Modern Human Origins

Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
49,729
Likes
22,663
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#62
New Paleolithic sites discovered in Hanzhong Basin, Central China

Fig.1 Lithic artifacts from the Hanzhong Basin. 1, 3-4, 6, choppers; 2, 8, picks; 5, 13, scrapers; 7. hand-axe; 9, 11-12, spheroids; 10, hammer stone; 14, point. Credit: WANG Shejiang)

The catchment of Hanjiang River is regarded as one of the most important Paleolithic sites in central China. During 2009-2012, a scientific team led by Dr. WANG Shejiang, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, conducted surveys and discovered two new Paleolithic open-air sites in the Hanzhong Basin. Researchers unearthed 252 stone artifacts, and reported the finding in the journal of Acta Anthropologica Sinica 2014 (2). This study indicates hominins already occupied the Hanzhong Basin from approximately 600000 years ago, and provides important data for the study of human adaptive strategies and patterns in this region and as well as the Palaeolithic culture and human behavior in East Asia.

Two new Paleolithic open-air sites, Hejialiang and Yaochangwan, are located in the upper valley of Hanjiang River in the southern piedmont of the Qinling Mountains, central China. The lithic assemblage analysis suggests that the stone artifacts were made of local raw materials of pebbles/cobbles which derived from the riverbank alluvial deposits of the Hanjiang River. The lithic samples from the Hejialiang site frequently made of quartz,

Graywacke, and igneous rock, but infrequently made of quartzite and silicon limestone. The lithics of the Yaochangwan site more frequently made of quartz, quartzite and igneous rock, but infrequently made of sandstone and silicon limestone. ...
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
49,729
Likes
22,663
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#63
Society bloomed with gentler personalities, more feminine faces:

A composite image shows the facial differences between an ancient modern human with heavy brows and a large upper face and the more recent modern human who has rounder features and a much less prominent brow. The prominence of these features can be directly traced to the influence of the hormone testosterone.
Credit: Robert Cieri, University of Utah

Modern humans appear in the fossil record about 200,000 years ago, but it was only about 50,000 years ago that making art and advanced tools became widespread.

A new study appearing Aug. 1 in the journal Current Anthropology finds that human skulls changed in ways that indicate a lowering of testosterone levels at around the same time that culture was blossoming.

"The modern human behaviors of technological innovation, making art and rapid cultural exchange probably came at the same time that we developed a more cooperative temperament," said lead author Robert Cieri, a biology graduate student at the University of Utah who began this work as a senior at Duke University.

The study, which is based on measurements of more than 1,400 ancient and modern skulls, makes the argument that human society advanced when people started being nicer to each other, which entails having a little less testosterone in action.

Heavy brows were out, rounder heads were in, and those changes can be traced directly to testosterone levels acting on the skeleton, according to Duke anthropologist Steven Churchill, who supervised Cieri's work on a senior honors thesis that grew to become this 24-page journal article three years later. ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 171114.htm
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
49,729
Likes
22,663
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#65
A fisherman who pulled in his nets 25 kilometers off the coast of Taiwan got a surprising catch: the lower jawbone of an ancient human.

The bone (pictured)—dredged from a watery grave in the Penghu Channel—is robust and sports unusually large molars and premolars, suggesting that it once belonged to an archaic member of our genusHomo, according to a report published online today in Nature Communications. The Penghu jaw and teeth most closely resemble a partial skull of H. erectus from Longtan Cave in Hexian on the mainland of China, as well as earlier H. erectus fossils. Although it wasn’t possible to date the jawbone directly, it was found with an extinct species of hyena that suggests this archaic human was alive in the past 400,000 years and, most likely, in the past 200,000 years. If so, the find suggests thatH. erectus persisted late in Asia, or that there were several other types of humans still alive at the time in this region.

It might even be a member of the mysterious Denisovan people, a close relative of Neandertals known only from a finger bone and two teeth from Denisova Cave in Russia and its ancient DNA. But “if Penghu is indeed a long-awaited Denisovan jawbone, it looks more primitive than I would have expected,” says paleoanthropologist Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London, who was not a co-author on the paper. And that question can only be answered if researchers can get DNA from Penghu.

http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2015/01/ancient-human-jawbone-surfaces-coast-taiwan
 

