DNA Update – October 2025 

Earlier in the week I had an e-mail from Ancestry.Com with a MAJOR update on my DNA stuff. It actually solved a mystery (by eliminating it completely) and added – at least potentially – another in its place. Part of the reason for the update is improvements in their algorithm as well as having more data to analyse. Here’s what they said... 

The mystery that I was struggling with – in that it was quite THE headscratcher – was my apparent Scottish ancestry. Although I haven’t gone too far back into my father's Irish side, I have gone back deep into the 15th century on my mother’s side without a SINGLE Scottish relative. My latest DNA results explain that by not showing ANY Scottish DNA at all – none. Therefore, my head no longer needs so much attention. Now the results show, as I fully expected from the start, that the majority of my DNA originated in Ireland. Interesting it's from ALL over Ireland – from the East coast (where my dad was from), to the far South and to the Northwest. It seems that my DNA liked to ‘get about’ a bit! Now as I completely expected I have 75% Irish DNA.  

The rest (or at least MOST of the rest) is, yet again, completely expected. 13% is from North Wales and Northwest England – where I was born and where I’ve found most of my English side relatives lived in the last 100 years or so. Again, completely expected, is the fact that 8% of my DNA comes from the West Midlands which is where my maternal grandmother is from. A mere 2% is from Devon & Somerset which is interesting but certainly not particularly strange. The STRANGE bit is that last 2%. 

Well within the margin of error is the interesting hint of 2% of my DNA being SPANISH. The rational side of me thinks that it came from a visiting Spanish sailor who ‘got lucky’ in a port in the Southwest and then went home to his family on the Cantabrian Coast. Of course, the more romantic side of my nature wonders if the guy in question (assuming it WAS a guy) was shipwrecked on the Irish coast on the way back from the failed Spanish Armada attack on England in 1588 and an Irish girl took a shine to his dark and brooding looks.... I doubt if I’ll ever find a Spanish name in the records though – but stranger things have happened.  

Either way it's an interesting update. Maybe a little ‘boring’ and ‘obvious’ but a really nice hint of the exotic. I’m amused if nothing else. I do have some Ancestry related reading to come. I wonder what I’ll discover?   

Just Finished Reading: The Origins of the Anglo-Saxons – Decoding the Ancestry of the English by Jean Manco (FP: 2018) [206pp] 

After reading the author’s previous book on the Celts around 2 years ago I thought it was about time to read her book about the Anglo-Saxons (despite not being one). As with the Celts this is a DEEP dive into the origins, culture, genetics and movements of a whole people so is very much a foundation – broad and deep – to any investigation of personal ancestry. I wasn’t expecting it to be particularly illuminating from my perspective but this didn’t stop it being always interesting and often fascinating. 

As I’ve said before, people (indeed peoples) moved around far more in the past than we moderns give them credit for. The Anglo-Saxons – generally made up of Angles, Saxons and Jutes – are a case in point moving across eastern Europe/central Asia westwards and northwards into western Europe, the British Isles and Scandanavia. Most of this slim volume covers that particular part of their history with diversions into archaeology, grave styles, coinage and, my particular favourite, languages and how they changed over LONG periods of time. Only the last quarter or so of the book looks at the impact on England putting to rest, yet again, the idea that the British Isles was ‘invaded’ and conquered by the Saxons and that the local population was displaced. Interesting this erroneous idea seems to have origination after the end of WW2 when the Saxons (AKA Germans) where not exactly in high standing in the UK. However, archaeological and, later, DNA evidence has shown the invasion motif to be overplayed at best. Apparently, which I found MOST interesting, around 36% of Brits living in the South East of England have Saxon genes and some individuals in Kent are essentially indistinguishable from native Germans (much, apparently, to their surprise and annoyance!). But the native population didn’t vanish (AKA killed). Nothing like it. The so-called ‘invasion’ actually took place over 2-300 years and varied from the hiring of mercenary soldiers who decided to stay – whether their ‘masters’ liked it or not – to actual raiders who stayed long term, and individual family groups looking for a better life and more productive farmland. 

Overall, this was interesting read that helped put present day genetics, place names and much else into a (DEEP) historical context. Although it didn’t help me very much to understand my own ancestry (of which more later) it did help me bed in the genetic foundations my ancestors were part of. Definitely of interest to anyone looking deep into their Anglo-Saxon past. Recommended.  

Happy Birthday: Gregor Johann Mendel (20 July 1822 – 6 January 1884) was an Austrian-Czech biologist, meteorologist, mathematician, Augustinian friar and abbot of St. Thomas' Abbey in Brno (Brünn), Margraviate of Moravia. Mendel was born in a German-speaking family in the Silesian part of the Austrian Empire (today's Czech Republic) and gained posthumous recognition as the founder of the modern science of genetics. Though farmers had known for millennia that crossbreeding of animals and plants could favour certain desirable traits, Mendel's pea plant experiments conducted between 1856 and 1863 established many of the rules of heredity, now referred to as the laws of Mendelian inheritance.

Mendel worked with seven characteristics of pea plants: plant height, pod shape and colour, seed shape and colour, and flower position and colour. Taking seed colour as an example, Mendel showed that when a true-breeding yellow pea and a true-breeding green pea were cross-bred their offspring always produced yellow seeds. However, in the next generation, the green peas reappeared at a ratio of 1 green to 3 yellow. To explain this phenomenon, Mendel coined the terms "recessive" and "dominant" in reference to certain traits. In the preceding example, the green trait, which seems to have vanished in the first filial generation, is recessive and the yellow is dominant. He published his work in 1866, demonstrating the actions of invisible "factors"—now called genes—in predictably determining the traits of an organism.

The profound significance of Mendel's work was not recognized until the turn of the 20th century (more than three decades later) with the rediscovery of his laws. Erich von Tschermak, Hugo de Vries and Carl Correns independently verified several of Mendel's experimental findings in 1900, ushering in the modern age of genetics.

Happy Birthday: James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928) is an American molecular biologist, geneticist, and zoologist. In 1953, he co-authored with Francis Crick the academic paper proposing the double helix structure of the DNA molecule. Watson, Crick and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".

Dancing Pet People? 

I had an e-mail a few days ago from Ancestry.Com regarding a new ‘personality trait’ they’d just released. Intrigued I logged on to have a look and ‘discovered’ that they had previously published a few more. Intrigued further I read on.... 

Now I’m not that impressed about linking too much personality to genetic drivers. I’m a fan of Free Will and, personally, don’t like the idea that my behaviour or personhood is significantly determined by the luck of the genetic lottery. Of course, I don’t think that I’m a completely Free Agent because of my life history and growing up in a particular culture but I think humanity in general is ‘plastic’ enough to modify itself – both collectively and individually – when required or desired. So, what do my genes apparently show? 

