scholarly journals Human species and mating systems: Neandertal-Homo sapiens reproductive isolation and the archaeological and fossil records

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karenleigh A. Overmann ◽  
Frederick L. Coolidge
Keyword(s):  
Reproductive Isolation ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Hybrid Sterility ◽  
Mate Recognition ◽  
Human Species ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Provisioning Behavior ◽  
Survival And Reproduction ◽  
Parallel Case ◽  
Fossil Records

The present paper examined the assumption of strong reproductive isolation (RI) between Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens, as well as the question of what form it might have taken, using insights from the parallel case of chimpanzee–bonobo hybridization. RI from hybrid sterility or inviability was thought unlikely based on the short separation-to-introgression timeline. The forms of RI that typically develop in primates have relatively short timelines (especially for partial implementation); they generally preclude mating or influence hybrid survival and reproduction in certain contexts, and they have the potential to skew introgression directionality. These RI barriers are also consistent with some interpretations of the archaeological and fossil records, especially when behavioral, cognitive, morphological, and genetic differences between the two human species are taken into consideration. Differences potentially influencing patterns of survival and reproduction include interspecies violence, Neandertal xenophobia, provisioning behavior, and ontogenetic, morphological, and behavioral differences affecting matters such as kin and mate recognition, infanticide, and sexual selection. These factors may have skewed the occurrence of interbreeding or the survival and reproduction of hybrids in a way that might at least partially explain the pattern of introgression.

scholarly journals Muscles of Facial Expression in Extinct Species of the Genus Homo

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arturo Tozzi
Keyword(s):  
Facial Expression ◽  
General Trend ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Anatomical Variation ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Human Species ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Genus Homo ◽  
Levator Labii Superioris ◽  
Mimetic Muscles

ABSTRACTWe display a detailed description of mimetic muscles in extinct human species, framed in comparative and phylogenetic contexts. Using known facial landmarks, we assessed the arrangement of muscles of facial expression in Homo sapiens, neanderthalensis, erectus, heidelbergensis and ergaster. In modern humans, several perioral muscles are proportionally smaller in size (levator labii superioris, zygomaticus minor, zygomaticus major and triangularis) and/or located more medially (levator labii superioris, zygomaticus minor and quadratus labii inferioris) than in other human species. As mimetic musculature is examined in the most ancient specimens up to the most recent, there is a general trend towards an increase in size of corrugator supercillii and triangularis. Homo ergaster’s mimetic musculature closely resembles modern Homo, both in size and in location; furthermore, Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis share many muscular features. The extinct human species had an elaborate and highly graded facial communication system, but it remained qualitatively different from that reported in modern Homo. Compared with other human species, Homo sapiens clearly exhibits a lower degree of facial expression, possibly correlated with more sophisticated social behaviours and with enhanced speech capabilities. The presence of anatomical variation among species of the genus Homo raises important questions about the possible taxonomic value of mimetic muscles.

scholarly journals Pervasive genetic associations between traits causing reproductive isolation in Heliconius butterflies

2010 ◽  
Vol 278 (1705) ◽  
pp. 511-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard M. Merrill ◽  
Bas Van Schooten ◽  
Janet A. Scott ◽  
Chris D. Jiggins
Keyword(s):  
Gene Flow ◽  
Reproductive Isolation ◽  
Hybrid Sterility ◽  
Mate Recognition ◽  
Colour Pattern ◽  
Genetic Associations ◽  
Male Preference ◽  
Heliconius Melpomene ◽  
The Face ◽  
Heliconius Cydno

Ecological speciation proceeds through the accumulation of divergent traits that contribute to reproductive isolation, but in the face of gene flow traits that characterize incipient species may become disassociated through recombination. Heliconius butterflies are well known for bright mimetic warning patterns that are also used in mate recognition and cause both pre- and post-mating isolation between divergent taxa. Sympatric sister taxa representing the final stages of speciation, such as Heliconius cydno and Heliconius melpomene , also differ in ecology and hybrid fertility. We examine mate preference and sterility among offspring of crosses between these species and demonstrate the clustering of Mendelian colour pattern loci and behavioural loci that contribute to reproductive isolation. In particular, male preference for red patterns is associated with the locus responsible for the red forewing band. Two further colour pattern loci are associated, respectively, with female mating outcome and hybrid sterility. This genetic architecture in which ‘speciation genes’ are clustered in the genome can facilitate two controversial models of speciation, namely divergence in the face of gene flow and hybrid speciation.

