DOCSLIB.ORG

Arguments That Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arguments That Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 May 2019 doi:10.20944/preprints201905.0038.v1 Arguments that Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species Rainer W. Kühne Tuckermannstr. 35, 38118 Braunschweig, Germany e-mail: [email protected] May 2, 2019 Abstract called either progressive Homo erectus or archaic Homo sapiens. I argue that the evidence of the Out-of-Africa A more primitive group of prehistorical hu- hypothesis and the evidence of multiregional mans is sometimes classified as Homo erec- evolution of prehistorical humans can be un- tus, but mostly classified as belonging to dif- derstood if there has been interbreeding be- ferent species. These include Homo anteces- tween Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, sor, Homo cepranensis, Homo erectus, Homo and Homo sapiens at least during the preced- ergaster, Homo georgicus, Homo heidelbergen- ing 700,000 years. These interbreedings require sis, Homo mauretanicus, and Homo rhodesien- descendants who are capable of reproduction sis. Sometimes the more primitive Homo habilis and therefore parents who belong to the same is regarded as belonging to the same species as species. I suggest that a number of prehistori- Homo ergaster. cal humans who are at present regarded as be- A further species is Homo floresiensis, a dwarf longing to different species belong in fact to one form known from Flores, Indonesia. This species single species. shows some anatomical characteristics which are similar to those of the more primitive humans Keywords Homo ergaster and Homo georgicus and other Homo sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo anatomical characteristics which are similar to erectus, Homo floresiensis, Neandertals, Deniso- those of Homo sapiens [1][2][3]. vans The first genetic sequences of a prehistorical human that were examined were those of Homo neanderthalensis [4]. Up to 4% of the genome of 1 Human Species modern European and Asian humans are from Homo neanderthalensis [5][6]. During the first decades of the twentieth cen- Genetic examinations provide evidence of a tury, prehistorical humans were regarded as be- further extinct human species. Up to 5% of longing not to the same genus as the modern hu- the genome of modern Eastern Asian humans man. According to the present nomenclature the are from a species called Denisovans [7][8]. The Pithecanthropus is now known as Homo erectus Denisovan genes help modern Tibetans to cope erectus and the Sinanthropus as Homo erectus with life at altitudes of 4,000 metres, by prevent- pekinensis. A number of humans during the ing their blood from thickening [9]. last Ice Age (Cro Magnon, Aurignac, Combe Genetic examinations provide evidence that Capelle) are now regarded as belonging to the the modern Africans had regional archaic ances- same species as modern humans, Homo sapiens. tors who split from the ancestors of anatomically Apart from Homo sapiens and Homo ne- modern humans 700,000 years ago and interbred anderthalensis (classical Neandertal) there are with modern humans 35,000 years ago [10] (see known a number of further prehistorical human also [11][12][13]). species. The African Homo helmei (known from Evidence of interbreeding between classical Florisbad, South Africa), the European Homo Neandertals and modern Europeans is provided steinheimensis (known from Steinheim, Ger- by a 24,500 year old fossil from Portugal which many), and the Asian Homo soloensis (known appears like a mosaic of modern sapiens and from the Solo river, Java) are regarded as be- classical Neandertal anatomy [14]. Further evi- longing to a transition field between Homo sapi- dence for such an interbreeding results from ge- ens and Homo erectus. They are sometimes netic examinations of a 40,000 year old modern 1 © 2019 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license. Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 May 2019 doi:10.20944/preprints201905.0038.v1 human from Romania whose DNA shows that years. Afterwards there were interbreedings 6 − 9% of his genome are derived from a Nean- with modern humans. These interbreedings ex- dertal ancestor four to six generations back [15]. plain why Homo steinheimensis is a descendant Genetic examinations of a 120,000 year old of both European Homo heidelbergensis and bone found in Russia show that the individ- African Homo helmei. They explain also the ual had a mother who was related to a Nean- 24,500 year old European fossil which appears dertal population and a father who was related like a mosaic of Homo neanderthalensis and to a Denisovan population [16]. It is assumed Homo sapiens. They explain also why Denisovan that Neandertals and Denisovans separated from DNA is found in modern Tibetans. Finally they each other 430,000 years ago [17]. explain why DNA of archaic humans is found in modern Africans. These interbreedings between Homo sapiens 2 Out-of-Africa Hypothesis and archaic humans (Neandertals, Denisovans, archaic Africans), Homo heidelbergensis and I wish to formulate a simple version of the Out- Homo helmei require the existence of descen- of-Africa hypothesis of human evolution. The dants who were capable of reproduction and par- earliest human species (Homo habilis) lived only ents who belonged to the same species. This in Africa. There it evolved to Homo ergaster. is hardly possible if all of these prehistorical Some individuals left Africa and migrated to humans belonged to different species, as the Eastern Europe and evolved to Homo georgicus present nomenclature requires. Therefore I sug- and Homo antecessor. Later, around 600,000 gest that most of the known prehistorical hu- years ago, other individuals left Africa and mi- mans in fact belonged to the same species. I grated to Europe and evolved to Homo heidel- suggest to use the following nomenclature: bergensis. Other individuals migrated to East- ern Asia and evolved to Homo erectus pekinen- Homo sapiens sapiens sis and Homo erectus erectus. Around 250,000 Homo sapiens neanderthalensis years ago the African Homo erectus evolved to Homo sapiens steinheimensis the erectus-sapiens transition field. Such fos- sils are known from Jebel Irhoud in Morocco Homo sapiens soloensis [18][19] and Florisbad in South Africa (Homo Homo sapiens helmei helmei). Individuals of this erectus-sapiens tran- Homo sapiens mauretanicus sition field migrated until Europe where they Homo sapiens floresiensis evolved to Homo steinheimensis and Eastern Homo sapiens denisovansis Asia were they evolved to Homo soloensis. Fi- Homo sapiens rhodesiensis nally, the African erectus-sapiens transition field Homo sapiens heidelbergensis evolved to the African Homo sapiens. Some in- Homo sapiens pekinensis dividuals migrated to Europe and Asia where Homo sapiens erectus they became the modern Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens cepranensis Homo sapiens antecessor Homo sapiens georgicus 3 Discussion Homo sapiens ergaster This simple version of the Out-of-Africa hy- pothesis cannot explain why typical Neandertal characteristics (e.g. pronounced Torus supraor- It is beyond the scope of the argumentation of bitalis) appear already with Homo heidelbergen- this paper. However, it may turn out that other, sis, continue with Homo steinheimenensis, and more primitive humans also interbred with the get more pronounced with Homo neanderthalen- less primitive humans mentioned above. In this sis. This development provides evidence of a case it may be useful to use the nomenclature: regional evolution from Homo heidelbergensis (600,000 years ago) to Homo neanderthalensis Homo sapiens habilis (40,000 years ago or less). Homo sapiens rudolfensis The genetic examinations of modern Africans Homo sapiens naledi provide evidence of regional evolution of archaic humans during the preceding 700,000 years until 35,000 years ago [10]. 4 Conclusion There were regional evolutions in Europe (Ne- andertals), Africa (archaic humans), and Asia The simple version of the Out-of-Africa hypothe- (Denisovans) which lasted for up to 700,000 sis of human evolution suggested in this paper is 2 Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 May 2019 doi:10.20944/preprints201905.0038.v1 reasonable and quite correct. However, a com- [12] D. Xu et al., Archaic Hominin Introgression plete description of human evolution must in- in Africa Contributes to Functional Salivary clude also the regional evolutions in Europe (Ne- MUC7 Genetic Variation, Molecular Biol- andertals), Asia (Denisovans), and Africa (ar- ogy and Evolution 34 (2017) 2704-2715. chaic humans). Interbreedings between individ- uals who have evolved regionally and by migra- [13] E. M. L. Scerri et al., Did Our Species tion from Africa have significantly contributed Evolve in Subdivided Populations Across to the evolution of Neandertals and modern hu- Africa, and Why Does It Matter?, Trends mans. Most prehistorical humans should be re- in Ecology & Evolution 33 (2018) 582-594. garded as belonging to the same species as mod- [14] C. Duarte et al., The Early Upper Pale- ern humans. olithic Human Skeleton from the Abrigo do Lagar Velho (Portugal) and Modern Hu- References man Emergence in Iberia, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the [1] P. Brown et al., A Small-Bodied Hominin United States of America 96 (1999) 7604- from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indone- 7609. sia, Nature 431 (2004) 1055-1061. [15] Q. Fu et al., An Early Modern Human from [2] M. J. Morwood et al., Archaeology and Age Romania with a Recent Neanderthal Ances- of a New Hominin from Flores in Eastern tor, Nature 524 (2015) 216-219. Indonesia, Nature 431 (2004) 1087-1091. [16] V. Slon et al., The Genome of the Offspring [3] M. Mirazon Lahr and R. Foley, Human Evo- of a Neanderthal Mother and a Denisovan lution Writ Small, Nature 431 (2004) 1043- Father, Nature 561 (2018) 113-116. 1044. [17] M. Meyer et al., Nuclear DNA Sequences [4] M. Krings et al., Neandertal DNA Se- from the Middle Pleistocene Sima de los quences and the Origin of Modern Humans, Huesos Hominins, Nature 531 (2016) 504- Cell 90 (1997) 19-30.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Defining the Genus Homo
