondrial Eve until today, 200,000 years have lapsed. After 10,000 generations of inheritance, there must be around three million “mistakes” or mutations. It being accumulated about three million in one cell. The ratio is around 0.5 (3 million ÷ 6,000 million) which is exactly the difference between Michelle and mitochondrial Eve. One can even predict that after another 200,000 years, the difference may increase by another 0.5.
Mutation cannot be the motivating force of evolution. From the mere difference of only 0.5 between mitochondrial Eve and modern humans, one can see that even mankind’s microevolution did not happen because of mutations. Needless to say, one cannot across the gap between the ape’s 24 pairs of chromosomes and the 23 pairs of chromosomes in humans because on human DNA mutations.
V. There is no human microevolution
Why is there no microevolution in humans?
As mentioned earlier, we have seen that DNA difference is merely 0.5 in one thousand between the mitochondrial Eve (200,000 years ago) and modern humans. This difference is even smaller than between difference peoples living in different regions of the world. From this fact we can be certain that in the last 200,000 years, microevolution has not occurred in humans.
Let us take another look at the August 22, 2000 report in the New York Times science section entitled “Do Races Differ? Not Really, Genes Show) which states:
“Dr. Venter and scientists at the National Institutes of Health recently announced that they had put together a draft of the entire sequence of the human genome, and the researchers had unanimously declared, there is only one race — the human race.
Dr. Venter and other researchers say that those traits most commonly used to distinguish one race from another, like skin and eye color, or the width of the nose, are traits controlled by a relatively few number of genes, and thus have been able to change rapidly in response to extreme environmental pressures during the short course of Homo sapiens history.”
Dr. Venter is one of the world leaders in genomic research. He is the chief expert who has done the most in the actual human genome project. Among the samples from five Individuals in the world genome research project, one sample came from Dr. Venter.
In sum, from the times of Y chromosome Adam and mitochondrial Eve, microevolution has not occur in humans.
1.Dorit RL, Akashi H, Gilbert W. “Absence of polymorphism at the ZFY
locus on the human Y chromosome.” Science 268:1183–1185 1955。
2．Underhill PA, et al. “Y chromosome sequence variation and the history of human populations”, Nature America Inc.2000.
3. Cruciani F, et al., A revised root for the human Y chromosomal phylogenetic tree: the origin of patrilineal diversity in Africa. Am J Hum Genet. Jun 10 2011
4.Anatole A. Klyosov, et al.,Re-Examining the “Out of Africa” Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) in Light of DNA Genealogy, Advances in Anthropology,2012. Vol.2, No.2, 80-86
5. Morgan, David. The Cell Cycle: Principles of Cell Control. New Science Press Ltd., London, 2007; pp 58-60.
6. HiYing Li，” Modern Molecular Biology and Genetic Engineerin
g”，the textbook of the Chinese University，Published by Chemical Industry Press