FrKadash

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Messages
1,959
Likes
2,117
Points
159
#67
18 March 2015 Last updated at 18:00
''DNA study shows Celts are not a unique genetic group''
By Pallab Ghosh Science correspondent, BBC News
"Many of the genetic clusters we see in the west and north are similar to the tribal groupings and kingdoms around, and just after, the time of the Saxon invasion, suggesting these kingdoms maintained a regional identity for many years," he told BBC News.
Full article here, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31905764
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
49,729
Likes
22,663
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#68
Hohle Fels Cave Yields Paleolithic Figurine Fragments




(M. Malina/University of Tübingen)
TÜBINGEN, GERMANY—Two fragments of a female figurine carved from mammoth ivory have been found in Hohle Fels Cave. The fragments resemble a breast and part of the stomach of the 40,000-year-old figurine known as the Venus from Hohle Fels, which was discovered in 2008. This carving may have been slightly larger, however, than the approximately two-inch-tall Venus. “The new discovery indicates that the female depictions are not as rare in the Aurignacian as previously thought, and that concerns about human sexuality, reproduction and fertility in general have a very long and rich history dating to the Ice Age,” Nicholas Conard of the University of Tübingen said in a press release. To read about another masterpiece of Paleolithic art, go to "New Life for Lion Man."

http://www.archaeology.org/news/3505-150722-ivory-figurine-fragments
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,619
Likes
3,314
Points
159
#69
Does anyone want to discuss the theory of multiple origins for humanity? I'm curious to hear it.
 

PeteByrdie

Privateer in the service of Princess Frideswide
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
2,223
Likes
1,930
Points
159
#70
All humans can reproduce freely, producing fertile offspring. If humans originated from different members of the genus Homo, if that's the theory, I wouldn't expect that. If it arose many times from a particular species, with a bit of interbreeding, I suppose that is possible. Still, it doesn't seem likely to me.

Presumably this theory has been proposed by someone. Who originated it?
 

Ermintruder

Delineated by a professional cryptozoologist
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
5,634
Likes
7,893
Points
284
#71
John Manning, in 'The Finger Book' shorthands us all to effectively being feminised apes. I need to re-read that excellent book, where (I think) he also insightfully references/expands:

- the 'gracile jaw' thesis proposed by Abramson and Pinkerton
- pognophobia as a universal fear amongst human infants (on consideration that might've been Blafer-Hrdy)
- the sustenance of ongoing distinct species within mankind inside racial groups as an analogue of contemporary lower primate speciation (this will not originally have been Manning's thesis, and is clearly highly-contentious/unproven)

Paleoanthropology is one of the many areas of study I find fascinating.
 
Last edited:

Ermintruder

Delineated by a professional cryptozoologist
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
5,634
Likes
7,893
Points
284
#73
So were a bunch of manscaped chimpanzees?
More like yellow/pink/brown, semi-hairless, four-legged spiders.

But: it is a wise man who knows he is a fool.

(I also must re-read Jones' "Y-the Descent of Man"....the 'fragile Y' precept, that ultimately human male chromosomal existence, is in gender jeopardy. I think there was a anthropological species-seperacy origin for this somewhat-major problem facing humanity. Unless Y-chromasomes have now been reassessed as no longer being under threat....)
 
Last edited:

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,473
Likes
4,026
Points
169
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
#74
All humans can reproduce freely, producing fertile offspring. If humans originated from different members of the genus Homo, if that's the theory, I wouldn't expect that. If it arose many times from a particular species, with a bit of interbreeding, I suppose that is possible. Still, it doesn't seem likely to me.

Presumably this theory has been proposed by someone. Who originated it?

G'day Pete, in the taxanomic kingdom, there are some species that can interbreed, and in the plant kingdom, they do frequently. Science, at one time, said that Neanderthal couldn't breed with Homo sapien - they now say that it did happen.
 

Ermintruder

Delineated by a professional cryptozoologist
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
5,634
Likes
7,893
Points
284
#75
G'day Pete, in the taxanomic kingdom, there are some species that can interbreed, and in the plant kingdom, they do frequently.
I'm sure I've read that, genetically, it would be entirely-possible to generate a large combination of semi-viable ape hybrids (eg chimpanzee-gorillas or orang-macaques etc). These in vitro productions would, however, normally be sterile (as for ligers and tigons...and asses, I think)

I'm also wondering where I read the fascinating fact (Dawkins? Leakey?) that right/left handedness amongst non-human anthropoids becomes bell-curved at 49:51/51:49 , rather than our 90:10 right-handedness, this being contestably-capable of use as a sub-species flag indicator of the presence/emergence of speech-centre specialisation within the brain. Thus, unequal musculature left:right arm development within the relative primates/homo pre-sapiens could be used as a predictor of developmental differentiation towards tool use/adoption of speech at a supra-speciated level (I paraphrase, but you get the idea....and you 'get' it, in part, because you are right or left handed, on a species biased basis).

"Do you take this hand in marriage? It may be your right, but what will we be left with?"
 

PeteByrdie

Privateer in the service of Princess Frideswide
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
2,223
Likes
1,930
Points
159
#76
G'day Pete, in the taxanomic kingdom, there are some species that can interbreed, and in the plant kingdom, they do frequently. Science, at one time, said that Neanderthal couldn't breed with Homo sapien - they now say that it did happen.
True, but, in animals, different species within a genus wouldn't usually have fertile offspring. However, I've had a chance to do a little reading on the mulitregional origins hypothesis since I posted my first response, and it seems clear it's not proposing that modern humans arose in isolation from one another (a notion I wouldn't give the time of day to) but that there was frequent interbreeding right through. So, I'm comfortable with that. I haven't seen a solution to the problem of greater genetic diversity in Africans, though.
 

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,473
Likes
4,026
Points
169
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
#77
True, but, in animals, different species within a genus wouldn't usually have fertile offspring. However, I've had a chance to do a little reading on the mulitregional origins hypothesis since I posted my first response, and it seems clear it's not proposing that modern humans arose in isolation from one another (a notion I wouldn't give the time of day to) but that there was frequent interbreeding right through. So, I'm comfortable with that. I haven't seen a solution to the problem of greater genetic diversity in Africans, though.

Well no Pete, if there were positing multi regional origins for humanity, like Africa, it would have started with an archaic form, and my example of Homo sapien breeding with Homo neanderthalensis was an example, showing how the Halls of Paleoanthropology can change its mind.
 

skinny

Class of 1984
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
7,790
Likes
7,761
Points
284
Location
Nebraska
#78
... there was frequent interbreeding right through...
Interesting discussion. I can't see how there's any doubt about this proposition. I think during the era we're looking at hominid species couldn't have looked as distinct as say Homo-ss does from orangs today. You'd have had your robusts and your graciles with height variability, but they'd have mostly had more in common than they had in variance. The males of all hominid species (known and unknown) would therefore have been f*cking anything they could hold down that looked relative to their form (and smelled female). Do we assume this was the case over waves of geographical co-location in the hundreds of thousands of years that led to the emergence of homo-ss? Almost anything could have happened breed-wise to produce the modern species as we are now. As the tree continues to complexify with successive hominid discoveries the genetic line will expand. So I guess I'm with the convergence crowd on this.

Origins has been and continues to be a very fragmented study with most of the pieces missing. So I don't hold to one theory strongly. Also fascinating is the idea that we've already transcended the old SS designation and technologically are escalating rapidly towards new sub-specieshood. If that is the case, do we see the currently unified human species evolving into divergent species at some future point? I don't see any alternative to the affirmative - other than the current crest capitulates to extinction. However, we have less to go on for future speculation, obviously, than we do of the past story. History will teach us nothing.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,619
Likes
3,314
Points
159
#79
A local library had a book from the sixties, which was about a multiregional origin for mankind. I don't recall much details though. There was a theory called Hologenesis and Francis DeLoy of DeLoy's Ape seems to have been a proponent.
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,239
Likes
9,009
Points
284
#80
First ancient African genome solves migration mystery
By Rebecca Morelle Science Correspondent, BBC News

An ancient African genome has been sequenced for the first time.
Researchers extracted DNA from a 4,500-year-old skull that was discovered in the highlands of Ethiopia.
A comparison with genetic material from today's Africans reveals how our ancient ancestors mixed and moved around the continents.

The findings, published in the journal Science, suggests that about 3,000 years ago there was a huge wave of migration from Eurasia into Africa.
This has left a genetic legacy, and the scientists believe up to 25% of the DNA of modern Africans can be traced back to this event.
"Every single population for which we have data in Africa has a sizeable component of Eurasian ancestry," said Dr Andrea Manica, from the University of Cambridge, who carried out the research.

Ancient genomes have been sequenced from around the world, but Africa has proved difficult because hot and humid conditions can destroy fragile DNA.
However, the 4,500-year-old remains of this hunter gatherer, known as Mota man, were found in a cave and were well preserved.
Importantly, a bone that is situated just below the ear, called the petrous, was intact.

Dr Manica, speaking to Science in Action on the BBC World Service, said: "The petrous bone is really hard and does a really good job of preventing bacteria getting in and degrading this DNA.
"What we were able to get is some very high quality undamaged DNA from which we could reconstruct the whole genome of the individual.
"We have the complete blueprint, every single gene, every single bit of information that made this individual that lived 4,500 years ago in Ethiopia."


The genome revealed that Mota man had purely African DNA, his ancestors had never moved from Africa.
But the comparison of this with modern African genomes highlighted that about 1,500 years after his death, the make-up of the continent had changed.

Genetic studies have shown that after the great migration out of Africa, which happened about 60,000 years ago, some people later returned to the continent.
But this study shows that about 3,000 years ago there was a much larger migration than had been thought.

The Neolithic farmers from western Eurasia who, about 8,000 years ago, brought agriculture to Europe then began to return to Africa.
"We know now that they probably corresponded to a quarter of the people that already lived in East Africa (at that time). It was a major backflow, a very sizeable movement of people," said Dr Manica.

It is unclear what caused this move - potentially changes happening in the Egyptian empire - but it has left a genetic legacy.
"Quite remarkably, we see in Ethiopia about 20% - so a fifth - of the genome of people living there right now is actually of Eurasian origin, it actually comes from these farmers," explained Dr Manica.
"But it goes further than that, because if you go to the corners of Africa, all the way to West Africa or South Africa, even populations that we really thought were purely African have 5-6% of their genome that dates back to these western Eurasian farmers."

etc...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34479905
 

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,473
Likes
4,026
Points
169
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
#81
First ancient African genome solves migration mystery
By Rebecca Morelle Science Correspondent, BBC News

An ancient African genome has been sequenced for the first time.
Researchers extracted DNA from a 4,500-year-old skull that was discovered in the highlands of Ethiopia.
A comparison with genetic material from today's Africans reveals how our ancient ancestors mixed and moved around the continents.

The findings, published in the journal Science, suggests that about 3,000 years ago there was a huge wave of migration from Eurasia into Africa.
This has left a genetic legacy, and the scientists believe up to 25% of the DNA of modern Africans can be traced back to this event.
"Every single population for which we have data in Africa has a sizeable component of Eurasian ancestry," said Dr Andrea Manica, from the University of Cambridge, who carried out the research.

Ancient genomes have been sequenced from around the world, but Africa has proved difficult because hot and humid conditions can destroy fragile DNA.
However, the 4,500-year-old remains of this hunter gatherer, known as Mota man, were found in a cave and were well preserved.
Importantly, a bone that is situated just below the ear, called the petrous, was intact.

Dr Manica, speaking to Science in Action on the BBC World Service, said: "The petrous bone is really hard and does a really good job of preventing bacteria getting in and degrading this DNA.
"What we were able to get is some very high quality undamaged DNA from which we could reconstruct the whole genome of the individual.
"We have the complete blueprint, every single gene, every single bit of information that made this individual that lived 4,500 years ago in Ethiopia."


The genome revealed that Mota man had purely African DNA, his ancestors had never moved from Africa.
But the comparison of this with modern African genomes highlighted that about 1,500 years after his death, the make-up of the continent had changed.

Genetic studies have shown that after the great migration out of Africa, which happened about 60,000 years ago, some people later returned to the continent.
But this study shows that about 3,000 years ago there was a much larger migration than had been thought.

The Neolithic farmers from western Eurasia who, about 8,000 years ago, brought agriculture to Europe then began to return to Africa.
"We know now that they probably corresponded to a quarter of the people that already lived in East Africa (at that time). It was a major backflow, a very sizeable movement of people," said Dr Manica.

It is unclear what caused this move - potentially changes happening in the Egyptian empire - but it has left a genetic legacy.
"Quite remarkably, we see in Ethiopia about 20% - so a fifth - of the genome of people living there right now is actually of Eurasian origin, it actually comes from these farmers," explained Dr Manica.
"But it goes further than that, because if you go to the corners of Africa, all the way to West Africa or South Africa, even populations that we really thought were purely African have 5-6% of their genome that dates back to these western Eurasian farmers."

etc...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34479905


Thank you Ryn...curioser and curioser.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,619
Likes
3,314
Points
159
#82
If true, it does make it seem weird that sub-saharan populations are lacking in neanderthal genome. Shouldn't that have been brought in by these immigrants?
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,239
Likes
9,009
Points
284
#83
If true, it does make it seem weird that sub-saharan populations are lacking in neanderthal genome. Shouldn't that have been brought in by these immigrants?
Maybe not if the new immigrants came from eastern parts, towards Asia, rather than the northern parts of Europe.
 

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,473
Likes
4,026
Points
169
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
#85
Maybe not if the new immigrants came from eastern parts, towards Asia, rather than the northern parts of Europe.
Yet Eastern Asian populations had 1.5%, with American and European populations having between 1 - 4% Neanderthal DNA.

Another oddity is the Australian Aboriginal has evidence of interbreeding with Neanderthal and the recently discovered Denisovans, having varying levels of Denisovan DNA, while many of their neighbours, like the residents of mainland Southeast Asia, containing none.

This also suggests that the Denisovan's range, so far linked only to a cave in southern Siberia, once extended to Southeast Asia and perhaps Oceania.

Odd.


http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/full/news.2011.551.html
 

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,473
Likes
4,026
Points
169
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
#87
I had my DNA done by Ancestorydotcom, at a cost, and was puzzled by the results.

It seems that I have 99% European DNA, with 4% GB [?], 56% Irish 34% Scandinavian, 3% Iberian peninsula, 1% Western European, 1% Eastern European, and 1% subcontinental Indian.

My Daughter has traced the Family back to the early 1700's, and as far as Faith is concerned, there is only one Irish connection.

My Great Grandma Annie Foulkes, on my Mum's side was Welsh, with the other side of My Mums people having a definite Nordic name, Skerratt, pronounced not as a k but as a 'sh'. Supposedly, the name Sherratt, no 'K', is also considered as Norman, meaning 'shining heart', and might cover the Iberian Peninsula and the Western European connection, but we have a family trait of the ring finger contracting towards the palm in old age - which I believe does indicate a Nordic connection.

I have a Scotts born Grandma, Molly, originally hailing from Wick, northern Scotland, and I'm wondering do they include Scottish origins as being Scandinavian. My Dad's side are Geordies, apart from Molly, and can be traced back to Alnwick where they were farm labourers until the advent of farming machinery, which forced them to move south and work in the pits.


The sub-continent connection is a head scratcher, and I wondered if this was a marker for a late exit from Africa, but in saying that, I discounted it, as there isn't any African marker.


I have questions concerning the efficacy of the results, i.e., how thorough is the examination of my spit [DNA], how defined are the determinations [haploid groupings], and really, is this just a money making con, considering the lack of explanation in the replies I received from ancestory.com?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.
 

Ermintruder

Delineated by a professional cryptozoologist
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
5,634
Likes
7,893
Points
284
#88
and really, is this just a money making con, considering the lack of explanation in the replies I received from ancestory.com?
Depressingly, I have read and seen much that does tend towards this interpretation. Not just in respect of that particular company, but regarding the entire industry: that's at least in part because it's based upon some very-shaky paradigms.

I've seen a few video extracts of US talkshows, with a DNA 'analysis' revelation towards the end, which (as opposed to just mapping a direct identification for the purposes of personal parental responsibilities) were claiming to go, substantively, much further.

They were purporting to be able to show African American guests the specific villages (not just regions) from which their own lineal ancestors were taken.

However, these claims (of specific familial/clan descent, and geographic linkage) were being comprehensively-debunked by the producers of the show, via the simple-but-costly comparative method of having multiple DNA samples from the same given individual sent off to a range of DNA analysis companies.

Yes, you've guessed it. Like any portfolio of horoscopes, they were (almost) entirely without concordance.

Not just as in having slight variations between the analyses, but in terms of radical differences in the interpreted conclusions. The impression I got was that there was possibly no actual scientific methodological approach being used by the companies at all (I can check up on this further, and go into a lot more detail).

By this, I mean it may have even been worse than pseudoscience for at least some of the companies concerned, in that their own putative mappings would vary between two samples from the same test subject serially-submitted under two different names.

I'm unsure if some of the companies (eg 23 & Me) or initiatives (notably the original kick-starter in all this, the National Geographic Genographic Project) are significantly better in achieving genuinely-meaningful results, but I intend to find out.
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
15,413
Likes
19,451
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
#89
Looking at genetics, some scientists claim that they hsve found evidence for another, earlier migration out of Africa. Though they say that first wave had little genetic influence.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37408014
... And in a depressingly inept follow-on, the story's top-level implication has been twisted into something else entirely ...

DNA research finds the world's oldest civilization

New research just revealed shows the world's oldest civilization belongs to the indigenous populations of Australia and Papua New Guinea. ...
SOURCE: http://www.aol.com/article/news/201...inds-the-worlds-oldest-civilization/21478043/
 
Top