Relative Distance

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Chimpanzees and humans are more different than previously thought, based on a draft of the chimp genome published in the September 1 Nature. Although the human genome differs from our closest relative's by 1.2 percent in terms of single nucleotide changes, the international Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium finds that duplications and rearrangements of larger DNA stretches add another 2.7 percent difference. Seven regions in the human genome that differ from that of chimps bear strong hallmarks of natural selection; for instance, one contains elements regulating a gene implicated in nervous system development and another possessing genes linked with speech. Consortium glycobiologist Ajit Varki and his colleagues also report in the September 9 Science the first human-specific protein, which binds to cellsurface sugars and is expressed in brain cells known as microglia. These immune cells are involved in ailments not seen in chimps, such as Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis and HIV-induced dementia.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 293 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Relative Distance” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 293 No. 5 (), p. 36
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1105-36b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe