DNA Variation Widens Human-Chimp Chasm | The Institute for Creation Research

DNA Variation Widens Human-Chimp Chasm

Over the past 20 years, DNA sequencing technology has improved regarding the bulk amount of sequence it can produce. However, the length of the DNA snippets (called reads) that are obtained is still quite short. Depending on the technology, the reads vary between about 75 to 1,500 bases.1 These short DNA segments are very difficult to assemble into chromosomes, which can be hundreds of millions of bases long. Because many areas of the genome contain extended regions where the DNA sequences are repeated or duplicated, they cannot be effectively assembled into contiguous stretches using short reads. As a result, important genes and regulatory regions in these areas are completely left out when a genome is reconstructed. The computer programs that researchers use simply cannot effectively assemble the entire chromosome as one contiguous piece because the reads are too short.

In the past several years, new sequencing technologies have become commercially available that provide much longer reads of 10,000 to 215,000 bases.2,3 These new long-read sequencing technologies allow for the more accurate assembly of the human genome, revealing some incredible surprises about human genetic diversity.

Before the advent of long-read sequencing, human variation was typically assessed by examining differences in the DNA between people at the single-base level. For example, one person might have a C (cytosine) at a specific position in their DNA while another would have an A (adenine). These are called single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs. When the diversity of SNPs was evaluated for thousands of people around the world, it was determined that the average difference in overall DNA sequence between any two humans was about 0.01%.4 However, a variety of recent papers have been published using long-read DNA sequencing technology that greatly improved the accuracy of assessing variation in the human genome, especially in areas that have been difficult to decipher using short-read technology.5-8

The results from these new papers using long-read technology have been startling and are shaking up the entire human genomics community. The most surprising finding was that the research demonstrates that large regions of the human genome can be markedly different between any two humans—or even within the same person. Because most animals, including humans, have two sets of chromosomes, one from the father and one from the mother, the maternal and paternal chromosomes in the same person can be very different. The bottom line is that any two human genomes can be up to 4.5% different from one another, in marked contrast to the previous estimate of 0.01% based solely on single-base changes.5

These newly found large differences in human genomes conflict with the evolutionary idea that humans and chimpanzees are 98.5% similar in their DNA. If humans can be up to 4.5% different from each other, how is it that chimps are supposedly only 1.5% different from humans? The fact of the matter is that the 98.5% similarity figure is based on cherry-picked data designed to bolster evolution. Newly published research by this author clearly shows that chimpanzee DNA overall is, at most, only 85% similar to human.9

In summary, recent research shows that outwardly visible human diversity is due not only to millions of single-base differences, but also to thousands of large structural differences. Most of these variants were likely built into the genomes of the original created couple, Adam and Eve—easily accounting for the diversity we see in humans across the globe and fully supporting the biblical narrative of diversity within kinds.

References

  1. Pettersson, E., J. Lundeberg, and A. Ahmadian. 2009. Generations of sequencing technologies. Genomics. 93 (2): 105-111.
  2. Jansen, H. J. et al. 2017. Rapid de novo assembly of the European eel genome from nanopore sequencing reads. bioRxiv. Posted on biorxiv.org January 20, 2017.
  3. Chin, C.-S. et al. 2016. Phased diploid genome assembly with single molecule real-time sequencing. Nature Methods. 13 (12): 1050-1054.
  4. Witherspoon, D. J. et al. 2007. Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations. Genetics. 176 (1): 351-359.
  5. English, A. C. et al. 2015. Assessing structural variation in a personal genome—towards a human reference diploid genome. BMC Genomics. 16: 286.
  6. Huddleston, J. et al. Discovery and genotyping of structural variation from long-read haploid genome sequence data. Genome Research. Posted on genome.cshlp.org November 28, 2016.
  7. Seo, J.-S. et al. 2016. De novo assembly and phasing of a Korean human genome. Nature. 538 (7624): 243-247.
  8. Shi, L. et al. 2016. Long-read sequencing and de novo assembly of a Chinese genome. Nature Communications. 7: 12065.
  9. Tomkins, J. P. 2016. Analysis of 101 Chimpanzee Trace Read Data Sets: Assessment of Their Overall Similarity to Human and Possible Contamination With Human DNA. Answers Research Journal. 9: 294-298.

* Dr. Tomkins is Director of Life Sciences at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in genetics from Clemson University.

Cite this article: Jeffrey P. Tomkins, Ph.D. 2017. DNA Variation Widens Human-Chimp Chasm. Acts & Facts. 46 (4).

The Latest
NEWS
Seafloor Spreading Matches Creation Predictions
Evolutionary scientists recently determined that seafloor spreading has been slowing down.1 And they are not exactly sure of the reason. However,...

NEWS
Remembering Patti Morse
But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from...

CREATION PODCAST
What Happened with Washington's Violent Volcano? | The Creation...
How did a 1980 volcanic eruption change our understanding of geology? What impact did this event have on the age assignments of sediments? Join us for...

NEWS
Fossil Insect Predation Shows No Evidence of Evolution
Some recent science news stories have come out describing fossils of insects feeding on plants supposedly many “millions of years ago.” What...

NEWS
Adaptive Genetic and Epigenetic Changes in Plants
Being sedentary organisms, plants are essentially stuck where they are planted and need to dynamically adapt to the conditions around them to not only...

NEWS
Dr. Tim Clarey Awarded Adjunct Professor of the Year
Congratulations to ICR Research Scientist and geologist Dr. Tim Clarey! He received the Adjunct Professor of the Year award from King’s University,...

NEWS
Mars Rover Records Dramatic Solar Eclipse
NASA’s Mars Perseverance rover has filmed the Martian satellite (or moon) Phobos eclipsing the sun, and this short but impressive video may be viewed...

CREATION PODCAST
Darwin or Design? CET Pt. 2 | The Creation Podcast: Episode 22
How does design provide a better explanation for biological functions and adaptations than natural selection? And how can engineering principles help...

NEWS
Resurrecting “Ancient” Enzymes?
The most abundant protein on Earth is probably an enzyme (biological catalyst) called RuBisCO (or Rubisco) designed by the Creator to function in photosynthesis.1...

NEWS
Inside May-June 2022 Acts & Facts
How can Christians stand up to scientific elitism? What does the plant fossil record in Iceland tell us about the global Flood? Does a new bacterium...