A Short Review on the Origin and Migrations of Modern Humans (Homo sapiens)

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 95-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hisao Baba
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde

This chapter deals with the similarities and differences between Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens, by considering genetic, brain, and cognitive evidence. The genetic differentiation emerges from fossil genetic evidence obtained first from mtDNA and later from nuclear DNA. With high throughput whole genome sequencing, sequences have been obtained from the Denisova Cave (Siberia) fossils. Nuclear DNA of a third species (“Denisovans”) has been obtained from the same cave and used to define the phylogenetic relationships among the three species during the Upper Palaeolithic. Archaeological comparisons make it possible to advance a four-mode model of the evolution of symbolism. Neanderthals and modern humans would share a “modern mind” as defined up to Symbolic Mode 3. Whether the Neanderthals reached symbolic Mode 4 remains unsettled.


2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Habiba Chirchir ◽  
Tracy L. Kivell ◽  
Christopher B. Ruff ◽  
Jean-Jacques Hublin ◽  
Kristian J. Carlson ◽  
...  

Humans are unique, compared with our closest living relatives (chimpanzees) and early fossil hominins, in having an enlarged body size and lower limb joint surfaces in combination with a relatively gracile skeleton (i.e., lower bone mass for our body size). Some analyses have observed that in at least a few anatomical regions modern humans today appear to have relatively low trabecular density, but little is known about how that density varies throughout the human skeleton and across species or how and when the present trabecular patterns emerged over the course of human evolution. Here, we test the hypotheses that (i) recent modern humans have low trabecular density throughout the upper and lower limbs compared with other primate taxa and (ii) the reduction in trabecular density first occurred in early Homo erectus, consistent with the shift toward a modern human locomotor anatomy, or more recently in concert with diaphyseal gracilization in Holocene humans. We used peripheral quantitative CT and microtomography to measure trabecular bone of limb epiphyses (long bone articular ends) in modern humans and chimpanzees and in fossil hominins attributed to Australopithecus africanus, Paranthropus robustus/early Homo from Swartkrans, Homo neanderthalensis, and early Homo sapiens. Results show that only recent modern humans have low trabecular density throughout the limb joints. Extinct hominins, including pre-Holocene Homo sapiens, retain the high levels seen in nonhuman primates. Thus, the low trabecular density of the recent modern human skeleton evolved late in our evolutionary history, potentially resulting from increased sedentism and reliance on technological and cultural innovations.


Author(s):  
Rainer Kühne

I argue that the evidence of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis and the evidence of multiregional evolution of prehistorical humans can be understood if there has been interbreeding between Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, and Homo sapiens at least during the preceding 700,000 years. These interbreedings require descendants who are capable of reproduction and therefore parents who belong to the same species. I suggest that a number of prehistorical humans who are at present regarded as belonging to different species belong in fact to one single species.  


2018 ◽  
pp. 89-101
Author(s):  
Erika Lorraine Milam

This chapter traces the popularization of the “killer ape” theory through the work of Robert Ardrey. It shows how Ardrey did not confine his use of “mankind” to Homo sapiens or to men. Preferring to recognize the long evolutionary lineage resulting in modern humans, he used “man” to include all of our hominid ancestors, from the moment our evolutionary lineage diverged from the lineages of other apes. Second, the chapter reveals that, throughout his writings, but especially in African Genesis, Ardrey evoked stereotypes of Africa as a timeless, wild, and primitive continent in which our ancient past had been preserved for the few Westerners (like himself) who were brave enough to confront it. In doing so, Ardrey promoted images of Africans that cultural anthropologists, civil rights leaders, and the designers of Man: A Course of Study (MACOS) were desperately trying to combat but that a reading white public eagerly consumed.