    Defining the Genus Homo Mark Collard and Bernard Wood Contents Introduction ..................................................................................... 2108 Changing Interpretations of Genus Homo ..................................................... 2109 Is Genus Homo a “Good” Genus? ............................................................. 2114 Updating Wood and Collard’s (1999) Review of Genus Homo .............................. 2126 Conclusion ...................................................................................... 2137 Cross-References ............................................................................... 2138 References ...................................................................................... 2138 Abstract The definition of the genus Homo is an important but under-researched topic. In this chapter we show that interpretations of Homo have changed greatly over the last 150 years as a result of the incorporation of new fossil species, the discovery of fossil evidence that changed our perceptions of its component species, and reassessments of the functional capabilities of species previously allocated to Homo. We also show that these changes have been made in an ad hoc fashion. Criteria for recognizing fossil specimens of Homo have been outlined on a M. Collard (*) Human Evolutionary Studies Program and Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada Department of Archaeology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK e-mail: [email protected] B. Wood Center for the Advanced
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolutionary History of the Human Face
    This is a repository copy of The evolutionary history of the human face. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/145560/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Lacruz, Rodrigo S, Stringer, Chris B, Kimbel, William H et al. (5 more authors) (2019) The evolutionary history of the human face. Nature Ecology and Evolution. pp. 726-736. ISSN 2397-334X https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0865-7 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ THE EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY OF THE HUMAN FACE Rodrigo S. Lacruz1*, Chris B. Stringer2, William H. Kimbel3, Bernard Wood4, Katerina Harvati5, Paul O’Higgins6, Timothy G. Bromage7, Juan-Luis Arsuaga8 1* Department of Basic Science and Craniofacial Biology, New York University College of Dentistry; and NYCEP, New York, USA. 2 Department of Earth Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, UK 3 Institute of Human Origins and School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
    [Show full text]
  • An Early Modern Human from the Pes¸Tera Cu Oase, Romania
    An early modern human from the Pes¸tera cu Oase, Romania Erik Trinkaus*†, Oana Moldovan‡,S¸ tefan Milota§, Adrian Bıˆlga˘r¶, Laurent¸iu Sarcina§, Sheela Athreyaʈ, Shara E. Bailey**, Ricardo Rodrigo††, Gherase Mircea§, Thomas Higham‡‡, Christopher Bronk Ramsey‡‡, and Johannes van der Plicht§§ *Department of Anthropology, Campus Box 1114, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130; ‡Institutul de Speologie ‘‘Emil Racovit¸a˘ ,’’ Clinicilor 5, P.O. Box 58, 3400 Cluj, Romania; §Pro Acva Grup, Strada˘Surduc 1, 1900 Timis¸oara, Romania; ¶Strada˘Decebal 1, 1500 Drobeta Turnu Severin, Romania; ʈDepartment of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843; **Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, 2110 G Street, Washington, DC 20052; ††Centro Nacional da Arqueologia Na´utica e Subaqua´tica, Instituto Portugueˆs de Arqueologia, Avenida da India 136, 1300 Lisboa, Portugal; ‡‡Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, 6 Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3QJ, United Kingdom; and §§Centrum voor Isotopen Onderzoek, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands Contributed by Erik Trinkaus, August 8, 2003 The 2002 discovery of a robust modern human mandible in the Pes¸tera cu Oase, southwestern Romania, provides evidence of early modern humans in the lower Danubian Corridor. Directly accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon (14C)-dated to 34,000– 36,000 14C years B.P., the Oase 1 mandible is the oldest definite early modern human specimen in Europe and provides perspec- tives on the emergence and evolution of early modern humans in the northwestern Old World. The moderately long Oase 1 mandi- ble exhibits a prominent tuber symphyseos and overall proportions that place it close to earlier Upper Paleolithic European specimens.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Evolution to Revolution: from a Slowly Developing Finite Communication System with Many Words to Infinite Modern Language
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/166520; this version posted July 20, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Language evolution to revolution: from a slowly developing finite communication system with many words to infinite modern language Andrey Vyshedskiy1,2* 1Boston University, Boston, USA 2ImagiRation LLC, Boston, MA, USA Keywords: Language evolution, hominin evolution, human evolution, recursive language, flexible syntax, human language, syntactic language, modern language, Cognitive revolution, Great Leap Forward, Upper Paleolithic Revolution, Neanderthal language Abstract There is overwhelming archeological and genetic evidence that modern speech apparatus was acquired by hominins by 600,000 years ago. There is also widespread agreement that modern syntactic language arose with behavioral modernity around 100,000 years ago. We attempted to answer two crucial questions: (1) how different was the communication system of hominins before acquisition of modern language and (2) what triggered the acquisition of modern language 100,000 years ago. We conclude that the communication system of hominins prior to 100,000 years ago was finite and not- recursive. It may have had thousands of words but was lacking flexible syntax, spatial prepositions, verb tenses, and other features that enable modern human language to communicate an infinite number of ideas. We argue that a synergistic confluence of a genetic mutation that dramatically slowed down the prefrontal cortex (PFC) development in monozygotic twins and their spontaneous invention of spatial prepositions 100,000 years ago resulted in acquisition of PFC-driven constructive imagination (mental synthesis) and converted the finite communication system of their ancestors into infinite modern language.
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Habilis
    COMMENT SUSTAINABILITY Citizens and POLICY End the bureaucracy THEATRE Shakespeare’s ENVIRONMENT James Lovelock businesses must track that is holding back science world was steeped in on surprisingly optimistic governments’ progress p.33 in India p.36 practical discovery p.39 form p.41 The foot of the apeman that palaeo­ ‘handy man’, anthropologists had been Homo habilis. recovering in southern Africa since the 1920s. This, the thinking went, was replaced by the taller, larger-brained Homo erectus from Asia, which spread to Europe and evolved into Nean­ derthals, which evolved into Homo sapiens. But what lay between the australopiths and H. erectus, the first known human? BETTING ON AFRICA Until the 1960s, H. erectus had been found only in Asia. But when primitive stone-chop­ LIBRARY PICTURE EVANS MUSEUM/MARY HISTORY NATURAL ping tools were uncovered at Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, Leakey became convinced that this is where he would find the earliest stone- tool makers, who he assumed would belong to our genus. Maybe, like the australopiths, our human ancestors also originated in Africa. In 1931, Leakey began intensive prospect­ ing and excavation at Olduvai Gorge, 33 years before he announced the new human species. Now tourists travel to Olduvai on paved roads in air-conditioned buses; in the 1930s in the rainy season, the journey from Nairobi could take weeks. The ravines at Olduvai offered unparalleled access to ancient strata, but field­ work was no picnic in the park. Water was often scarce. Leakey and his team had to learn to share Olduvai with all of the wild animals that lived there, lions included.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fate of the Neanderthals Announcement
    The Fate of the Neanderthals Announcement The first midterm exam will take place in class on Monday, October 1. You only need to bring a pencil or pen with you. The exam will have 2 parts: 1) 16 multiple choice questions (1 point each, 15 minutes) 2) 6 out of 7 short IDs (4 points each, 30 minutes) Sample questions are posted on the course website. After Homo erectus, several species of archaic Homo emerged during the Middle Paleolithic Homo heidelbergensis, Neanderthals, and Denisovans are often called “Archaic Homo” or “Archaic Humans” Neanderthals Homo sapiens Denisovans (400-30kya) (200kya-present) (40kya) Europe and Middle East Africa first Asia Homo heidelbergensis (600-200kya) Africa, Europe, and the Middle East Homo erectus (2mya-150kya?) Africa and Asia. Europe? Outline of Today’s Class: The Fate of the Neanderthals 1) Neanderthal biology and behavior 2) Modern humans - Early expansions out of Africa >100kya - Later expansions out of Africa 60kya associated with Upper Paleolithic modern human behavior 3) Neanderthal ancient DNA and clues about Neanderthal extinction The Neanderthals (300kya-30kya) • First fossils discovered in 1856 in the Neander Valley, Germany. • Large brains, large noses, and large brow ridges. Short, stocky bodies. • Cold-weather adapted to life during the Pleistocene “Ice Ages” (ca. 736kya-11.7kya). • Covered a wide geographic range extending from Europe to the Near Boyd & Silk (2014). East and West Asia. • Neanderthals living in different regions had different diets and behaviors (e.g., European Neanderthals hunted large game whereas Near Eastern Neanderthals had a more diverse diet of plants and small animals).
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Years on Ice Age Europe Network Celebrates – Page 5
    network of heritage sites Magazine Issue 2 aPriL 2018 neanderthal rock art Latest research from spanish caves – page 6 Underground theatre British cave balances performances with conservation – page 16 Caves with ice age art get UnesCo Label germany’s swabian Jura awarded world heritage status – page 40 5 Years On ice age europe network celebrates – page 5 tewww.ice-age-europe.euLLING the STORY of iCe AGE PeoPLe in eUROPe anD eXPL ORING PLEISTOCene CULtURAL HERITAGE IntrOductIOn network of heritage sites welcome to the second edition of the ice age europe magazine! Ice Age europe Magazine – issue 2/2018 issn 2568­4353 after the successful launch last year we are happy to present editorial board the new issue, which is again brimming with exciting contri­ katrin hieke, gerd­Christian weniger, nick Powe butions. the magazine showcases the many activities taking Publication editing place in research and conservation, exhibition, education and katrin hieke communication at each of the ice age europe member sites. Layout and design Brightsea Creative, exeter, Uk; in addition, we are pleased to present two special guest Beate tebartz grafik Design, Düsseldorf, germany contributions: the first by Paul Pettitt, University of Durham, cover photo gives a brief overview of a groundbreaking discovery, which fashionable little sapiens © fumane Cave proved in february 2018 that the neanderthals were the first Inside front cover photo cave artists before modern humans. the second by nuria sanz, water bird – hohle fels © urmu, director of UnesCo in Mexico and general coor­­­di nator of the Photo: burkert ideenreich heaDs programme, reports on the new initiative for a serial transnational nomination of neanderthal sites as world heritage, for which this network laid the foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Seminar on the Evolution of Language PSYC GU4242 4 Points Professor Herb Terrace 418 Schermerhorn Hall [email protected]
    Seminar on the Evolution of Language PSYC GU4242 4 points Professor Herb Terrace 418 Schermerhorn Hall [email protected] 212-854-4544 Thursdays 10:10-12 Schermerhorn 200C Office hours: Thursdays 9-10am and other times TBA Course description: This seminar will consider the evolution of language at the levels of the word and grammar, in each instance, phylogenetically and ontogenetically. Since humans are the only species that use language, attention will be paid to how language differs from animal communication. Prerequisites: Introduction to linguistics, introduction to psychology, and permission of instructor. Role of PSYC GU4242 in the Psychology curriculum: GU4242 is a seminar open to graduate students and advanced undergraduate students. It fulfills the following degree requirements. • For graduate students, it can partially fulfill the seminar requirement for the M.A. or the elective requirement for the M.Phil. • For undergraduates Psychology majors or concentrators and for students in the Psychology Postbaccalaureate certificate program, it meets the Group I (Perception & Cognition) distribution requirement. • For Psychology majors and Psychology Postbac students, it fulfills the seminar requirement. • For undergraduates pursuing the Neuroscience & Behavior major, it fulfills the advanced seminar requirement in the Psychology portion of the major. • Graduate students in Psychology and junior and senior Neuroscience & Behavior, Psychology, and Linguistics majors will have priority for registration. However, for non-majors in the College and in G.S., GU4242 could count as one term of the natural science requirement, provided the student has taken the prerequisite courses and has instructor permission. Role of PSYC GU4242 in the Linguistics curriculum: This course can be used to meet the “psychology and biology of language” theme requirement or the elective course requirement for the Linguistics major.
