Morphological and mtDNA analysis of Mezzena mandible

 

I've written about late Neandertals becoming more AMH-like, and a new study on an Italian specimen that postdates the arrival of AMH in Europe lends some further support to that idea.
The Mezzena jaw has Neandertal mtDNA and shares a number of morphological traits with other Neandertals, but its overall shape places it within the cluster of modern humans  (triangles; figure on the left). Notice also that Qafzeh 9 (Q9) and Shkul V (SV) are also within the cluster of modern humans, and Spy 1 (a Neandertal) is actually closer to modern humans than to other Neandertals.
From the paper:

The position on the scatter plot of our specimen of interest, Mezzena, has been calculated a posteriori. Unsurprisingly, the Mezzena mandible does not present any particular affinities with mid-Pleistocene specimens. It is most similar to AMHs being positioned within the H. sapiens cloud of points and the DFA classifies the specimen with modern humans (Table S7). Especially its shape is similar to that of Ohalo II and to a lesser extent to the recent modern human specimen China5. However, it should be noted that its position also indicates affinities with some Neanderthal specimens: the late Neanderthal Spy 1 and Saint-Césaire, the Near-East specimens Tabūn II and Amud 1, and to a lesser extent the classic Neanderthals La Ferrassie 1 and Guattari III (Figure 2).

According to the authors:

In this light, we can interpret the position of the Mezzena mandible which stands within the modern human shape space, while presenting strong shape similarities with some Neanderthal specimens. Such a conflicting taxonomical position is not surprising, considering the geological age of the mandible [30]. Indeed, numerous late Neanderthals such as Spy 1, Saint Césaire and the Near-East mandibles Amud 1 and Tabun II possess hints of a chin (i.e. tuber symphyseo) though not a true modern human morphology [37], [51]. Late Neanderthals lived in area where AMHs might have been already present [2], [23], [52], while the Levantine fossils are displaying a less derived Neanderthal morphology [35], [36]. 

Therefore, in our view, this change in morphology of the mandibular chin among the fossils of Mezzena and other late Neanderthals could have been the result of a small degree of interbreeding with AMHs.

It would be interesting to sequence Mezzena to confirm the existence of AMH admixture.
PLoS ONE 8(3): e59781. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059781
Possible Interbreeding in Late Italian Neanderthals? New Data from the Mezzena Jaw (Monti Lessini, Verona, Italy)
Silvana Condemi et al.
In this article we examine the mandible of Riparo Mezzena a Middle Paleolithic rockshelter in the Monti Lessini (NE Italy, Verona) found in 1957 in association with Charentian Mousterian lithic assemblages. Mitochondrial DNA analysis performed on this jaw and on other cranial fragments found at the same stratigraphic level has led to the identification of the only genetically typed Neanderthal of the Italian peninsula and has confirmed through direct dating that it belongs to a late Neanderthal. Our aim here is to re-evaluate the taxonomic affinities of the Mezzena mandible in a wide comparative framework using both comparative morphology and geometric morphometrics. The comparative sample includes mid-Pleistocene fossils, Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans. This study of the Mezzena jaw shows that the chin region is similar to that of other late Neanderthals which display a much more modern morphology with an incipient mental trigone (e.g. Spy 1, La Ferrassie, Saint-Césaire). In our view, this change in morphology among late Neanderthals supports the hypothesis of anatomical change of late Neanderthals and the hypothesis of a certain degree of interbreeding with AMHs that, as the dating shows, was already present in the European territory. Our observations on the chin of the Mezzena mandible lead us to support a non abrupt phylogenetic transition for this period in Europe.
Link

Revised timescale of human mtDNA evolution (Fu et al. 2013)

 

An important new paper has just appeared in Current Biology. It is very exciting for a couple of reasons:

• The paper uses the idea of branch shortening to infer dates for the mtDNA phylogeny. Briefly, if one counts differences between a present-day sample P and an ancient sample A, one can get a sense of when their most recent common ancestor X, lived. But PX and PA are not equal: PA is shorter, because A has "missed" a few thousand years of evolution (depending on its age). If we know the age of A (and this can be reliably known by direct dating for many samples), then we can infer the time of X.

Looking at the ages of many haplogroups, I don't see any that immediately strike me as inconsistent with recent published age estimates based on modern mtDNA alone, such as those from the Copernican reassessment paper. In any case, this is an exciting new application of an idea that will yield good dates for haplogroup ages in the future. For example, it could be used to date Y-chromosome lineages as well, when high-quality sequences of ancient human Y-chromosomes become available.

• The paper also presents a number of new and exciting ancient DNA samples:

Please note that the "Cro Magnon" sample is actually revealed to be non-ancient in the study; that is another utility of the "branch shortening" idea, since it can demonstrate that purported very old samples are in fact fairly recent.
Note the important new samples from Dolni Vestonice, Oberkassel, Continenza, all of which are Paleolithic Europeans and all of which belong, without exception to subgroups of haplogroup U. It appears that Europe was indeed dominated by this haplogroup down to Mesolithic times, with a sharp discontinuity with early Neolithic Europeans.
The only outlier in the European context is Paglicci Str. 4b which is assigned to haplogroup H1. However:

Using this criterion, we excluded Paglicci Str. 4b from further analysis as the rate of C to T misincorporation at the 50 end was only 8.8%, thus making an ancient origin for the DNA in this sample uncertain [14].

Personally, I doubt there was any mtDNA haplogroup H in pre-Neolithic Europe, as the first author of this paper has also argued for in a previous one.
There is also a new sample from Boshan; it is probably too early to detect a pattern, but it is nonetheless noteworthy that it also belonged to mtDNA haplogroup B like the much earlier sample from Tianyuan.
Finally, the paper also discusses the issue of the mutation rate, noting that the divergence between Eurasian (M+N) and African (L3) mtDNA is much later than that inferred for autosomal DNA using new and "slow" de novo autosomal mutation rates. In my opinion there are two possible interpretations for this: one that there's something wrong with the slow rates, while another is that the earlier divergence using autosomal DNA may be a consequence of inflation due to admixture events in Africa.
Current Biology doi:10.1016/j.cub.2013.02.044
A Revised Timescale for Human Evolution Based on Ancient Mitochondrial Genomes
Qiaomei Fu et al.
Summary
Background
Recent analyses of de novo DNA mutations in modern humans have suggested a nuclear substitution rate that is approximately half that of previous estimates based on fossil calibration. This result has led to suggestions that major events in human evolution occurred far earlier than previously thought.
Results
Here, we use mitochondrial genome sequences from ten securely dated ancient modern humans spanning 40,000 years as calibration points for the mitochondrial clock, thus yielding a direct estimate of the mitochondrial substitution rate. Our clock yields mitochondrial divergence times that are in agreement with earlier estimates based on calibration points derived from either fossils or archaeological material. In particular, our results imply a separation of non-Africans from the most closely related sub-Saharan African mitochondrial DNAs (haplogroup L3) that occurred less than 62–95 kya.
Conclusions
Though single loci like mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) can only provide biased estimates of population divergence times, they can provide valid upper bounds. Our results exclude most of the older dates for African and non-African population divergences recently suggested by de novo mutation rate estimates in the nuclear genome.
Link