The first thing is that I’m unlikely to have a pet. Whilst this is technically true and has been for some time now since my cat died, I did have her for 16 years. Added to that is the fact that I grew up in a house overflowing with pets, from a German shepherd that I only just remember to hamsters, fish, budgies & minor birds, rabbits (LOTS of rabbits), jerboas and so on. So, on balance I’d have to say it's probably dead wrong to say that I’m not a pet person – although the website does say that having a pet is at least 2% genetic and at most 98% environmental. That’s not a lot to go on really! 

Next up is dancing. I doubt if many people have seen me dance – at least not sober! One of my ‘special powers’ is to increase my bodily density whenever anyone tries to get me onto a dancefloor. That very quickly give up before they pull a muscle or dislocate something. Interestingly, Ancestry scientists found more than 1,730 DNA markers connected to enjoying dancing and that enjoying dancing is at least 7% genetic. It would seem that I have few of those genes in my DNA! 

As before Ancestry has me down as an Extrovert – which I’m most definitely not. Sometimes I appear to be one, but this very much depends on who I’m with and where I am. I actually think that the whole extrovert/introvert dynamic is complete bullshit, so I’m not particularly surprised that they got me so wrong. It doesn’t help that only around 1% of our genes are apparently link to this behaviour characteristic – despite that being 8,000 genes! 

The website has me down as a Night person which I most definitely am. I don’t usually start feeling tired until around 11.30pm and can fairly easily stay up past midnight and still function reasonably well. Try me at 6am and you’ll see a very different person! At that time in the morning I might appear to be awake, but my brain is still in the early stages of a slow reboot. It’s interesting to see that being a morning or night person is at least 17% genetic and I can certainly accept that it has a significant genetic component that you can’t really mess with too much! 

One other thing I think was spot on was the ‘hint’ that I’m a picky eater. I am in fact a VERY picky eater. If I’m presented with something unannounced and are expected to simply eat it, then you have another thing coming. Even before becoming a veggie, I would ask, politely at first, exactly what it was. If such facts were not forthcoming whatever it is definitely goes nowhere near my mouth or my stomach. Plus, once I find a food I like I’m likely to eat/drink it for the rest of my life (ditto with things I don’t like & don’t eat). However, I can and have simply drop a particular food item from my ingestible list sometimes for reasons even I can’t understand... 

Finally, the trait that got me laughing the most – risk taking. Now no one who knows me would ever describe me as a risk-taker, indeed I am notoriously risk averse – so much so that I’ve been called boring, a wimp and much besides for not joining in with some idiocy my risk-blind friends are doing. I look at something, quickly assess any risks and if I see that it's too high (and it doesn’t need to be all that high) I become a completely immovable object on the subject. However, according to my genes I’m more likely to take risks than 60% of the population. Really? I think not! But if taking risks is at least 9% genetic I’m guessing that it's been overlayed by the other 91% of environmental factors. 

Just Finished Reading: The Book of Humans – A Brief History of Culture, Sex, War and the Evolution of Us by Adam Rutherford (FP: 2018) [233pp] 

We are, according to Charles Darwin, the paragon of animals. But what makes us so? Many animals are faster, stronger or more prolific. There are animals that can fly, swim, dig in the earth much better than we can. So, what makes us so special? An age-old answer is that we are tool users. But over the years this has been shown to be far less unique than we first thought. Not only were other Homo species also tool users but the precursors to the whole Homo genus seemed to use tools too. Likewise other living creatures are tool users – not only other primates but birds, dolphins and numerous insects. Even our use of fire no longer seems exclusive any longer. Again, other primates use fire for their own ends and even birds have been recorded spreading fire deliberately to flush out game or feast on the cooked remains of animals who couldn’t escape the flames. War seems to be a defining ‘quality’ of humanity, but chimps especially engage in long running campaigns to eradicate opposition and take their land. We are likewise notoriously sexual beings but have nothing on some of our fellow primates who use sex far more frequently and in far more inventive ways than even we do. Even homosexuality, long considered to be a so-called ‘perversion of nature’ is nothing of the kind, indeed it is so common throughout the animal kingdom that it is hardly worth the mention. About the only thing that is substantially different – in scale rather than kind – is our use of culture and especially our use of language. In both these areas we far outpace any other creature on Earth. Our language(s) allow the passage of information – often in great detail – to exist at levels can only be dreamt of by other animals. Our culture can be preserved in writing and can cross boundaries in both time and space than have never existed before and, therefore, can be built on over the millennia allowing us to both expand across the whole planet and build entire civilisations on the foundations of those who have gone before. Although some has been lost much has been retained and expanded over the ages. 

This is a really good start to the years reading (although I actually read it about 2-3 weeks ago). I have a long-standing fascination with human evolution which never seems to fade. Despite there being still much to discover about our tangled origins and both our precursors and our contemporaries on the evolutionary tree, we are slowly filling in the gaps and, interestingly, pushing back the timelines of ‘firsts’ - tool use, painting, burial rituals and so on – that enrich our past. I was particularly struck here by the discussion on the origins of language in our earliest ancestors both from a genetic point of view and from a physiological one. Language use is so important to our early dominance of the world that it's interesting to see the genetic ‘quirks’ that gave rise to a brain capable of such complex vocalisations. 

If, like me, you’re always looking for new information or new insights into our species you could do far worse than pick up this often-fascinating book. The only thing I’d warn some readers about is that there’s quite an extensive (around 60 pages) look at sex – human and non-human – which might put some people off. But it does help to illustrate that there’s little new under the sun. You might not look at giraffes quite the same way though... Recommended and more to come, both on the topic and by this author.   

Just Finished Reading: Blood of the Isles – Exploring the Genetic Roots of our Tribal History by Bryan Sykes (FP: 2006) [339pp] 

This is apparently the first ever book published on the genetic heritage of the British Isles. Previously, the foundations of the Isles have either been shrouded in myth, based on sometimes questionable historic documents or, going back into deep history, evidence from archaeological sites and ancient monuments. The question for the author, and his scientific team from Oxford University, was both what they could add to this story and what they could clarify. For example, how much change did the Anglo-Saxon migration to the British mainland accomplish? Was it, as some historians portray, a series of invasions (complete with significant displacement or replacement of locals) or was it a more gradual and much more peaceful process. Other questions revolve around the impact – partial or not – of the Viking occupation of North-western England for several centuries and, naturally, the long-term impact of the Norman Invasion in 1066 (to say nothing of the much earlier Roman occupation). 

Interestingly, for a science Geek like me, the author went to great lengths to show the team’s work – essentially how they went about collecting a significantly large number of samples from across the Isles. Back in those days [grin] the knowledge and appreciation of genetic fingerprints was much lower than it is today. So, first they had to convince people to hand over their genetic data which, naturally, they thought would be a hard sell. It turned out to be nothing of the sort. Using the opportunity to speak to people at their local Blood Transfusion Service, they asked if they could have some of their blood and asked for any ancestry details that they were willing to divulge. Almost everyone without exception said YES. Again, back in those days it took somewhat longer to derive results from the samples, so the project was a long one. But once the results began being complied it was clear that the effort and the wait were worth it. 

It would seem that the genetic make-up of the Isles has changed very little – despite all of the known historical events – from the original pre-Roman ‘base’. Not only did the Romans have a negligible impact on the British/English genome it had, as we might expect, none in Wales, Ireland or Scotland. A good part of the explanation for this was that the majority of Roman soldiers based in Britain were not in fact Italian but, rather, Germanic or from Gaul – the very peoples that had either already settled in Britain or who would shortly do so. Interestingly, the Viking occupation of the Danelaw also had only a slight impact on the local DNA. This was, again as you might suspect, significantly more pronounced – though still only a minority stake – in places like the Shetland Islands and parts of west Scotland. One thing that made me smile, being a fan on the Anglo-Saxons, was the fact that the Norman Invasion barely registered on the countries DNA despite the deaths of many of the Anglo-Saxon great and good. It would seem that the Norman DNA (which was essentially Scandinavian DNA already here) wasn’t different enough to show up in the results. From my own personal view – that of my Irish and Scottish ancestry – the author confirmed what I had already come across in various books on the subject, that the west of Ireland and the east of Scotland have had a LONG history of mixing which might just explain at least some of my Scottish DNA. 

If you’re looking into your ancestry from these islands – including England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales – you could do far worse than start here. This will certainly give you a good grounding in the genetic history of those countries as well as some appreciation of how things changed over time and the general movement of peoples into and within the British Isles. More to come. Recommended. 

[Labels Added: 1, Labels Total: 46] 

Just Finished Reading: Tamed – Ten Species that Changed Our World by Alice Roberts (FP: 2017) [332pp] 

It has long been thought that the great break, the great leap forward, in human existence was the move from hunter/gathering to farming. We moved, so it was assumed, from basically being nomads to being sedentary, and everything that followed made us what we are today. But was it that clear cut? Apparently not – not by a long way. Of course, we should know by now that not much in human history fits into neat little boxes. Things happen and are then lost or abandoned and then picked up again later, somewhere else. Sometimes a really good idea (in hindsight) just doesn’t take off and another, technically worse, idea lives on way beyond its ‘sell-by date’. Such is the convoluted and meandering story of domestication. Before the advent of detailed genetic analysis, it was assumed (admittedly for some good reasons) that farming began in the Fertile Crescent and was so successful it swept across the rest of Eurasia in an unstoppable wave of progress. A more detailed picture shows a patchwork of casual pastoralism where animals are sometimes hunted and sometimes ‘managed’ and where naturally occurring grasses are ‘harvested’ periodically during variable term semi-nomadic ‘lay-overs’. Farming, as we think of it today, took a long time to ‘bed in’ across Eurasia with some people’s never adopting the idea and others dipping in and out of the idea as circumstances allowed or dictated. It certainly wasn’t either a smooth or an inevitable process. Domestication of both plant and animal species across the world depended on the availability of suitable species – horses rather than zebras for example – opportunities for the process to begin (beneficial to both sides of the equation as shown by the numbers of chickens in the world following their domestication), population pressures, and even climate change. Looking at dogs, wheat, cattle, maize, potatoes, chickens, rice, horses and apples – plus our self-domestication – the author delves into the origins of the domestication process (as much as possible considering those origins sometimes greatly predate historical or archeological evidence – as with the transition from wolves to dogs), when and where it occurred and the consequent impact on both humanity and the domesticated creature or plant. 

I’ve been looking forward to reading this for a while now and was not disappointed. The author has a wonderful ‘voice’ and explains the genetic, archeological and anthropological aspects of domestication very well indeed. Needless to say, I learnt a LOT from this book. Some of it, she freely admits, is still speculative at this point but the speculation, where it does occur, is both highlighted as such and supported by what data we do have. It is interesting to know, as I’d read before, that horses (for example) evolved in North America but went extinct there – probably by human hand/spear - long before the Spanish reintroduced them after Columbus. It’s interest (as always) to speculate how the Spanish would have done if faced by something like the Apache on horseback in the 15th century. Equally it's interesting to speculate how history would’ve played out if horses had been pushed to total extinction in Eurasia too! If you’ve ever wondered where the staples of the planet’s diet come from (plus DOGS!) this is definitely the book for you. Highly recommended. 

[Labels Added: 5, Labels Total: 8] 

Just Finished Reading: The Re-Origin of Species – A Second Chance for Extinct Animals by Torill Kornfeldt (FP: 2016) [211pp] 

There was much talk, some years ago, about bringing mammoths back. A fairly intact baby mammoth had been discovered in the Siberian permafrost and it looked like viable DNA could be extracted from it. Bringing back animals that had gone extinct has a romantic quality to it. It’s a mixture of almost godlike power as well a moral righteousness of putting something right – most especially when it was us who made the creature extinct in the first place. There’s also, naturally, the scientific challenge or challenges as well as the possible financial payoff. In the background of everything else is, rather inevitably, Jurassic Park. Whenever any recovery of any species comes up it’s only a matter of time before dinosaurs and Michael Crighton come into the conversation – as the author of this interesting book discovered for herself. 

Intrigued initially with the talk of herds of mammoths wandering the Siberian steppe she decided to find out for herself exactly where the science stood and what exactly those involved in these cutting-edge projects had in mind. She was, as I was, both intrigued and rather disappointed with the results. Although there are indeed ongoing projects to bring back mammoths, the passenger pigeon, and even dinosaurs there’s one HUGE problem hanging over all of them – getting viable DNA from creatures that became extinct hundreds, thousands and sometimes millions of years ago. Apparently, they have indeed extracted usable DNA from mammoths. Although they haven’t managed to get DNA from a single specimen, they have managed to piece together a full mammoth genome from multiple individuals. So far so good. But, and this surprised me greatly, the scientists involved had no intention of using this information to eventually ‘clone’ a mammoth. No, they intend to genetically modify an Asian elephant, bit by bit, to *resemble* a mammoth. To me, that’s not exactly ‘bring it back’. That’s creating something completely new. Likewise with the passenger pigeon, they propose to use genetic information to modify an existing pigeon to more *resemble* its extinct cousin. With the holy grail of dinosaurs, it gets worse. So far it has proven impossible to derive ANY dinosaur DNA from ANY source. It’s just far too old to have survived – yes, even in amber. So, the idea is to ‘regress’ chickens to more *resemble* their dinosaur ancestors. Any resulting ‘dinosaurs’ will be both heavily modified chickens and tiny. Maybe they’ll sell well as exclusive pets?  