Author(s):  
STEVEN MITHEN

The modern human is a product of six million years of evolution wherein it is assumed that the ancestor of man resembles that of a chimpanzee. This assumption is based on the similarities of the ape-like brain size and post-cranial characteristics of the earliest hominid species to chimpanzees. Whilst it is unclear whether chimpanzees share the same foresight and contemplation of alternatives as with humans, it is nevertheless clear that chimpanzees lack creative imagination — an aspect of modern human imagination that sets humanity apart from its hominid ancestors. Creative imagination pertains to the ability to combine different forms of knowledge and ways of thinking to form creative and novel ideas. This chapter discusses seven critical steps in the evolution of the human imagination. These steps provide a clear picture of the gradual emergence of creative imagination in humans from their primitive origins as Homo sapiens some 200,000 years ago. This chronological evolution of the imaginative mind of humans involves both biological and cultural change that began soon after the divergence of the two lineages that led to modern humans and African apes.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 686-697
Author(s):  
DAVID R. LAWRENCE

Abstract:This article aims to explore the idea that enhancement technologies have been and will continue to be an essential element of what we might call the “human continuum,” and are indeed key to our existence and evolution into persons. Whereas conservative commentators argue that enhancement is likely to cause us to lose our humanity and become something other, it is argued here that the very opposite is true: that enhancement is the core of what and who we are. Using evidence from paleoanthropology to examine the nature of our predecessor species, and their proclivities for tool use, we can see that there is good reason to assume that the development of Homo sapiens is a direct result of the use of enhancement technologies. A case is also made for broad understandings of the scope of enhancement, based on the significant evolutionary results of acts that are usually dismissed as “unremarkable.” Furthermore, the use of enhancement by modern humans is no different than these prehistoric applications, and is likely to ultimately have similar results. There is no good reason to assume that whatever we may become will not also consider itself human.


Anthropology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick L. Coolidge ◽  
Thomas Wynn

Cognitive archaeology may be divided into two branches. Evolutionary cognitive archaeology (ECA) is the discipline of prehistoric archaeology that studies the evolution of human cognition. Practitioners are united by a methodological commitment to the idea that archaeological traces of past activity provide access to the minds of the agents responsible. The second branch, ideational cognitive archaeology, encompasses archaeologists who strive to discover the meaning of symbolic system, primarily through the analysis of iconography. This approach differs from ECA in its epistemology, historical roots, and citation universes, and focuses on comparatively recent time periods (after 10,000 years ago). Evolutionary cognitive archaeologists are concerned with the nature of cognition itself, and its evolutionary development from the time of the last common ancestor with chimpanzees to the final ascendancy of modern humans at the end of the Pleistocene. Although ECA methods are primarily archaeological, its theoretical grounding is in the cognitive sciences, including cognitive psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive neuroscience. It is by its nature interdisciplinary. ECA differs from the allied discipline of evolutionary psychology in several important respects. Methodologically, ECA is a macroevolutionary science that studies physical evidence of past human cognition, including archaeological and fossil remains. Evolutionary psychology relies heavily on reverse engineering from controlled experiments on living humans. Theoretically, ECA is more eclectic, drawing on a variety of cognitive and evolutionary models; evolutionary psychology is committed to a neo-Darwinian, selectionist understanding of evolutionary change. The two approaches tend to study different components of human mental life, but are not inherently contradictory. ECA practitioners reconstruct prehistoric activities using well-established archaeological methods and techniques, including morphological analysis of artifacts to identify action sequences and decision patterns, functional analyses (e.g., microwear) to identify use patterns, and spatial patterns within sites to recognize activity loci (e.g., hearths). An increasingly important method is the actualistic recreation of prehistoric technologies to identify features not preserved in the archaeological remains. Neuroarchaeologists enhance such actualistic research by imaging the brains of the participants (most typically using fMRI), an approach that also contributes directly to cognitive science’s understanding of the neural basis of technical cognition. ECA practitioners take two non-mutually exclusive approaches to documenting human cognitive evolution. The first approach enriches the understanding of specific hominin taxa (i.e., Homo sapiens and their direct ancestors since 6 million years ago) by providing accounts of their cognitive life worlds, or by contrasting two taxa with one another. This approach is famously exemplified by attempts to contrast the abilities of Neandertals with those of modern humans. The second approach traces the evolution of specific cognitive abilities from the first appearance of stone tools 3.3 million years ago to the emergence of city-states 5,000 years ago. The range of accessible cognitive abilities is limited by the nature of archaeological remains, but evolutionary cognitive archaeologists have been able to trace developments in spatial cognition, memory, cognitive control, technical expertise, theory of mind, aesthetic cognition, symbolism, language, and numeracy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 318-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin Greigert ◽  
Julie Brunet ◽  
Basma Ouarti ◽  
Maureen Laroche ◽  
Alexander W Pfaff ◽  
...  