Admixture in Southern Africa (Petersen et al. 2013)

Related:

• The genetic prehistory of southern Africa
• Genomic Variation in Seven Khoe-San Groups Reveals Adaptation and Complex African History

PLoS Genet 9(3): e1003309. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003309
Complex Patterns of Genomic Admixture within Southern Africa
Desiree C. Petersen et al.
Within-population genetic diversity is greatest within Africa, while between-population genetic diversity is directly proportional to geographic distance. The most divergent contemporary human populations include the click-speaking forager peoples of southern Africa, broadly defined as Khoesan. Both intra- (Bantu expansion) and inter-continental migration (European-driven colonization) have resulted in complex patterns of admixture between ancient geographically isolated Khoesan and more recently diverged populations. Using gender-specific analysis and almost 1 million autosomal markers, we determine the significance of estimated ancestral contributions that have shaped five contemporary southern African populations in a cohort of 103 individuals. Limited by lack of available data for homogenous Khoesan representation, we identify the Ju/'hoan (n = 19) as a distinct early diverging human lineage with little to no significant non-Khoesan contribution. In contrast to the Ju/'hoan, we identify ancient signatures of Khoesan and Bantu unions resulting in significant Khoesan- and Bantu-derived contributions to the Southern Bantu amaXhosa (n = 15) and Khoesan !Xun (n = 14), respectively. Our data further suggests that contemporary !Xun represent distinct Khoesan prehistories. Khoesan assimilation with European settlement at the most southern tip of Africa resulted in significant ancestral Khoesan contributions to the Coloured (n = 25) and Baster (n = 30) populations. The latter populations were further impacted by 170 years of East Indian slave trade and intra-continental migrations resulting in a complex pattern of genetic variation (admixture). The populations of southern Africa provide a unique opportunity to investigate the genomic variability from some of the oldest human lineages to the implications of complex admixture patterns including ancient and recently diverged human lineages.
Link

Extreme mobility in the late Pleistocene (Shaw and Stock 2013)

The idea of Pleistocene remains having "extremely active and mobile lives" is consistent with the hypothesis that people moved around during prehistory, and did not simply grow roots after their initial colonization of the planet, as some models of "Paleolithic continuity" have affirmed.
Journal of Human Evolutiondoi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.01.004
Extreme mobility in the Late Pleistocene? Comparing limb biomechanics among fossil Homo, varsity athletes and Holocene foragers
Colin N. Shaw, Jay T. Stock
Descriptions of Pleistocene activity patterns often derive from comparisons of long bone diaphyseal robusticity across contemporaneous fossilized hominins. The purpose of this study is to augment existing understanding of Pleistocene hominin mobility patterns by interpreting fossil variation through comparisons with a) living human athletes with known activity patterns, and b) Holocene foragers where descriptions of group-level activity patterns are available. Relative tibial rigidity (midshaft tibial rigidity (J)/midshaft humeral rigidity (J)) was compared amongst Levantine and European Neandertals, Levantine and Upper Palaeolithic Homo sapiens, Holocene foragers and living human athletes and controls. Cross-country runners exhibit significantly (p < 0.05) greater relative tibial rigidity compared with swimmers, and higher values compared with controls. In contrast, swimmers displayed significantly (p < 0.05) lower relative tibial rigidity than both runners and controls. While variation exists among all Holocene H. sapiens, highly terrestrially mobile Later Stone Age (LSA) southern Africans and cross-country runners display the highest relative tibial rigidity, while maritime Andaman Islanders and swimmers display the lowest, with controls falling between. All fossil hominins displayed relative tibial rigidity that exceeded, or was similar to, the highly terrestrially mobile Later Stone Age southern Africans and modern human cross-country runners. The more extreme skeletal structure of most Neandertals and Levantine H. sapiens, as well as the odd Upper Palaeolithic individual, appears to reflect adaptation to intense and/or highly repetitive lower limb (relative to upper limb) loading. This loading may have been associated with bipedal travel, and appears to have been more strenuous than that encountered by even university varsity runners, and Holocene foragers with hunting grounds 2000–3000 square miles in size. Skeletal variation among the athletes and foraging groups is consistent with known or inferred activity profiles, which support the position that the Pleistocene remains reflect adaptation to extremely active and mobile lives.
Link

Late Middle Pleistocene teeth from South China (Liu et al. 2013)

From the paper:

The Panxian Dadong P3 falls in the upper left quadrant, an area that, with the exception of two out of the nine Atapuerca-SH specimens and S7-34, is exclusively occupied by recent humans. Thus this geometric morphometric analysis indicates that the general crown conformation of the Panxian Dadong P3 resembles some European Middle Pleistocene hominins, Chinese Upper Pleistocene hominins, and particularly the recent human specimens. 

According to the above comparisons, the Panxian Dadong P3 preserves some primitive and highly polymorphic traits, but in general its conformation is derived. Its occlusal morphology is simple, and the contour is symmetrical with a lingual cusp that is narrower than the buccal one. All these features make the Panxian Dadong P3 most similar to Upper Pleistocene hominins and recent humans in our comparative samples.