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Heidelbergensis: the Ot Ol to Our Success Alexander Burkard Virginia Commonwealth University
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Auctus: The ourJ nal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Scholarship 2016 Homo heidelbergensis: The oT ol to Our Success Alexander Burkard Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/auctus Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons, and the Biology Commons © The Author(s) Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/auctus/47 This Social Sciences is brought to you for free and open access by VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Auctus: The ourJ nal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Scholarship by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Homo heidelbergensis: The Tool to Our Success By Alexander Burkard Homo heidelbergensis, a physiological variant of the species Homo sapien, is an extinct spe- cies that existed in both Europe and parts of Asia from 700,000 years ago to roughly 300,000 years ago (carbon dating). This “subspecies” of Homo sapiens, as it is formally classified, is a direct ancestor of anatomically modern humans, and is understood to have many of the same physiological characteristics as those of anatomically modern humans while still expressing many of the same physiological attributes of Homo erectus, an earlier human ancestor. Since Homo heidelbergensis represents attributes of both species, it has therefore earned the classifica- tion as a subspecies of Homo sapiens and Homo erectus. Homo heidelbergensis, like anatomically modern humans, is the byproduct of millions of years of natural selection and genetic variation. It is understood through current scientific theory that roughly 200,000 years ago (carbon dat- ing), archaic Homo sapiens and Homo erectus left Africa in pursuit of the small and large animal game that were migrating north into Europe and Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Evolution: a Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H
    PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Human Evolution: A Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H. Smith HUMAN EVOLUTION: A PALEOANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE F.H. Smith Department of Anthropology, Loyola University Chicago, USA Keywords: Human evolution, Miocene apes, Sahelanthropus, australopithecines, Australopithecus afarensis, cladogenesis, robust australopithecines, early Homo, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Australopithecus africanus/Australopithecus garhi, mitochondrial DNA, homology, Neandertals, modern human origins, African Transitional Group. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Reconstructing Biological History: The Relationship of Humans and Apes 3. The Human Fossil Record: Basal Hominins 4. The Earliest Definite Hominins: The Australopithecines 5. Early Australopithecines as Primitive Humans 6. The Australopithecine Radiation 7. Origin and Evolution of the Genus Homo 8. Explaining Early Hominin Evolution: Controversy and the Documentation- Explanation Controversy 9. Early Homo erectus in East Africa and the Initial Radiation of Homo 10. After Homo erectus: The Middle Range of the Evolution of the Genus Homo 11. Neandertals and Late Archaics from Africa and Asia: The Hominin World before Modernity 12. The Origin of Modern Humans 13. Closing Perspective Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary UNESCO – EOLSS The basic course of human biological history is well represented by the existing fossil record, although there is considerable debate on the details of that history. This review details both what is firmly understood (first echelon issues) and what is contentious concerning humanSAMPLE evolution. Most of the coCHAPTERSntention actually concerns the details (second echelon issues) of human evolution rather than the fundamental issues. For example, both anatomical and molecular evidence on living (extant) hominoids (apes and humans) suggests the close relationship of African great apes and humans (hominins). That relationship is demonstrated by the existing hominoid fossil record, including that of early hominins.
    [Show full text]
  • The Human Evolutionary Calendar - Evolution in a Year)I------1 January • December F------{( March ) ( June September
    The Human Evolutionary Calendar - Evolution in a Year)I---------1 January • December f-------{( March ) ( June September SahelanthropusTchadensi Australopithecus sediba Homo rh odes iensis Ardipithecus ramidus 7,000,000 - 6,000,000 yrs. 2,000,000 - , ,750,000 yrs. 300,000 -125,000 yrs. 3,200,000 • 4,300,000 yrs. Homo rudolfensis Orrorin tugenensis 1,900,000 - 1.750,000 yrs. Homo pekin ensi s 6, 100,000 - 5,BOO,Oci:l yrs. 700,000 - 500,000 yrs. Australopit ec us anamensis 4,200,00 - 3,900,000 yrs. Ardipithecus kadabba 5,750,000 - 5,200,000 yrs. Ho m o Ergaster 1,900,000 - 1,3,000,000 yrs. Homo heidelberge nsis 700,000 • 200,000 yrs. Australopithecus afarensis Homo erectus 3,900,000 - 2,900,000 yrs. 1,800,000 • 250,000 yrs. Ho mo antecessor Australopithecus africa nus Ho mo habilis 1,000,000 -700,000 yrs. 3,800,000 - 3,000,000 yrs. 2,350,000 - 1,450,000 yrs. Ho m o g eorgicus Kenya nthropus platyo ps 1,800,000- 1.3000,000 yrs. 3,500,000 - 3,200,000 yrs. Ho m o nea nderthalensis 200,000 · 28,000 yrs. Paranthropus bo ise i Paranthropus aethiopicu 2,275,000- 1,250,000 yrs. De nisova ho minins 2,650,000 - 2,300,000 yrs. 200,000 - 30,000 yrs. Paranthropus robustus/crass iden s Australopithecus garhi 1,750,000- 1,200,000 yrs. 2,750,000 - 2.400,000 yrs. Red Deer Cave Peo ple ?- 11,000yrs. Ho mo sa piens sapien s 200~ Ho m o fl o res iensis 100,000 • 13,000 yrs.
    [Show full text]