Oddly the most interesting and hopeful example in this book was the American chestnut. Apparently, it has been pushed to the edge of extinction by the unintentional introduction of a foreign fungus which almost eliminated it save for a few hold-out clusters that are endangered every day. With the ‘simple’ addition of a fungus resistant gene from wheat it looks like it’s possible – at the time of publication – that the newly bolstered variety could start expanding again. At least that would be an only slightly modified original species rather than the re-created versions mentioned above. 

Full of interesting science, interesting (sometimes rather odd) scientists and a healthy dose of philosophy and moral dilemma, this was a fascinating if rather sobering read. One thing it did make clear – an actual Jurassic Park with *real* dinosaurs is a LONG way from being realised, which is a bit disappointing. But there’s much food for thought here – not only about if we can do it, but also if we should do it. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in the topic. 

Translated from the Swedish by Fiona Graham 

Just Finished Reading: The Scots – A Genetic Journey by Alistair Moffat (FP: 2011/2017) [243pp] 

My regular (and returning – THANKS!) readership will be aware that I recently took an Ancestry DNA test which kind of surprised me, and that was BEFORE I started digging into my family tree. The surprise was that by DNA I’m 36% Scottish. Now my father's family are from the East coast of Ireland and my mother's side mostly come from the English Midlands and (generally) points South. I’ve only gone back into the early 19th Century on my Dad’s side so some Scots might show up there, but I’ve managed to go back a LOT further (mid-15th century) on my Mum’s side and.... not a single Scot to be had. So.... Mystery....  

I had read that Scotland and the East coast of Ireland had a long and convoluted history together. That’s one thing that this book confirmed. Certainly, for many centuries there was a lot of commerce and emigration from Ireland to Scotland and, no doubt, the flow went both ways from the very earliest times – although mostly, it seems, From Ireland and TO Scotland. So, at least from that perspective this book didn’t really help me much to start to understand that particular quirk of my double-helix. But there’s So much else of interest here! 

Starting from cradle of humanity, the author follows the slow movement of people (moving at around 1Km per year) from Africa and into Europe, the meeting – and occasional mating – with our close human relatives the Neanderthals, the brief occupation of southern Britain (back in those wonderous days when you could WALK there from ‘France’) and then the reoccupation of what would become the British Isles after the last Ice Age. Obviously, Scotland could only be occupied once the Northern Ice Cap retreated and this happened as humans followed herds North. Over the centuries more people settled in the far North of Britain with occasional immigrants from Ireland and Scandanavia – plus of course a few very brave Roman’s, either sent North to combat the ‘unruly tribes’ there or stationed around Hadrian's Wall and settling down with local wives (staying behind after the Roman’s left). Starting with this core population, the author follows Scottish history with diaspora across the world to Canada, the US and Australia as well as hints of comingling with French settlers and the slow drip feed of European refugee’s seeking shelter across the centuries.  

This is a very informative and often fascinating read. I was generally aware of Scottish history when it impacted on my much wider reading of English history (Scotland and England having an often-troubled relationship!) so it was really interesting to hear about much earlier events. Like in his other book on British DNA he talked about the land-bridge and comparatively long-term settlement of areas that are now under the North Sea. This whole concept completely blows my mind and I really need to read more about it. Although this didn’t really help me much with my DNA search, I found it most enjoyable. Definitely of interest to anyone with Scottish ancestry or just a general interest in that region.   

Latest DNA Update 

Ancestry.Com have just added a DNA ‘traits’ assessment to their website. It was £15 to activate it but that’s a pretty minimal charge in the grand scheme of things – equivalent to an expensive non-fiction paperback. So, what did it find? Mostly what it highlighted didn’t come as much of a surprise, but it was interesting to see both what data my DNA contained and if they got anything wrong. Here are some of the results: 

Apparently, my DNA suggests that I might be ‘more Introverted’. Now those who know me well will be aware of the problems I have with the whole Introvert/Extrovert ‘thing’, but in this case I’ll hold back on that particular tirade and go with it. If I had to choose, I’d say that yes, I am ‘more Introverted’. Score 1. 

Apparently, I’m well within the average for remembered dreams. That feels about right. Sometimes I have VERY vivid dreams (which I’ve remembered) and I also have recurring types of dreams too. I’ve mostly figured out what they are and why they happen – it's my ‘lizard brain’ trying to communicate without the ability to speak..... but that’s a WHOLE other story. 

Nutrient wise I (apparently) have typical levels of beta-carotene, average omega-3, typical levels of B12 (nice to know being a veggie!), typical vitamin C, slightly lower than average levels of vitamin D and typical levels of vitamin E. So, no inherent biological problems there – although I do take a multi-vitamin tablet every day (as I have for over 30 years) plus a number of other vitamin-esque tablets.  

Fitness-wise things got a bit interesting. Apparently, I have “some DNA differences that are commonly found in elite endurance athletes”. That made me laugh a bit but I do have what I regard as a reasonable level of stamina. My heart-rate recovery is average which is OK. I do tend to quiet down quickly after a sudden burst of effort – like running for a bus & such. I’ve always been pleased with that. Interestingly, my “muscles may tire faster than average” which honestly, I haven’t really noticed too much. I’ve never been particularly active, muscle-wise, so probably haven’t really noticed any great problems. Rather interesting too is the fact that I seem to have the ‘sprinter gene’ which came as a bit of a surprise! Seems that I’m quick off the mark but tire easily, but at the same time have some endurance genes – quite a mix there! Lastly here apparently, I have an average ability to increase my oxygen uptake during exercise. Centre of the pack – just where I like it. 

In other news, I don’t ‘flush’ after drinking alcohol, I’m probably not sensitive to certain bitter tastes (probably why I like Brussels sprouts), my caffeine consumption is probably higher than average (as I sip some vanilla Coke zero), I don’t have a problem with fresh coriander (Oh, I love Indian food – period), I’m not lactose intolerant (I’m OK with a glass of milk or ice cream but if I drink TOO much milk in a short period I can feel a bit queasy – although this might not be any kind of tolerance issue), apparently I’m less sensitive to savory flavours (I do like a bit of savory but can live without too much of it), I might sneeze when exposed to bright light (not sure if I do that, I’ll check next time I look at the sun – if it appears at some point!), and I have a sweet tooth – well, duh! 