I suspect that the age of these teeth will render them useless for ancient DNA work.
Journal of Human Evolution doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.10.012
Late Middle Pleistocene hominin teeth from Panxian Dadong, South China
Wu Liu et al.
The hominin teeth and evidence of hominin activities recovered from 1991 to 2005 at the Panxian Dadong site in South China are dated to the late Middle Pleistocene (MIS 8–6 or ca. 130–300 ka), a period for which very little is known about the morphology of Asian populations. The present study provides the first detailed morphometric description and comparisons of four hominin teeth (I1, C1, P3 and P3) from this site. Our study shows that the Panxian Dadong teeth combine archaic and derived features that align them with Middle and Upper Pleistocene fossils from East and West Asia and Europe. These teeth do not display any typical Neanderthal features and they are generally more derived than other contemporaneous populations from Asia and Africa. However, the derived traits are not diagnostic enough to specifically link the Panxian Dadong teeth to Homo sapiens, a common problem when analyzing the Middle Pleistocene dental record from Africa and Asia. These findings are contextualized in the discussion of the evolutionary course of Asian Middle Pleistocene hominins, and they highlight the necessity of incorporating the Asian fossil record in the still open debate about the origin of H. sapiens.
Link

Our rabbit-hunting ancestors (Fa et al. 2013)

From the paper:

Relative to other mammal groups, rabbit bone abundance was always significantly higher during the Upper Palaeolithic (76%) and Mesolithic (59%) than during the Middle Palaeolithic (Fig. 4). The difference between the average rabbit remains and that of cervids, the second most abundant prey item, were less than 10% during the Mousterian. In contrast, during the Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic, the difference between the rabbit and the second-most important prey items was over 60% and 20%, respectively. After the rabbit, large ungulates (caprids, cervids and equids) were relatively important during the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic, while caprids, cervids and suids took that place during the Mesolithic (Fig. 4).

and:

Our evidence indicates that hominin diets may have changed from one dependent on large mammals during the Middle Palaeolithic to diets dominated by smaller species in the Upper Palaeolithic, in particular by the wild rabbit. The explanation for this transition is either that climate change negatively impacted large mammal populations, forcing prehistoric people to incorporate smaller vertebrate species into their diets, or that people themselves negatively impacted large mammal populations, which in turn forced foragers to add smaller species to their diets.

I am not sure how modern hunter-gatherers hunt rabbits, but I would think that trapping, or some type of slingshot or blowdart would be ideal for this small and fast-moving animal. Did Neandertals simply lack efficient technology to capture rabbit, or is there some other reason why they underutilized the species?
Journal of Human Evolution DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.01.002
Rabbits and hominin survival in Iberia
John E. Fa et al.
High dependence on the hunting and consumption of large mammals by some hominins may have limited their survival once their preferred quarry became scarce or disappeared. Adaptation to smaller residual prey would have been essential after the many large-bodied species decreased in numbers. We focus on the use of a superabundant species, the rabbit, to demonstrate the importance of this taxon in Iberia as fundamental to predators. We show that the use of the rabbit over time has increased, and that there could have been differential consumption by Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH). Analysis of bone remains from excavations throughout Iberia show that this lagomorph was a crucial part of the diet of AMH but was relatively unutilised during the Mousterian, when Neanderthals were present. We first present changes in mammalian biomass and mean body mass of mammals over 50,000 years, to illustrate the dramatic loss of large mammalian fauna and to show how the rabbit may have contributed a consistently high proportion of the available game biomass throughout that period. Unlike the Italian Peninsula and other parts of Europe, in Iberia the rabbit has provided a food resource of great importance for predators including hominins. We suggest that hunters that could shift focus to rabbits and other smaller residual fauna, once larger-bodied species decreased in numbers, would have been able to persist. From the evidence presented here, we postulate that Neanderthals may have been less capable of prey-shifting and hence use the high-biomass prey resource provided by the rabbit, to the extent AMH did.
Link

Doubt cast on Tam Pa Ling age

For reference, see the post on the original article:

• Tam Pa Ling: modern humans in Southeast Asia at 63-46ka

From a criticism of the original paper:

Hence, contrary to the authors' assertion that TPL1 has a “minimum secured age of 46 ka and a maximum age of ∼63 ka”, the published stratigraphy, if correct, indicates that the TPL1 specimen is no older than 46 ka. TPL1’s status as “the earliest well-dated modern human fossil east of the Jordan Valley” also appears weak compared with the Liujiang specimen dated to ∼153 ka (3), the Callao Cave fossil in the Philippines dated to 67 ka (4), and, above all, the ∼100 ka modern fossil from Zhirendong (5), discovered only 484 km northeast of Tam Pa Ling in Southern China.

Irreconcilable differences between stratigraphy and direct dating cast doubts upon the status of Tam Pa Ling fossil

Alain Pierret et al.

Link

... and from a reply to the criticism by the authors:

They question the validity of the dating because of an apparent “reverse stratigraphy” (Fig. 1), whereby “older” dates are located higher in the section [i.e., 51.4 (14C) at 2.1 m] and “younger” dates are at the bottom of the section [i.e., 48 ka (optically stimulated luminescence [OSL]) and >49.2 ka (14C) at 4.3 m] (2). This criticism ignores the presented SEs (table 2 and table S1 in ref. 1), which make the results statistically equivalent (Table 1). More importantly, they ignore that the radiocarbon results are well beyond the accepted radiocarbon barrier of ∼40 ka (3), indicating that the charcoal has a minimum age of ∼40 ka. Bearing in mind these problems, we have conservatively estimated the burial age to be ∼46 ka according to the luminescence dating of the sediments. As the luminescence results are stratigraphically consistent, we perceive no irreconcilable differences between the stratigraphy and dating.

...

Finally, we interpret TPL1 as the earliest human fossil that is both well-dated and fully modern in morphology. Zhirendong demonstrates a mixture of archaic and modern traits, making it significant but not fully modern in appearance (4). Similarly, the metatarsal from Callao Cave is only diagnostic to the genus Homo given that it falls within “the morphological and size ranges of Homo habilis and H. floresiensis” (ref. 5, p. 123). Although the modernity of the Liujiang fossil is not questioned, it has no direct date and no secure stratigraphic provenance. It has been variably dated to ca. 20 ka, ca. 67 ka, 111 to 139 ka, and >153 ka (6), and this uncertain stratigraphic context has prevented many scholars from accepting any of the dates currently attributed to it (6).

Reply to Pierret et al.: Stratigraphic and dating consistency reinforces the status of Tam Pa Ling fossil

Fabrice Demeter et al.

Link

Higher Levels of Neanderthal Ancestry in East Asians Than in Europeans (Wall et al. 2013)

Higher Levels of Neanderthal Ancestry in East Asians Than in Europeans (Wall et al. 2013)

The title seems to say it all; such a conclusion was also arrived at by Meyer et al. (high coverage Denisova paper). However, the extent of this ancestry appears to be differently estimated in the new paper:

By using the high coverage Denisova genome, we are able to show that the admixture rate into East Asians is 40% higher than into Europeans.

Of course, the interesting question is why East Asians have this excess of Neandertal ancestry, given that Neandertals were a west Eurasian-distributed species (for the most part). Similarly, we would not have expected Australo-Melanesians to possess higher Denisovan admixture, and yet they do. Some models of multiregional evolution assumed regional continuity with pre-existing archaic populations in different parts of the world (e.g., Europeans with Neandertals), but clearly much more interesting things were taking place in deep prehistory.

Of particular interest is this conclusion:

In particular, at least some Neanderthal-modern human admixture must postdate the separation of the ancestors of modern European and modern East Asian populations.

The publication of Tianyuan has shown that by ~40kya, differentiation of Asians from Europeans was already on its way, and this is a date close to the disappearance of the Neandertals, the date of which is contested, but one can imagine that already-differentiated Eurasians may have encountered some lingering Neandertal groups.

Genetics doi: 10.1534/genetics.112.148213

Higher Levels of Neanderthal Ancestry in East Asians Than in Europeans

Jeffrey D. Wall et al.

Neanderthals were a group of archaic hominins that occupied most of Europe and parts of Western Asia from roughly 30-300 thousand years ago (Kya). They coexisted with modern humans during part of this time. Previous genetic analyses that compared a draft sequence of the Neanderthal genome with genomes of several modern humans concluded that Neanderthals made a small (1-4%) contribution to the gene pools of all non-African populations. This observation was consistent with a single episode of admixture from Neanderthals into the ancestors of all non-Africans when the two groups coexisted in the Middle East 50-80 Kya. We examined the relationship between Neanderthals and modern humans in greater detail by applying two complementary methods to the published draft Neanderthal genome and an expanded set of high-coverage modern human genome sequences. We find that, consistent with the recent finding of Meyer et al. (2012), Neanderthals contributed more DNA to modern East Asians than to modern Europeans. Furthermore we find that the Maasai of East Africa have a small but significant fraction of Neanderthal DNA. Because our analysis is of several genomic samples from each modern human population considered, we are able to document the extent of variation in Neanderthal ancestry within and among populations. Our results combined with those previously published show that a more complex model of admixture between Neanderthals and modern humans is necessary to account for the different levels of Neanderthal ancestry among human populations. In particular, at least some Neanderthal-modern human admixture must postdate the separation of the ancestors of modern European and modern East Asian populations.

Link

Late Neandertal survival in Iberia questioned

Late Neandertal survival in Iberia questioned

Neanderthal remains point to earlier extinction

In the latest study1, Higham and his former graduate student Rachel Wood, now at the Australian National University in Canberra, tried to date remains from 11 sites on the Iberian Peninsula using their decontamination methods. Previous efforts put the remains as young as 36,000 years old.

However, Wood and Higham found that just two of the sites — Jarama, outside Madrid, and Cueva del Boquete de Zafarraya, near the southern tip of Spain — contained bones with enough carbon to be dated. Their work suggests that these remains are more than 45,000 years old, with some older than 50,000 years, the practical limit of carbon dating. Wood says that the team’s study calls into question evidence that the last populations of Neanderthals found refuge in the Iberian Peninsula.

PNAS doi: 10.1073/pnas.1207656110

Radiocarbon dating casts doubt on the late chronology of the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in southern Iberia

Rachel E. Wood et al.

It is commonly accepted that some of the latest dates for Neanderthal fossils and Mousterian industries are found south of the Ebro valley in Iberia at ca. 36 ka calBP (calibrated radiocarbon date ranges). In contrast, to the north of the valley the Mousterian disappears shortly before the Proto-Aurignacian appears at ca. 42 ka calBP. The latter is most likely produced by anatomically modern humans. However, two-thirds of dates from the south are radiocarbon dates, a technique that is particularly sensitive to carbon contaminants of a younger age that can be difficult to remove using routine pretreatment protocols. We have attempted to test the reliability of chronologies of 11 southern Iberian Middle and early Upper Paleolithic sites. Only two, Jarama VI and Zafarraya, were found to contain material that could be reliably dated. In both sites, Middle Paleolithic contexts were previously dated by radiocarbon to less than 42 ka calBP. Using ultrafiltration to purify faunal bone collagen before radiocarbon dating, we obtain ages at least 10 ka 14C years older, close to or beyond the limit of the radiocarbon method for the Mousterian at Jarama VI and Neanderthal fossils at Zafarraya. Unless rigorous pretreatment protocols have been used, radiocarbon dates should be assumed to be inaccurate until proven otherwise in this region. Evidence for the late survival of Neanderthals in southern Iberia is limited to one possible site, Cueva Antón, and alternative models of human occupation of the region should be considered.

Link

"In Africa" project

"In Africa" project

The new 5-year "In Africa" project headed by Marta Mirazon Lahr has a wonderful website filled with information. From the Aims section:


"The project hopes to achieve five main goals:

1. to increase significantly the number of human and other mammalian fossils in East Africa dating to the last 250,000 years;
2. to map changes in human morphology, behaviour and occupation in different basins of East Africa in the period before and after the main modern human dispersals across and out of Africa;
3. to map the character and timing of the Middle to Later Stone Age transition in the Central Rift Valley;
4. to integrate the human prehistoric record with local palaeoenvironmental data to explore the role climate change and its expression in the African tropics may have played in our recent evolutionary history;
5. to increase the scientific and public awareness of how important it is to understand what happened in Africa in order to understand why Homo sapiens and its diversity evolved."

An example of the information that can be found in this site is this list of Middle Pleistocene Sub-Saharan African fossils (pdf). Please note that some of the given dates (such as that of Broken Hill/Kabwe) are controversial. The e-library is also full of a large number of  papers and is a very useful resource.

40,000-year old "Lion Man"

40,000-year old "Lion Man"

Ice Age Lion Man is world’s earliest figurative sculpture

Even more exciting than the discovery of new pieces, the sculpture’s age has been refined using radio-carbon dating of other bones found in the strata. This reveals a date of 40,000 years ago, while until recently it was thought to be 32,000 years old. Once reconstruction is completed, several tiny, unused fragments of the mammoth ivory are likely to be carbon dated, and this is expected to confirm the result.

This revised dating pushes the Lion Man right back to the oldest sculptures, which have been found in two other caves in the Swabian Alps. These rare finds are dated at 35,000 to 40,000 years, but the Lion Man is by far the largest and most complex piece. A few carved items have been found in other regions which are slightly older, but these have simple patterns, not figuration.

What was striking about the sculptor of the Lion Man sculptor is that he or she had a mind capable of imagination rather than simply representing real forms. As Cook says, it is “not necessary to have a brain with a complex pre-frontal cortex to form the mental image of a human or a lion—but it is to make the figure of a lion-man”. The Ulm sculpture therefore sheds further light on the evolution of homo sapiens.

I have sometimes wondered whether therianthropic figures really represent an abstract blending of forms (which would require the mental conception of a non-actual creature), or a stylized depiction of a real man wearing (like Hercules) a lion's head.