Abstract Fleas are ectoparasites of various animals, including Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758 (Primates: Hominidae). Among the species relevant to the human health field, either due to their dermatopathological potential or because of their role as vectors of microorganisms responsible for infectious diseases, such as plague or murine typhus, are the human flea, oriental rat flea, closely related cat and dog fleas, and chigoe flea. However, other species can accidentally infest humans. We have herein reported two unusual cases of humans infested and bitten by Archaeopsylla erinacei, the hedgehog flea. This species has been identified using stereomicroscopy, on the base of key characteristics. Furthermore, a brief literature review has revealed that hedgehog fleas could carry human-infectious agents, such as Rickettsia felis Bouyer et al. 2001 (Rickettsiales: Rickettsiaceae) or Bartonella henselae Regnery et al.1992 (Rhizobiales: Bartonellaceae). Using molecular biology, we thus tested nine A. erinacei specimens taken from these patients, for several bacteria species commonly associated with hematophagous arthropods, implicated in human pathology. However, all our samples were proven negative. The role of A. erinacei in human epidemiology has never been evaluated to date. This report sought to remind us that these fleas can be accidental parasites in humans. In addition, recent findings pertaining to bacteria of medical interest that are present in these insects should be brought to the fore, given that the question of their role as vectors in human infections remains unanswered and deserves further investigation.


2011 ◽  
Vol 366 (1567) ◽  
pp. 1060-1069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco d'Errico ◽  
Chris B. Stringer

Crucial questions in the debate on the origin of quintessential human behaviours are whether modern cognition and associated innovations are unique to our species and whether they emerged abruptly, gradually or as the result of a discontinuous process. Three scenarios have been proposed to account for the origin of cultural modernity. The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place approximately 50 ka in Africa among already evolved anatomically modern humans. The second posits that cultural modernity emerged gradually in Africa starting at least 200 ka in concert with the origin of our species on that continent. The third states that innovations indicative of modern cognition are not restricted to our species and appear and disappear in Africa and Eurasia between 200 and 40 ka before becoming fully consolidated. We evaluate these scenarios in the light of new evidence from Africa, Asia and Europe and explore the mechanisms that may have led to modern cultures. Such reflections will demonstrate the need for further inquiry into the relationship between climate and demographic/cultural change in order to better understand the mechanisms of cultural transmission at work in Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens populations.


Hereditas ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 158 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Úlfur Árnason

Abstract Background The Out of Africa hypothesis, OOAH, was challenged recently in an extended mtDNA analysis, PPA (Progressive Phylogenetic Analysis), that identified the African human populations as paraphyletic, a finding that contradicted the common OOAH understanding that Hss had originated in Africa and invaded Eurasia from there. The results were consistent with the molecular Out of Eurasia hypothesis, OOEH, and Eurasian palaeontology, a subject that has been largely disregarded in the discussion of OOAH. Results In the present study the mtDNA tree, a phylogeny based on maternal inheritance, was compared to the nuclear DNA tree of the paternally transmitted Y-chromosome haplotypes, Y-DNAs. The comparison showed full phylogenetic coherence between these two separate sets of data. The results were consistent with potentially four translocations of modern humans from Eurasia into Africa, the earliest taking place ≈ 250,000 years before present, YBP. The results were in accordance with the postulates behind OOEH at the same time as they lent no support to the OOAH. Conclusions The conformity between the mtDNA and Y-DNA phylogenies of Hss is consistent with the understanding that Eurasia was the donor and not the receiver in human evolution. The evolutionary problems related to OOAH became similarly exposed by the mtDNA introgression that took place from Hss into Neanderthals ≈ 500,000 YBP, a circumstance that demonstrated the early coexistence of the two lineages in Eurasia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document