My DNA suggests that I was of average (that word again) birth weight which I think I was, that I don’t have a cleft chin (true), that I have blue eyes (also true), that my ring finger may be longer than my index (pointer) finger (probably true on my right hand and definitely true on my left), that I probably have freckles (some, though not many), that I’m blonde and could pass on red hair to my children (I was actually born with red hair which then went white-blonde before getting progressively darker [or dirty] blonde before eventually going grey), my hair is naturally straight (true even when it reached my shoulders back in my teens), I have a low chance of hair loss (yeah!), I have a light skin tone (true and I really don’t tan well!), I don’t have a unibrow (true!) and, finally, I’ll get (or probably already have had) all of my wisdom teeth. 

So, I’d say that the results – although pretty mundane as things go – are spot on. I wonder what else they can learn just from your DNA. If they come up with more (and interesting!) results I’ll let you know. 

Just Finished Reading: Britain – A Genetic Journey by Alistair Moffat (FP: 2013) [261pp] 

After ‘treating myself’ to a DNA ancestry test last year I was intrigued (actually more than a little confused) by the amount of “Scottish” DNA in my cells. According to my results I’m 36% Scottish which was, and still is, rather surprising as at least on my mother's side I have zero Scottish ancestors going back to the 16th century and none on my father’s side going back around 200 years. Needless to say, this has prompted some head scratching and book buying including this fascinating volume (the first of a significant number). 

Although it certainly didn’t directly answer any of my questions concerning my mysterious ancestry, it’s given me some ideas, some baselines to work from and, rather inevitably, more ideas for book purchases including the authors companion work on Scottish DNA. Expecting an exclusive focus on the waves of immigration into the British Isles over the millennia I was surprised at how far back into deep time the author looked – indeed as far back as the human diaspora out of Africa as we populated the rest of the planet beyond where we evolved. One of the things that intrigued me most was when the author discussed Britain’s initial occupation just after the last Ice Age when glaciers retreated North and humans followed in their chilly wake. Of course, the interesting thing about that era is that the occupiers didn’t somehow sail across the English Channel, the North Sea or across the unpredictable Bay of Biscay because those features we know so well from satellite imagery had yet to exist. No, the first colonisers of Britain *walked* here across the ‘land bridge’ that connected Britain to mainland Europe. Now, I had always imagined that this ‘bridge’ was a reasonably narrow corridor across what is now the Channel from France which collapsed at some point to separate us from the Continent. I could not have been more wrong. The so-called ‘bridge’ was HUGE, not only across the area of the Channel but across much of what we now call the North Sea. Not only was the bridge extensive but it also lasted a LONG time after the ice retreated. Scans of the North Sea bed, undertaken by companies looking for oil and gas, not only discovered underwater river beds but signs of long-tern occupation and even stone circles now submerged. It is not unusual, apparently, for fishing boats in parts of the North Sea to dredge up PEAT off the sea floor! Things like that really blow me away and remind me that even present day geological and geographic features have not always been like this. But I digress! 

Like much of the planet, Britain is a nation of mixed genetic heritage. Originally lightly populated by wanderers from the attached continent it experienced waves of colonisation (and conquest) from Anglo-Saxons, Romans (who located legions here from all over their Empire – some of which still show up in DNA clusters around original Roman camps), Vikings and Normans. On top of this there has been a steady influx of individuals and family groups from across the Empire and the world to these shores. All of them have had an effect on the genetic makeup of Britain’s DNA. My father relocated here, aged 10, from Southern Ireland in the late 1930’s. Further back, some of my mother’s Irish ancestors arrived in the Midlands around the time of the Industrial Revolution. Such has always been the case and probably always will be. 

Whilst not exactly helping me very much with any of my ongoing ancestry questions or mysteries this was definitely an interesting and often fascinating read. I have at least 3-4 more books on this subject lined up which should give me a decent foundation for going forward in my quest to understand my genetic, historic and cultural heritage a bit more clearly. Recommended for anyone interested in Britain's genetic history and especially the history of their own land. Much more to come on this and associated subjects.  

Just Finished Reading: The Wolf Within – The Astonishing Evolution of Man’s Best Friend by Bryan Sykes (FP: 2018) [259pp]

I’ve always thought, despite being at heart a cat person, that dogs are something special. I don’t remember our first dog, a German Shepard, but my sister had a dog growing up who was a lot of fun. Not only was he bat-shit crazy at times (and therefore hilariously entertaining at times) he was incredibly loyal both to my sister and her kids and I honestly think he would have died for them if he saw a need to. That kind of loyalty is rare in people but all too common in dogs. So, where do dogs come from and why do they have such a special place in the lives of humans – even cat lovers like me.

It seems obvious on first glance that dogs must be descended from wolves but such a link was only confirmed comparatively recently. Charles Darwin, much interested in dog breeding, thought that we might never know for certain where the ancestors of dogs came from, but that was long before the discovery of DNA and investigations into the canine genome. That, genetics and the compilation of the canine family tree, is the focus of this interesting book. Starting with a rather (admitted by the author) romantic musing of the origins of how man and wolf met and ended up co-operating with each other the author moves onto discussing the sparse but fascinating evidence for the incorporation of the dog into human society to the mutual advantage of both. I particularly liked the speculation around two sets of footprints in the rear of a cave in France. Side by side, in what must have been a darkened part of a cave complex are imprints of a child’s footprints next to those of what is obviously a dog or dog-like creature. Although dating both prints to exactly the same time is difficult if not impossible it appears to be clear that the dog/wolf was not actually hunting the child. It’s easy to imagine a parent watching the child wander off and telling a nearby resting dog to ‘go with’ the child to keep a watchful eye on them. After all it’s what it would do for one of its own pack mate’s cubs.

Wolves and humans have broadly similar social structures and comparable hunting styles so it’s understandable that a wolf/dog would have an easier time of fitting into a ‘pack’ hierarchy than many other creatures. You really couldn’t see this happening with lions for example. Of course once they started being integrated you’d get specialisation – hunting dogs, guard dogs and war dogs. From there the diversity exploded across the world as wherever we went our dogs would go with us. It’s a fascinating story which is at least touched on here, from evolution to breeding and from owner’s relationships with their animals (both pets and working dogs) to the idea of cloning dogs for a kind of immortality. Being the person I am I enjoyed owner stories somewhat less than the studies of canine genetics and evolutionary family trees but there’s something for everyone here. It has certainly given me some interesting insights into my second favourite ‘pet’ and I think any dog owner will find it at least as interesting. Recommended. More on wolves to come!       

Looking Backwards – DNA Results!

Several months ago I bought myself a DNA Ancestor kit and sent a seeming bucketful of spit to a lab in Ireland for analysis. The results were due next week but dropped early. Interestingly the results were mundane, surprising and a little disappointing.

