Do we share 100% of our genes with other apes?

[FiverBeyond]

Following the ongoing Aronra/Enyart phylogeny debate. has made me mentally review the topic of DNA comparison. It's an issue that I've noticed creationists seem to deliberately confuse. For example...

Sharing gene families is not the same as sharing genes.
Sharing genes is not the same as sharing alleles.
Sharing a percentage of genes is not the same as sharing a percentage of DNA.


Understanding that, I'm hoping I can find an answer to an obvious question: Is there ANY gene found in humans that is not also found in other apes?

 

[Inferno]

Understanding that, I'm hoping I can find an answer to an obvious question: Is there ANY gene found in humans that is not also found in other apes?

Apparently, yes. I can't answer this with any certainty because I'm more than a bit drunk, but this article does seem to suggest that there are between 3-18 genes that are unique to humans.
More importantly, why do you ask?

 

[FiverBeyond]

I can't answer this with any certainty because I'm more than a bit drunk, but this article does seem to suggest that there are between 3-18 genes that are unique to humans.
More importantly, why do you ask?

Aha, this is exactly the kind of paper I was looking for (I knew I'd come to the right place!)

I only ask out of curiousity, and for a better understanding of how often new genes come about. Well... and I suppose because it would've been an exciting one-liner to truthfully say that "Humans share 100% of their genes with other apes." Still... 18/20,000 = 99.9% ain't bad.

The article about novel genes being formed from non-coding DNA still leaves the door open for novel human genes being formed from alteration of pre-existing genes, but on that point I hit another question that I've wondered about: at what point does a gene variant stop being an allele and finally qualify as a 'novel gene'?


Thanks again for the paper!