First human fossil in Arabia found

Author(s):  
Meredith Brand
Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
Vol 519 ◽  
pp. 82-91
Author(s):  
S.-J Park ◽  
J.-Y Kim ◽  
Y.-J Lee ◽  
J.–Y Woo

2017 ◽  
Vol 163 (1) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathieu Duval ◽  
Laura Martín-Francés
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. e2
Author(s):  
Jeffrey H. Schwartz

The Evolutionary or Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (here identified as the Synthesis) has been portrayed as providing the foundation for uniting a supposed disarray of biological disciplines through the lens of Darwinism fused with population genetics. Rarely acknowledged is that the Synthesis’s success was also largely due to its architects’ effectiveness in submerging British and German attempts at a synthesis by uniting the biological sciences through shared evolutionary concerns. Dobzhansky and Mayr imposed their bias toward population genetics, population (as supposedly opposed to typological) thinking, and Morgan’s conception of specific genes for specific features (here abbreviated as genes for) on human evolutionary studies. Dobzhansky declared that culture buffered humans from the whims of selection. Mayr argued that as variable as humans are now, their extinct relatives were even more variable; thus the human fossil did not present taxic diversity and all known fossils could be assembled into a gradually changing lineage of time-successive species. When Washburn centralized these biases in the new physical anthropology the fate of paleoanthropology as a non-contributor to evolutionary theory was sealed. Molecular anthropology followed suit in embracing Zuckerkandl and Pauling’s assumption that molecular change was gradual and perhaps more importantly continual. Lost in translation was and still is an appreciation of organismal development. Here I will summarize the history of these ideas and their alternatives in order to demonstrate assumptions that still need to be addressed before human evolutionary studies can more fully participate in what is a paradigm shift-in-the-making in evolutionary biology.


Author(s):  
José María Bermúdez de Castro ◽  
María Martinón-Torres ◽  
Aida Gómez-Robles ◽  
Ann Margvelashvili ◽  
Juan Luis Arsuaga ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 93 ◽  
pp. 155-171
Author(s):  
Italo Biddittu ◽  
Marie-Hélène Moncel ◽  
Salvatore Milli ◽  
Luca Bellucci ◽  
Massimo Ruffo ◽  
...  

AbstractThe Ceprano human calvarium, dated around 400,000 yr, is a well-known fossil specimen. It represents significant evidence of hominin presence in the Italian peninsula during the Middle Pleistocene and may be considered representative of an archaic variant of the widespread and polymorphic species Homo heidelbergensis. Since its discovery (March 1994), systematic surveys in the Campogrande area near Ceprano, central Italy, identified 12 localities (CG1-12) with archaeological and/or paleontological assemblages. On this basis, fieldwork was carried out at Campogrande between 2001 and 2006, including drilled cores and excavations, allowing a detailed description of the stratigraphic and paleoenvironmental context associated with the human fossil specimen and the archaeological materials. In the present paper we focus on the stratigraphy and sedimentological features of the uppermost deposits, coupled with a detailed appraisal of the available lithic assemblages that mostly belongs to overlying sediments (CG9 and CG10 localities). We conclude that the Ceprano hominin died in a floodplain environment with a low topographic gradient, where a fluvial meandering channel occurred. The archaeological materials describe a network of sites that document common behavioural features of human groups of the mid-to-late Middle Pleistocene, representing evidence of the regionalization observed across Europe after Marine Oxygen Isotope Stage 12.


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Proctor ◽  
Katerina Douka ◽  
Janet W. Proctor ◽  
Tom Higham

Kent's Cavern is one of Britain's most important Palaeolithic sites. The Torquay Natural History Society excavations in the Vestibule (1926–1928 and 1932–1938) yielded Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic deposits as well as a fragment of human jaw (KC4). Higham et al. (2011) recently identified it as the oldest modern human fossil known from North West Europe, with a date estimated, using Bayesian modelling, at 44,200–41,500 cal bp (at 95.4% probability). However, White and Pettitt (2012) and Zilhão (2013) have claimed that the poor quality of the excavations and lack of stratigraphic integrity cast doubt on the archaeological and dating evidence from the site. Here, we present a thorough re-analysis of the excavations and show that they were in fact conducted to a reasonable standard. We also carefully examine the stratigraphic and sedimentological sequence and present twelve new AMS determinations from key contexts to test the previous model and chronology. We find that, while Trench C has good stratigraphic integrity, there is some evidence of post-depositional disruption of certain parts; some post-depositional movement is also shown by a limited number of artefact refits. There are two outlying AMS determinations dating to c. 32,000 bp. We therefore cannot exclude completely the possibility that the maxilla's age could be younger than the published probability distribution function (PDF). Our analysis lends support to the assessment by Higham et al. (2011) of the site and KC4 and shows that it offers considerable potential for future study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document