Rather unsurprisingly my results came out as 59% Irish. On my father’s side of things I’ve only managed to go back around 100 years but I’m confident, once I break through the deadlock, that they go back as far as records allow – and no doubt much further – on the Irish East coast. So 59% is no great surprise. Knowing now that my mother’s side of the family are, by and large, English (or at least born & bred in England) the 59% seems reasonable. There’s a blip of Irish blood back in the 18^th century – most likely from one of the periodic famines – that shows up in the Midlands (no doubt in the early-ish stages of the Industrial Revolution) which probably explains the additional 9%. So far, so mundane.

The surprise, at least to me, in the next big chunk of DNA in each of my cells – 36% Scottish. Now certainly on my Mother’s side (the only lineage I’ve managed to track back to any great depth) I’ve thought several times that there is a notable ABSENCE of Scots. As mentioned above most of my maternal ancestors are English with an Irish blip and a handful of Welsh back in the 16^th century. The vast majority of my maternal ancestors are either from the Midlands or points SOUTH. I could understand a bleed-over effect from ancestors near the Scottish borders but it surprises me a great deal to see Scottish genes so heavily represented here. I’m obviously missing some information. The only things I can think of is either some SERIOUS mixing of Scottish DNA into my English ancestors prior to Tudor times (I know that several serious raids into the Midlands and the South happened over the last 1000 years but nothing that resulted in long term occupation) or, and probably more likely, the Scottish DNA comes from migrations from Scotland into Ireland from VERY early days. As always more research (AKA books!) is required.

Of course what this does mean is that I’m 95% Celtic – which is COOL in itself and something I had long believed myself to be. It seems that I do indeed have an INDENTITY that I can back up with science & stuff. I am, as you might expect, more than happy with that result. I’m a CELT – deal with it [lol]. This, of course, also requires much more reading! [grin]

So, what of the other 5%? Well, the DNA results said that I’m 3% English or North European. Again that’s interesting. It would suggest that the Irish side of the family didn’t have any noticeable influx of other DNA lines and that the ‘English’ side of things – presumably from Irish and (somehow) Scottish ancestors - didn’t mix much with the locals. I wonder if that was due to their Catholic faith. I’m guessing that the local English (with majority ‘English’ DNA) were Protestants so were outside the acceptable breeding range of the ‘Irish’/’Scottish’ DNA lines. That might explain any mate selection process that would, as a consequence, exclude ‘English’ DNA from the available gene pool. At least that’s a working theory!

The remaining 2% was, rather oddly, Swedish. This is both funny (in a way) and more than a little disappointing. The ‘funny’ part is that I expect that a LOT of European DNA, including the UK and Ireland, have around 2-5% Scandinavian in its code structure. Those guys got around a LOT over the years. The disappointing part is that it destroys a personal myth I kind of toyed with about having Viking ancestors. After all the area where my father’s family comes from was periodically settled by Vikings. I guess they didn’t mix very much…. So, my first impulse was to be rather underwhelmed by the whole thing but thinking about it more deeply my mind is starting to run down interesting rabbits as they bob and weave away from me. One of the interesting takeaways from the results is how incredibly LOCAL my DNA is. Despite the UK in general being a real mixing pot over the millennia my DNA line managed to stay fairly cohesive. That in itself is something to ponder on….. Oh, and one more thing that popped into my head. The DNA trail seems to suggest that NONE of my ancestors came over with the Normans in 1066 and after. Interesting!

Just Finished Reading: Blueprint – How DNA Makes Us Who we Are by Robert Plomin (FP: 2018) [188pp]

We’ve come a long way since the Human Genome Project fully sequenced the first person. Not only is genome sequencing far faster these days it’s also a great deal cheaper too. Which is good news for those investigating the genetic factors in human behaviour, which is the author’s field of expertise.

For a LONG time now the debate has raged over the relative impact of Nature and Nurture. I remember this was a HOT topic back in my school days. Both sides have their advocates and the discussion has bled into both the Philosophical and Political domain. Talk of Free Will and Determinism abound in the debate and arguments about being ‘slaves’ to our DNA start flame wars across cyberspace. Confirming genetic inheritability of things like school attainment, obesity and sexuality are highly controversial in today’s super-charged environment (I’m looking at YOU Facebook) and the author is fully aware of this and the debates that rage throughout the genetic minefield (and mind-field!). However, this is all well and good but as more and more people have their genome sequenced and larger and larger studies are undertaken the evidence for genetic factors in much (if not all) of human behaviour is becoming unassailable. Many things that we have taken for granted as caused exclusively by environmental factors or are greatly amenable to environmental change are apparently nothing of the sort. Using LARGE studies of twins (both fraternal and identical), adopted siblings, and non-identical siblings separated in their early years it is clear that a significant percentage of human behaviour is genetically inherited. For example, whilst ‘only’ 50% of general intelligence is inherited a whopping 70% of spatial ability – the ability to navigate – is inherited from your parents (although I’m pretty good at navigating from a map my initial sense of where I am is terrible. If I need to go right I will invariably go left until I learn my mistake. I wonder which of my parents gave me that particular ‘skill’.). Interestingly stomach ulcers are 70% inherited as is Autism. Whereas height is 80% genetic and weight is, again, 70%.

If that wasn’t interesting enough the other thing which really got me thinking was the number of genes involved. I remember the amazement/horror some years ago when they supposedly found the ‘gay gene’. Reactions varied (naturally) with some hailing it as a victory that gay people are simply following their genetic disposition so it’s as natural as the day is long and not, as some maintained, an aberration whilst others celebrated the idea that they could now pick ‘straight’ in vitro embryos for re-implantation. Unfortunately for those on the side of human genome manipulation things have been confirmed as rather more complex than that. It had long been assumed that, at most, a small handful of genes are in control of various aspects of our being. So modification of these genes would produce any desired result – children with a higher IQ or an immunity to X. Not so fast. It appears that visible effects of single genes are tiny and had not, until recently, been picked up because the pool being tested was far too small. With bigger and deeper pools we discovered that attributes such as intelligence are influenced by 10’s and sometimes 100’s of genes. Modifying that many without the law of unintended consequences seriously smacking you in the face (if you’re lucky!) is decades away if possible at all. Likewise picking the ‘best’ embryo in vitro might be a juggling act of increased IQ, reduced chance of heart disease but increased chance of baldness and autism. Whichever way you cut it the ‘perfection’ of humanity through genetics might be a busted flush if the data keeps moving in the direction it seems to be.

Of course there are many, many upsides to the information now building up. Early warning of physical and behavioural issues that can be addressed early enough to mitigate or prevent later catastrophic results plus individually tailored medication or educational programmes. Knowing that a child is genetically predisposed to have reading difficulties (for example) allows for extra resources being applied and removes any stigma of being labelled as ‘slow’ or being called ‘stupid’ by others. It’s still very much a tangled field of endeavour but our knowledge is increasing and the benefits could be great indeed. Told by an expert in his field who is obviously excited by what has been uncovered so far as well as the road ahead this is an interesting read that shouldn’t tax anyone with a reasonable scientific background. Plus there are LOTS of notes in the back if you want to dig deeper. Recommended.

Just Finished Reading: The Incredible Unlikeliness of Being – Evolution and the Making of Us by Alice Roberts (FP: 2014)

Well, I hardly know where to start unpacking this fascinating tour through the human body. Its 356 pages are dense with information so much so that you have to slow down so as not to be overwhelmed by it all. The route she follows is equally interesting – moving literally from head to toe, starting with the basic questions like ‘Why do we have a head?’ and uncovering how the fertilised egg slowly becomes you!

Each section brings with it its own questions and the answers supplied call on embryology, anatomy, anthropology, primate studies and palaeontology. We learn about the development of the nervous system, the evolution of eyes, where your ear bones come from, how our fish ancestors are responsible for some very quirky plumbing (the author can’t stop herself having a dig at creationists from time to time when she points out just how badly ‘designed’ our bodies are), how we ‘mirror’ others in our own heads in order to model their behaviours and make predictions of what people are going to do next, how children learn by watching as much as by trying and doing, why our eyes are at the front (with neat stereoscopic vision) rather than at the sides of our heads, the history of our speech box and why men have deep voices (I disagreed with her on this one and though she overlooked something quite basic), human segmentation – along with practically every other complex creature on Earth, why we have so many back problems, chest cavities, shoulder blades and upright walking, the big headed birth problem and the spirit of compromise, why we have four limbs, not six (or more or, indeed, less), why feet are so important especially the big toe, standing on our own two feet (habitually) and the ability to outrun horses, arm movement and the ability to throw accurately, and how we are linked to all other life.

As a first book introducing you to the wonders of human biology I doubt if much could beat this. You could spend days combing it for information, cross referencing with other areas of science and moving deeper from there – always returning to this work for your next biological assignment. It is, indeed, an excellent overview of where we are in the study of ourselves (and how such a study has changed over the last 100 or so years – especially since the discovery of DNA. If you’re new to the subject or haven’t picked up a biology or evolution book since school, but wondered what else had been discovered since your teens, or maybe you want to help your kids with their homework and need a quick refresher course this is definitely the book for you. Much more on this fascinating subject(s) to come. Highly recommended.  

Coming Next: The Black Panthers.

Just Finished Reading: The Vital Question – Why is Life the Way it is? By Nick Lane (FP: 2015)

It’s a good question, a fundamental question. Why is life exactly the way it is? Could it have been any different? Does our knowledge of life on Earth give us any clues about other life in the Universe are there indeed universal laws of life?

To attempt to answer these questions we need to go way, way, way back in time to the very earliest, and simplest, life forms – bacteria (or actually the ancestors of what we recognise as bacteria these days). After around 2 billion years where they dominated the world they gave rise to cells that we are all familiar with – with a nucleus, recognisable call walls, DNA and much else besides. How did this happen? By the fusing together of two distinct types of single cell creatures to produce the first true Eukaryotic cell. This apparent one-time event produced the raw material for evolution to produce everything from Amoeba to Blue whales and us over the next 2 ½ billion years. The driving force behind all this was energy. Early bacteria, in a largely oxygen free atmosphere at the time, had a limited pool of energy to call on. The new calls on the block had much more at their disposal utilising the productive capacity of what later became mitochondria. Being energy rich they could afford to grow larger, more complex with sub-sections of the cell undertaking individual pieces of work, they could grow faster, reproduce more often and in more interesting ways (introducing both the idea of sex and death to the Earth), carry more genes allowing evolution to have more grist to its mill which increased the overall ‘speed’ of the evolutionary process. Once off and running there was no stopping them. The rest is, a very long and convoluted, history.

It’s good to get back to some proper scientific reading. It’s been a while – and it showed as I struggled with some of the earlier parts of this very interesting work. Whilst being no stranger to Biology or Evolution itself I admit to being on much less confident ground with Chemistry. It’s not something I studied in school to any great length so some of the author’s arguments and detailed descriptions ended up being close to going over my head. Some parts I probably skimmed more than I should have, others I had to read several times to understand what he was getting at. But don't let that kind of thing put you off. Although College grade Chemistry and Biology would come in handy it’s not 100% necessary to get the meat of the argument onto your mental plate in a reasonably cooked condition. I was much happier when he discussed what was happening in cells at a quantum level (very important) so all that reading of Quantum Mechanics over the past few years came to my rescue here! But again don’t let that put you off. If you get the gist of his argument that will be enough to serve you well later on when he delves into cell function and how mistakes in cell replication point to what happens in normal heathy cells. The meat of the book (to keep using a very un-vegetarian analogy) is dedicated to that healthy cell, how it works, why it looks and operates the way it does – right across all complex life on Earth – and why it probably couldn’t be any other way.

Which brings up his views on life elsewhere. We both agree that life in the Universe will be common for the simple reason that its building blocks are everywhere in abundance and there has been more than sufficient time for it to emerge wherever conditions allow. We agreed to disagree on his second contention – that complex multicellular life is rare. Simple bacteria like creatures existed on Earth for 2 billion years before the Eukaryotic Revolution which took another 2 ½ billion years to produce intelligence. This was, the author maintains, a once in a life time event. It would be entirely possible, he maintains, for bacteria to dominate the planet right up to its extinction when our Sun finally burns out. This is the apparent fate of most life on most worlds (which would explain the lack of signals or spaceships. Bacteria has little use for either star drives or radio telescopes). I remain to be convinced of this. Maybe it’s just hope but I’d expect complexity to emerge eventually given time. The advantages are seemingly obvious.

This was, as I’ve said, a difficult read (at least for me!) but a worthwhile one. My brief and simple precis has done little justice to the detailed argument and analysis that unfolds throughout its 305 pages. If you ever wanted to understand why life is the way it is I’d have to say that there are probably many worse places than this. Recommended to anyone with an enquiring mind.

Just Finished Reading: Viruses – A Very Short Introduction by Dorothy H Crawford (FP: 2011)

Viruses are fascinating if generally nasty little creatures. Very primitive in many respects they are highly sophisticated infiltrators that have existed probably as long as life on Earth. Viruses live on the edge of the life/non-life barrier and cannot prosper without a host to infect in order to reproduce. For centuries their existence was unknown or unproven despite a host of circumstantial evidence. Only comparatively recently has the reality of these enigmatic creatures been confirmed, catalogued and gradually understood.

Such is the scope of this fascinating little volume. Looking first at the nature of the beast, their diversity, structure and evolution the author discusses how the human immune system in particular has developed and adapted over time to the viral threat. The disturbing subject of emerging viruses is covered next including the spread of West Nile virus, SARS and, of course HIV. Leading naturally to the subject of Epidemics and Pandemics the author relates the fight against Measles, Smallpox and Flu. After a chapter on persistent viruses such as Herpes (400 million years old it seems!) and HIV (again) the author moves onto discuss the growing number of viruses know to or suspected of producing tumours. Finally, the author turns to the ongoing fight against viruses – both the successes (smallpox, polio and rabies) and relative failure (AIDS) and debates the arguments for and against vaccination. In the final chapter she discusses the history of viruses in human populations and speculates on the future of the seemingly everlasting war against them.

This is an interesting little book aimed at the general reader. I did find I needed to concentrate a bit more than usual during the discussion of the ins and outs of viral DNA and exactly how viruses operate but I’ve been out of the world of biology for quite some time. It was, in effect, a good refresher course for me! The sections on the emergent problem where very good if more than a little disturbing. With humans moving into areas little explored until now due to population pressures it’s inevitable that we will encounter diseases for which we have little or no immunity. With global communications and international transport a new virus could potentially spread across the world before the first person exhibits symptoms. This is seriously scary stuff! Whilst most definitely an introduction into the subject this book does have a handy glossary of technical terms and a short bibliography. It is a subject I’m quite interested in and will be following up some of the subjects highlighted above in future reading. Recommended.

Just Finished Reading: Endless Forms Most Beautiful – The New Science of Evo Devo and the Making of the Animal Kingdom by Sean B Carroll (FP: 2005)

The last time I studied biology in general or genetics in particular in any depth was around 35 years ago. Since then I’ve read the odd book or two on the subject so whilst not exactly out of the loop on the subject I’m not as familiar as I once was (or arguably still should be) with the ins and outs of the workings of DNA. In consequence I honestly struggled with the first half of this book. It wasn’t that it was badly written or poorly explained – it certainly wasn’t that – it was just that some of my mental processors had rusted up in the intervening decades of relative inactivity. Despite the amount of effort it took to keep up with the intricacies of DNA in action and the assimilation of new discoveries about how exactly wings, legs, eyes and eye-spots come into existence and change form and function over time I did manage to keep up – though sometimes only just – with this fascinating story. Facts inevitably came thick and fast, experiments reeled off and detailed photographs explained to show how the same gene(s) that gave rise to the eyes of a fly gave rise to the very different eyes in mice and men. All in all there was quite a lot to absorb even after you got over the wow factor and, sometimes, the yuk factor.

I was far happier with the second section of the book – or should I say more at ease – where the author applied everything he brought up in the first section. Here he moved on from the ‘pure’ genetics of Evo Devo (Evolutionary Development Biology) to its application(s) out in the real world. Here he looked at the questions that had baffled previous generations of biologists and showed how the new approach could offer solutions – problems like the Zebra stripes, the development of the eye (not ‘re-invented’ on multiple occasions as previously thought), the development of flight in insects and birds and the development of the human brain plus much else besides. I can’t possibly précis the amount of information held in this book nor will I attempt to do so. I can only suggest that you sit down in a quiet room with a good strong cup of coffee and some of your favourite biscuits and have at it. It will probably be hard going unless you’re a lot closer to your College biology class than I am. But it’s definitely worth the effort to get to know what’s been going on in the world of evolutionary genetics in the last few years. The myths that Darwinian evolution is falling apart, has hit an impenetrable impasse or has simply run out of steam are blown apart. Real solid progress is outlined on practically every page. The implications are sometimes quite staggering. Not only are we moving into an era where we have a much greater knowledge of how Evolution actually works on a day-to-day basis we are not that far away from being able to manipulate this process at a cellular level. Once we know for certain exactly what needs to happen to produce a butterflies wings or a fish fin we are in a position where we can truly design living beings. Not only will we be able to design bacteria to produce any chemical in any quantity we wish we can bring back extinct creatures and create new ones that have only previously existed in the human imagination. The power of this technology is incredible. We are, it appears, not too far away from creating life from scratch. It’s all very exciting and more than a little disturbing!

I have more evolutionary biology books in the pipeline which will, I hope and expect, both deepen and widen my knowledge of this ever fascinating subject which informs both where we came from and, probably, where we are going. Along with Quantum Mechanics the subject has long had a hold on me which refuses to let go. Long may it continue. 

Just Finished Reading: The Incredible Human Journey – The Story of How We Colonised the Planet by Alice Roberts

I remember catching a few episodes or bits of episodes of this excellent BBC series and thinking two things: how gorgeous and delightful the presenter was and how interesting and well presented the information/story was. So when I saw the book I jumped at the opportunity to explore the subject in more depth.

Dr Robert’s writing style is very chatty and, in this volume at least, very personal and down to earth. Having heard her speak before on TV I found that, rather than reading words off the page, it was like listening to her tell me about the journey she made across the world following in our ancestors footsteps – literally as we basically colonised the planet on foot – from Africa, across the Middle East, into the Far East and India, across the sea via island hopping to Australia, a later move into Europe and then finally across the land-bridge over what is now the Bering Strait, down North America and into South America. Following the archaeological evidence as far as it went – which is very patchy and sometimes deeply disputed in some areas – and the more recent breakthroughs in DNA analysis Dr Roberts made a very good case indeed for the Out of Africa Hypothesis (so much so as to make it as close to fact as we’re likely to get) after bringing up and addressing the major counter proposals. She also made a good case for how early humans crossed to Australia – obviously in boats that, because of their very nature, left no archaeological evidence behind them and even travelled a short distance between islands on a bamboo raft that would not have been outside the capabilities of our ancestors at the time.

That was one great thing I liked about the book. It was the authors have a go attitude. Not only did she risk crossed the Pacific Ocean (or at least a little part of it) on bamboo but she also crossed the arctic tundra practically freezing in her state-of-the-art clothing only to be rescued from frostbite by the gift of a pair of locally made reindeer boots, she bedded down on the African plain protected only by a collection of thorn bushes and listened with dread to the noises of animals – including lions – using a near-by waterhole in the pitch-black dead of night. She’s definitely braver than I am! She is also clearly fascinated by the history of our species and this fascination communicates itself throughout the book. This is a woman not only passionate about her subject but one able enough to communicate the sometimes detailed and difficult information to a non-specialist audience. Although I have had a very long and abiding interest in all things scientific I am the first to admit that I am not a scientist. That being said, Dr Roberts did not lose my attention once and I now know a great deal more about our ancestry and how, over thousands of years we managed to move into and thrive in very different environments across the globe and thereby become arguably the dominant life form on the planet. If you’ve ever wondered where we came from and how we moved from just another ape-like creature in Africa to the peoples we are today them this is definitely the book for you. Very highly recommended. More on this subject and from the delightful Alice to come.