It's not inconceivable that Ice Age hunters might "wear their prey on their head", just as later hunters used antlers for the same purpose. This may be a more prosaic explanation (Big Men projecting their power and prowess as a reflection of the dangerous animals they killed) compared to the idea of artists envisioning  an imaginary being.

The case for earlier Out-of-Africa (Boivin et al. 2013)

The case for earlier Out-of-Africa (Boivin et al. 2013)

An informative review critical of the ~60kya coastal-Out-of-Africa hypothesis. On the left, the authors' estimate of the distribution of hominin groups during MIS5.

From the paper:

Another under-appreciated issue is the anomalous nature of the genetic evidence for a rapid spread of modern humans from Africa to Asia. Echoing the fossil date anomaly, the mtDNA branch lengths for sampled populations are longest for those which are farthest east, in Near Oceania, and shortest in the Asian areas that would have been encountered first (Merriwether et al., 2005; Oppenheimer, 2009). The real problem, however, is that the variation in branch lengths suggests that a single genotype engaged in the expansion actually existed for 30 ka, which does not support a rapid expansion. The anomaly can be explained by what we call an an ‘M buffer’ effect (see Supplementary material A) which implies that the branch ages we observe are considerable underestimates of the time of arrival of the genotype to these areas. Such anomalously long-lived genotypes have been directly observed through ancient DNA in species such as the Iberian lynx (Dalen et al., 2011).

and:

We have focused here on the possibility that the modern human exit recorded by fossil evidence in the Levant in MIS 5 does not represent a failed dispersal, and that in fact our species was not only in the Levant but also the Arabian peninsula during this marine isotope stage, and spread to India before the Toba eruption at 74 ka (Petraglia et al., 2007). Another valid hypothesis we do not explore here is that H. sapiens was able to leave Africa in MIS 6 via a grassland corridor (Frumkin et al., 2011; see also Scally and Durbin, 2012). Yet another is that our species dispersed out of Africa shortly after its first appearance c. 195 ka, in MIS 7 (Dennell and Roebroeks, 2005: 1102). One other possibility is that there were several, separate dispersals of our species out of Africa (Dennell and Petraglia, 2012). At the same time, we acknowledge that major demographic changes occurred in MIS 4 and MIS 3, perhaps explaining the relatively young mtDNA coalescence age in living populations. The increasing evidence for complexity as well as the clear patterns of bias for all records, whether archaeological, fossil or genetic, suggests the need for an open mind to multiple scenarios for Out of Africa, as well as for more rather than less complex models of H. sapiens dispersal across Eurasia.

Quaternary International doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2013.01.008

Human Dispersal Across Diverse Environments of Asia during the Upper Pleistocene

Nicole Boivin et al.

The initial out of Africa dispersal of H. sapiens, which saw anatomically modern humans reach the Levant in Marine Isotope Stage 5, is generally regarded as a ‘failed dispersal’. Fossil, archaeological and genetic findings are seen to converge around a consensus view that a single population of H. sapiens exited Africa sometime around 60 thousand years ago (ka), and rapidly reached Australia by following a coastal dispersal corridor. We challenge the notion that current evidence supports this straightforward model. We argue that the fossil and archaeological records are too incomplete, the coastal route too problematic, and recent genomic evidence too incompatible for researchers not to remain fully open to other hypotheses. We specifically explore the possibility of a sustained exit by anatomically modern humans, drawing in particular upon palaeoenvironmental data across southern Asia to demonstrate its feasibility. Current archaeological, genetic and fossil data are not incompatible with the model presented, and appear to increasingly favour a more complex out of Africa scenario involving multiple exits, varying terrestrial routes, a sub-divided African source population, slower progress to Australia, and a degree of interbreeding with archaic varieties of Homo.

Link

Genetic evidence for the colonization of Australia

Genetic evidence for the colonization of Australia

Quaternary International Volume 285, 8 February 2013, Pages 44–56

Genetic evidence for the colonization of Australia

Sheila van Holst Pellekaan et al.

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), Y-chromosome and, more recently, genome studies from living people have produced powerful evidence for the dispersal of modern human populations. The prevailing model of global dispersion assumes an African origin in which Australia and the American continents represent some of the extreme regions of human migration, though the relative timing of dispersal events remains debatable. Here, a focus on Australia and New Guinea discusses currently available genetic evidence from the two regions, compared with that from Asia. Mt haplotypes indicate ancient ancestry for both Australia and New Guinea peoples, with evidence of some shared genetic connection and other unshared haplogroups apparently specific to both places. Migration into Sahul from south-east Asia may have been by more complex routes than only along a ‘southern coastal route’, raising the question of possible common ancestry in central or northern Asia for some Australian and American peoples for which current genetic evidence is tenuous. Although current dating methods for genetic diversity rely heavily on several assumptions, best estimates provide support for archaeological dates, indicating that, relative to the colonization of America, Australia was inhabited very early. Genetic diversity of living descendants of Australia’s founding populations is informative for dispersal within Australia and for understanding complex population histories of Asia.

Link

Neandertal origin of Châtelperronian; likely modern human origin of Châtelperronian body ornamentation

Neandertal origin of Châtelperronian; likely modern human origin of Châtelperronian body ornamentation

Related:

• Earliest sapiens remains in Europe
• Rapid onset of Aurignacian in Southwest France
• Redating of the Early Upper Paleolithic site of Riparo Mochi (Italy)
• 43,000-year old Aurignacian in Swabian Jura

PNAS doi: 10.1073/pnas.1212924109

Radiocarbon dates from the Grotte du Renne and Saint-Césaire support a Neandertal origin for the Châtelperronian

Jean-Jacques Hublin et al.

The transition from the Middle Paleolithic (MP) to Upper Paleolithic (UP) is marked by the replacement of late Neandertals by modern humans in Europe between 50,000 and 40,000 y ago. Châtelperronian (CP) artifact assemblages found in central France and northern Spain date to this time period. So far, it is the only such assemblage type that has yielded Neandertal remains directly associated with UP style artifacts. CP assemblages also include body ornaments, otherwise virtually unknown in the Neandertal world. However, it has been argued that instead of the CP being manufactured by Neandertals, site formation processes and layer admixture resulted in the chance association of Neanderthal remains, CP assemblages, and body ornaments. Here, we report a series of accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dates on ultrafiltered bone collagen extracted from 40 well-preserved bone fragments from the late Mousterian, CP, and Protoaurignacian layers at the Grotte du Renne site (at Arcy-sur-Cure, France). Our radiocarbon results are inconsistent with the admixture hypothesis. Further, we report a direct date on the Neandertal CP skeleton from Saint-Césaire (France). This date corroborates the assignment of CP assemblages to the latest Neandertals of western Europe. Importantly, our results establish that the production of body ornaments in the CP postdates the arrival of modern humans in neighboring regions of Europe. This new behavior could therefore have been the result of cultural diffusion from modern to Neandertal groups.

Link

Chromosomal rearrangements and human-chimp speciation

Chromosomal rearrangements and human-chimp speciation

Mol Biol Evol (2012) doi: 10.1093/molbev/mss272

Recombination Rates and Genomic Shuffling in Human and Chimpanzee—A New Twist in the Chromosomal Speciation Theory

Marta Farré et al.

A long-standing question in evolutionary biology concerns the effect of recombination in shaping the genomic architecture of organisms and, in particular, how this impacts the speciation process. Despite efforts employed in the last decade, the role of chromosomal reorganizations in the human–chimpanzee speciation process remains unresolved. Through whole-genome comparisons, we have analyzed the genome-wide impact of genomic shuffling in the distribution of human recombination rates during the human–chimpanzee speciation process. We have constructed a highly refined map of the reorganizations and evolutionary breakpoint regions in the human and chimpanzee genomes based on orthologous genes and genome sequence alignments. The analysis of the most recent human and chimpanzee recombination maps inferred from genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism data revealed that the standardized recombination rate was significantly lower in rearranged than in collinear chromosomes. In fact, rearranged chromosomes presented significantly lower recombination rates than chromosomes that have been maintained since the ancestor of great apes, and this was related with the lineage in which they become fixed. Importantly, inverted regions had lower recombination rates than collinear and noninverted regions, independently of the effect of centromeres. Our observations have implications for the chromosomal speciation theory, providing new evidences for the contribution of inversions in suppressing recombination in mammals.

Link

Bulging modern human foreheads

Bulging modern human foreheads

AJPA DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22202

Geometric variation of the frontal squama in the genus homo: Frontal bulging and the origin of modern human morphology

Emiliano Bruner et al.

The majority of studies of frontal bone morphology in paleoanthropology have analyzed the frontal squama and the browridge as a single unit, mixing information from different functional elements. Taking into account that the bulging of the frontal bone is often described as a species-specific trait of Homo sapiens, in this article we analyze variation in the midsagittal profile of the genus Homo, focusing on the frontal squama alone, using landmark-based superimpositions and principal components analysis. Our results demonstrate that anatomically modern humans are definitely separated from extinct human taxa on the basis of frontal bulging. However, there is minor overlap among these groups, indicating that it is necessary to exercise caution when using this trait alone to make taxonomic inferences on individual specimens. Early modern humans do not show differences with recent modern humans, and “transitional” individuals such as Jebel Irhoud 1, Maba, and Florisbad, show modern-like frontal squama morphology. The bulging of the frontal squama in modern humans may represent a structural consequence of more general cranial changes, or it could be a response to changes in the morphology of the underlying prefrontal brain elements. A subtle difference between Neandertals and the Afro-European Middle Pleistocene Homo sample is associated with flattening at bregma in the former group, a result that merits further investigation.

Link

Mating between Modern Humans, Neanderthals and other Archaics (Waddell & Tan 2012)

Mating between Modern Humans, Neanderthals and other Archaics (Waddell & Tan 2012)

arXiv:1212.6820 [q-bio.GN]

New g%AIC, g%AICc, g%BIC, and Power Divergence Fit Statistics Expose Mating between Modern Humans, Neanderthals and other Archaics

Peter J. Waddell, Xi Tan

The purpose of this article is to look at how information criteria, such as AIC and BIC, relate to the g%SD fit criterion derived in Waddell et al. (2007, 2010a). The g%SD criterion measures the fit of data to model based on a normalized weighted root mean square percentage deviation between the observed data and model estimates of the data, with g%SD = 0 being a perfectly fitting model. However, this criterion may not be adjusting for the number of parameters in the model comprehensively. Thus, its relationship to more traditional measures for maximizing useful information in a model, including AIC and BIC, are examined. This results in an extended set of fit criteria including g%AIC and g%BIC. Further, a broader range of asymptotically most powerful fit criteria of the power divergence family, which includes maximum likelihood (or minimum G^2) and minimum X^2 modeling as special cases, are used to replace the sum of squares fit criterion within the g%SD criterion. Results are illustrated with a set of genetic distances looking particularly at a range of Jewish populations, plus a genomic data set that looks at how Neanderthals and Denisovans are related to each other and modern humans. Evidence that Homo erectus may have left a significant fraction of its genome within the Denisovan is shown to persist with the new modeling criteria.

Link

Neandertal STAT2 haplotype in Eurasians

Neandertal STAT2 haplotype in Eurasians

Two recent papers have argued that African population structure or late Middle Paleolithic/Upper Paleolithic Neandertal admixture have contributed to the finding that Non-Africans appear to be a few percent more similar to Neandertals than Africans are across the genome. I would add that modern human admixture in the Vindija individual remains a distinct possibility.

What percentage of the ~3% Eurasian excess can be accounted by each of these three processes? The jury is out, and we won't find out until someone decides to tackle the problem comprehensively and/or new ancient DNA samples become available to inform the discussion. African population structure cannot be discounted, and intriguing new evidence may appear thanks to ancient DNA analysis.

But, there is a different approach to detecting Neandertal admixture that zeroes in on specific genomic locations and dissects them in great detail. This single-region approach provides evidence for admixture, without necessarily arguing about how extensive it was.

The single-region dissection was previously used in the Hammer lab to identify the first very convincing evidence for archaic admixture in Africans and Melanesians. In a new paper, Mendez et al. identify a small region in chromosome 12 that shows evidence for archaic introgression from Neandertals, or a species closely related to them.

But, it is worthwhile to begin with a list of other Neandertal introgression candidates from the literature:

Thus far, only a handful of loci have been hypothesized to have entered the human gene pool through archaic admixture and positive selection, including MAPT (MIM 157140),5 MCPH1 (MIM 607117),3 and particular alleles at the HLA locus (MIM 142800, 142830, 142840).6 However, analysis of the Neanderthal genome failed to provide evidence of introgressive alleles at the former two loci.1 Because of its role in fighting pathogens, HLA presents an instance where it is relatively easy to conceive of an a priori reason that acquisition of an archaic Eurasian HLA allele would benefit human ancestors, especially as they expanded into new habitats.7 However, the fact that HLA haplotypes are known to exhibit transspecific polymorphism and show evidence of strong balancing selection 8,9 increases the probability that similarities between modern and archaic haplotypes are due to ancestral shared polymorphism (i.e., as opposed to archaic admixture). In addition, the SNPs tagging the main HLA haplotype that was said to have introgressed were not observed in the Denisova or Neanderthal draft genomes. 

So, what lines of evidence support the notion that the new STAT2 haplotype is the "real deal"?

First, N matches the Neanderthal sequence at all 18 sites that fall within the resequenced 8.6 kb STAT2 region and have Neanderthal sequence coverage (Table 1). Second, N lineages are broadly distributed at relatively low frequencies in Eurasian populations (Figure 3) and are not observed in sub-Saharan African populations (Table S6). Third, the N haplotype extends for ~130 kb in West Eurasians and up to ~260 kb in some East Asians and Melanesians, producing much stronger LD than that observed in sub-Saharan Africans.

...

Given that the N lineage and the reference sequence diverged ~600 kya, these results suggest that population structure has influenced the recent evolution of this locus. Balancing selection alone is not expected to maintain this extent of LD and consequently is not sufficient to explain these patterns. Moreover, although a strong bottleneck could generate extended LD similar to the levels we observe near STAT2 in non-Africans, it would not explain why the N lineage went extinct in Africa (i.e., why the SNPs associated with the N lineage in non- Africans were not observed in sub-Saharan Africans that are part of our WGS or public SNP panels).

...

We point out that although a recent common ancestry between a human lineage and Neanderthal sequences might indicate gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans, this information alone does not inform us about the direction of gene flow. With the additional evidence of the observed extent of LD in modern human sequences, it is possible to infer that the N lineage introgressed into modern humans (either from Neanderthals or another archaic source that contributed to both Neanderthals and AMH).

Actually, the N haplotype is observed in North Africa, but this might be due to relatively recent back-migration. One might also argue that a recent bottleneck in a Eurasian population generated the high degree of LD, and the N haplotype was lost in a back-to-Africa migration, or North-to-Sub-Saharan Africa migration. But, that would not seem to explain how the deeply divergent lineage persisted in the North African population of proto-modern humans for such a long time; the evidence for recent common ancestry of N with the Neandertal haplotype would argue against incomplete lineage sorting (=inheritance of related forms of the haplotype from before the modern-Neandertal divergence).

All in all, this probably represents the best evidence for Neandertal-to-modern introgression to date. As full genomes of different human groups become available, it will be possible to automate this analysis and pick off other such strong signals. This may not indicate the level of admixture, but it might provide strong evidence against the idea of reproductive isolation between modern humans and Neandertals.

It is also noteworthy that this is barely consistent with the coastal migration theory with respect to the origin of Australo-Melanesians, because humans trekking along the coast would not have the opportunity to admix with Neandertals who are completely unattested there in either their physical, or archaeological (Mousterian) form.

But, it is consistent with my Out-of-Arabia theory. Australo-Melanesian Y chromosomes belong to the CF clade of the phylogeny. I have speculated that the post-70ka climate crisis in Arabia spurred some human groups to escape north (CF), and others to remain south (DE). The latter eventually gave rise to the major African lineage, heading west (E), as well as a relic Asian lineage heading east (D) that was later inundated by the descendants of CF. If Australo-Melanesians are descended from the CF folk who went north out of Arabia, then they too would have had the opportunity to admix with Neandertals in the Near East.

The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 91, Issue 2, 265-274, 10 August 2012

A Haplotype at STAT2 Introgressed from Neanderthals and Serves as a Candidate of Positive Selection in Papua New Guinea

Fernando L. Mendez, Joseph C. Watkins and Michael F. Hammer

Signals of archaic admixture have been identified through comparisons of the draft Neanderthal and Denisova genomes with those of living humans. Studies of individual loci contributing to these genome-wide average signals are required for characterization of the introgression process and investigation of whether archaic variants conferred an adaptive advantage to the ancestors of contemporary human populations. However, no definitive case of adaptive introgression has yet been described. Here we provide a DNA sequence analysis of the innate immune gene STAT2 and show that a haplotype carried by many Eurasians (but not sub-Saharan Africans) has a sequence that closely matches that of the Neanderthal STAT2. This haplotype, referred to as N, was discovered through a resequencing survey of the entire coding region of STAT2 in a global sample of 90 individuals. Analyses of publicly available complete genome sequence data show that haplotype N shares a recent common ancestor with the Neanderthal sequence (∼80 thousand years ago) and is found throughout Eurasia at an average frequency of ∼5%. Interestingly, N is found in Melanesian populations at ∼10-fold higher frequency (∼54%) than in Eurasian populations. A neutrality test that controls for demography rejects the hypothesis that a variant of N rose to high frequency in Melanesia by genetic drift alone. Although we are not able to pinpoint the precise target of positive selection, we identify nonsynonymous mutations in ERBB3, ESYT1, and STAT2—all of which are part of the same 250 kb introgressive haplotype—as good candidates.

Link

Redating of the Early Upper Paleolithic site of Riparo Mochi (Italy)

Redating of the Early Upper Paleolithic site of Riparo Mochi (Italy)

There are two possibilities on how the early Aurignacian entered Europe. According to one hypothesis, its bearers followed the Danube, which formed a natural corridor into the heartland of the continent which was, at the time, thickly forested. A different hypothesis is that the early Aurignacian entered Europe via the Mediterranean. Distinguishing between the two hypotheses depends on obtaining reliable chronological estimates for the Mediterranean and Central European Aurignacian

A recent dating of a site in the Swabian Jura suggested that the Aurignacian was earlier attested in Central Europe. But, another paper in the Journal of Human Evolution examines meticulously the sequence in the Moch rockshelter and finds that it is just as early.

Comparisons with dates for other Upper Palaeolithic contexts outside Italy suggest that the date of the Protoaurignacian of Mochi compares closely. In Fig. 9a the start boundaries for the earliest Aurignacian evidence at the sites of Geissenklösterle (Germany), Abri Pataud and Isturitz (France) are compared to the start boundary for unit G in Mochi. The first two sites were dated recently in Oxford with reliable methodologies (Higham et al., 2011; Higham et al., in press) while for Isturitz only a small number of dates exist for the earliest Upper Palaeolithic (Szmidt et al., 2010). This comparison reveals that the lowermost Aurignacian levels at Geissenklosterle (AHIII) and Isturitz (C4d) date to the same period as Mochi G, at around 42.7-41.5 ka cal BP (68.2%). The earliest Aurignacian of Abri Pataud dates slightly later to around 41e40 ka cal BP (68.2%), but the assemblage there has always been considered more evolved, so this is not surprising. No Mousterian dates are included in any of these calculations, therefore the start boundaries in the Bayesian models are not well constrained at their earliest end. What is interesting is that there appears to be a close similarity between the dates for the Protoaurignacian and Early Aurignacian sites in Germany on the Danube and on the Mediterranean coast. This might suggest a rapid dispersal of both variants of the Aurignacian across Europe at c. 44-42 ka cal BP.

It does appear that the Aurignacian was a continent-wide punctuational event in Europe which occurred in the middle to late 40 thousands ka cal BP.

Either there were two streams into Europe (Danubian and Mediterranean), or one stream that quickly inundated much of the continent. Given that the argument for the Danubian Corridor is partly related to the ease of access it provided, it is difficult to imagine how the people who followed it would quickly stray far from it all the way to Italy. Overall, it does appear that there were multiple streams into Europe, and perhaps new research in the Balkans, Eastern Europe, and West Asia, may help us trace the earlier predecssor of these streams before they followed their separate ways into Europe.

Journal of Human Evolution DOI:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.11.009

A new chronostratigraphic framework for the Upper Palaeolithic of Riparo Mochi (Italy)


Katerina Douka et al.


The rockshelter of Mochi, on the Ligurian coast of Italy, is often used as a reference point in the formation of hypotheses concerning the arrival of the Aurigancian in Mediterranean Europe. Yet, the site is poorly known. Here, we describe the stratigraphic sequence based on new field observations and present 15 radiocarbon determinations from the Middle Palaeolithic (late Mousterian) and Early Upper Palaeolithic (Aurignacian and Gravettian) levels. The majority of dates were produced on humanly modified material, specifically marine shell beads, which comprise some of the oldest directly-dated personal ornaments in Europe. The radiocarbon results are incorporated into a Bayesian statistical model to build a new chronological framework for this key Palaeolithic site. A tentative correlation of the stratigraphy to palaeoclimatic records is also attempted.

Link

43,000-year old Aurignacian in Swabian Jura

43,000-year old Aurignacian in Swabian Jura

A new paper continues the re-assessment of the radiocarbon dating record in Europe. It pushes the Aurignacian of Central Europe back in time, but not as far back as the appearance of modern humans in Europe. The implication is that the advanced music and art of the Aurignacian did not accompany modern humans as they made their first steps into Europe, but rather developed there.

The authors distinguish between a "strong" version of their model (which would posit a monocentric origin of music/art around the Geissenkoesterle site), and a "weak" one in which these innovations were contributed in parallel by different regions. A better understanding of the origin of different innovations and their assignment to specific groups of modern humans may help us better understand what was the "common core" of behavioral and technological modernity that facilitated the success of our species.

From the paper:

The majority of scholars conclude that the Aurignacian is the earliest signature of the first modern humans in Europe. Recent research suggests that this is not likely to be the case. Benazzi et al. (2011) have shown that the Uluzzian of Italy and Greece is likely to be a modern human industry based on the reanalysis of infant teeth in the archaeological site of Cavallo, and also demonstrated that it dates to 45,000-43,000 cal BP. Other dated examples from other Uluzzian sites (e.g., Higham et al., 2009) fall into the same period, and the Uluzzian is always stratigraphically below the Proto- Aurignacian in Italian sites where both co-occur. This adds an additional level of complexity to the emerging picture of early human dispersals and suggests that the Aurignacian does not represent the earliest evidence of our species in Europe. 

... 

Taken together, these results suggest that modern humans arrived in Europe as early as ~45,000 cal BP and spread rapidly across Europe to as far as southern England between 43,000 and41,000 cal BP. The dates for the lower Aurignacian at Geissenklosterle fall in the same period and appear to pre-date the ages for the Proto- Aurignacian and Early Aurignacian in other regions (Fig. 6). The new results suggest that the caves of the Swabian Jura document the earliest phase of the Aurignacian, and the region can be viewed as one of the key areas in which a variety of cultural innovations, including figurative art, mythical images, and musical instruments, are first documented. These dates are consistent with the Danube Valley serving as an important corridor for the movement of people and ideas (Conard, 2002; Conard and Bolus, 2003). 

... 

The new radiocarbon dates from Geissenklosterle document the presence of the Aurignacian in the Swabian Jura prior to the Heinrich 4 cold phase, with the Early Aurignacian beginning around 42,500 cal BP. In the coming years, excavations in the Swabian Jura will continue and new radiometric dates should contribute to an improved understanding of the spatial-temporal development of the Aurignacian and its innovative material culture.

From the press release:

Researchers from Oxford and Tübingen have published new radiocarbon dates from the from Geißenklösterle Cave in Swabian Jura of Southwestern Germany in the Journal of Human Evolution. The new dates use improved methods to remove contamination and produced ages between began between 42,000 – 43,000 years ago for start of the Aurignacian, the first culture to produce a wide range of figurative art, music and other key innovations as postulated in the Kulturpumpe Hypothesis. The full spectrum of these innovations were established in the region no later than 40 000 years ago.

Journal of Human Evolution doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.03.003

Τesting models for the beginnings of the Aurignacian and the advent of figurative art and music: The radiocarbon chronology of Geißenklösterle

Thomas Higham et al.

The German site of Geißenklösterle is crucial to debates concerning the European Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition and the origins of the Aurignacian in Europe. Previous dates from the site are central to an important hypothesis, the Kulturpumpe model, which posits that the Swabian Jura was an area where crucial behavioural developments took place and then spread to other parts of Europe. The previous chronology (critical to the model), is based mainly on radiocarbon dating, but remains poorly constrained due to the dating resolution and the variability of dates. The cause of these problems is disputed, but two principal explanations have been proposed: a) larger than expected variations in the production of atmospheric radiocarbon, and b) taphonomic influences in the site mixing the bones that were dated into different parts of the site. We reinvestigate the chronology using a new series of radiocarbon determinations obtained from the Mousterian, Aurignacian and Gravettian levels. The results strongly imply that the previous dates were affected by insufficient decontamination of the bone collagen prior to dating. Using an ultrafiltration protocol the chronometric picture becomes much clearer. Comparison of the results against other recently dated sites in other parts of Europe suggests the Early Aurignacian levels are earlier than other sites in the south of France and Italy, but not as early as recently dated sites which suggest a pre-Aurignacian dispersal of modern humans to Italy by ∼45000 cal BP. They are consistent with the importance of the Danube Corridor as a key route for the movement of people and ideas. The new dates fail to refute the Kulturpumpe model and suggest that Swabian Jura is a region that contributed significantly to the evolution of symbolic behaviour as indicated by early evidence for figurative art, music and mythical imagery.

Link