> This strange-sounding state of affairs is not unique to the hoatzin; we see it in our own DNA. Human beings share their most recent common ancestor with chimpanzees and bonobos, but more than ten per cent of the human genome is actually more closely related to the gorilla genome. Another tiny fraction of the human genome also seems to be most closely shared with an even more distant relative: the orangutan. “This implies that there is no such thing as a unique evolutionary history of the human genome,” a team of molecular biologists wrote in 2007. “Rather, it resembles a patchwork of individual regions following their own genealogy.”
Is horizontal gene transfer [1] the right term for this phenomenon? Are we talking about transfer of individual genes that could occur via transposons, or transfer of entire genomic regions that occur via a different mechanism?
| Is horizontal gene transfer [1] the right term for this phenomenon?
This is "incomplete lineage sorting". There's no need to invoke anything more exotic than standard vertical inheritance, but the existence of genetic diversity within populations after they split/speciate (i.e. it's not a single Adam & Eve that give rise to a new species) produces counter-intuitive patterns of relatedness like this.
Is horizontal gene transfer [1] the right term for this phenomenon? Are we talking about transfer of individual genes that could occur via transposons, or transfer of entire genomic regions that occur via a different mechanism?
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer