1
$\begingroup$

Excuse me if it is a question with a simply answer, but I don't understand these discoveries, looking a discrepancy from my unknowledge of genetics:

and,

Neanderthals should had also chimapnzee genes, so what does that 2% of correspondency between Neanderthal and actual Homo sapiens genome exactly means?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Some version of this question has been asked and answered several times... I thought we had a more clear canonical answer but maybe I'm just thinking of the first in my list. $\endgroup$ – Bryan Krause Aug 21 '19 at 20:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This all a question of what is meant by “share % of our DNA”, which is obviously different in the two cases. My “todo” list includes writing a definitive answer to all the questions that result from loose journalistic language in this area. Alas, I have not yet found the time. Your response to @BryanKrause illustrates the confusion: you are using %DNA and %genes as if they were equivalent. They are not. And what do you mean by %genes? Not what the 2% means, I bet. $\endgroup$ – David Aug 21 '19 at 20:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Probably iayork's answer here (also linked above): biology.stackexchange.com/questions/61147/… is the most succinct way to put it without deeper explanation. $\endgroup$ – Bryan Krause Aug 21 '19 at 20:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Universal_learner The 2% is referring to alleles that were A) Absent from homo sapiens at one point, B) Present in neanderthals, C) Present in present-day homo sapiens due to breeding between humans and neanderthals. It omits alleles shared in both. Also beware of the ASD/neanderthal linkage, it is not a scientifically supported theory to my knowledge. $\endgroup$ – Bryan Krause Aug 22 '19 at 20:35