Homo Neanderthalensis in Light of Modern Paleoanthropology: a Natural Science and Biblical/Theological Conception

2019 ◽  
pp. 97-126
Author(s):  
Олег Мумриков ◽  
Илья Алексеевич Беломытцев
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Human Species ◽  
East Central ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Dead End ◽  
The Status ◽  
Long Time

Homo neanderthalensis (человек неандертальский) - название ископаемой группы гоминид, населявшей значительную часть Евразии в период от 28 до 300 тысяч лет назад. Согласно данным современной науки, неандертальцы не были непосредственными предшественниками современных людей, а сосуществовали длительное время одновременно с homo sapiens. При этом результаты ряда исследований свидетельствуют о том, что неандертальцы могли быть полноценными людьми, мало в чём уступавшими человеку современного анатомического типа. Вопрос о том, являются ли неандертальцы тупиковой ветвью эволюции, животным-гоминидом, альтернативным видом человека или кем-либо ещё остаётся в настоящее время открытым и подразумевает всестороннее, междисциплинарное обсуждение. В настоящей статье рассмотрен вопрос о статусе неандертальца в контексте библейско-святоотеческого учения о происхождении человека: изложены основные данные об антропогенезе, рассмотрены их различные интерпретации, предложены оценки с точки зрения православной антропологии. Homo neanderthalensis is the name of a fossil hominid group that inhabited a significant part of Eurasia (Europe, Middle East, Central Asia), and North Africa from 28 to 300 thousand years ago. The name of the group comes from the discovery of a skull in 1856 in West Germany (Neandertal Gorge, near Düsseldorf and Erkrath). In 1858 German anthropologist H. Schaaffhausen (Hermann Schaaffhausen) introduced the term “Neanderthal”. According to the data of modern science, Neanderthals were not the immediate predecessors of modern people, but coexisted for a long time simultaneously with homo sapiens. At the same time, the results of a number of studies indicate that Neanderthals could be full-fledged people who were not inferior to humans of a modern anatomical type. The question of whether Neanderthals are a dead-end branch of evolution, a hominid animal, an alternative human species, or something else entirely is currently open and implies a comprehensive, interdisciplinary discussion. This article addresses the issue of the status of a Neanderthal in the context of biblical/ patristic doctrine of human origins: the main data on anthropogenesis are presented, various interpretations are considered, and evaluations are made from the point of view of Orthodox anthropology.

Neanderthals and modern humans

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Differentiation ◽  
Nuclear Dna ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Whole Genome ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Modern Mind ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Mode 3

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.

Hominin transition to Upper Pliocene

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Ayala ◽  
Camilo J. Cela-Conde
Keyword(s):  
Brain Development ◽  
Late Pleistocene ◽  
Technological Progress ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Middle Pleistocene ◽  
Evolutionary Significance ◽  
Australopithecus Afarensis ◽  
Phylogenetic Significance ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Surprising Discovery

This chapter analyzes the transition of the hominins from the Middle Pleistocene to the Late Pleistocene. Two alternative models are explored, the “Multiregional Hypothesis” (MH) and the “Replacement Hypothesis,” and how each model evaluates the existing relationships between the taxa Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens. Next is the investigation of the transitional (or “archaic,” if this grade is taken into account) exemplars found in Europe, Africa, and Asia and their evolutionary significance. In particular, the comparison between H. erectus and H. sapiens in China and Java is investigated, as the main foundation of the MH. The chapter ends with the surprising discovery of Homo floresiensis and its description and interpretations concerning its taxonomic and phylogenetic significance. The correlation between brain development and technological progress is at odds with the attribution of perforators, microblades, and fishing hooks to a hominin with a small cranial volume, similar to that of Australopithecus afarensis.

Not just a peep: The evolution of calling in Pseudacris crucifer

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Cicchino
Keyword(s):  
Reproductive Isolation ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Mate Recognition ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Incipient Species ◽  
Pseudacris Crucifer ◽  
Full Analysis ◽  
American Frog

Reproductive isolation is the hallmark of speciation as defined by the biological species concept. A species that is evolving towards reproductive isolation, but has not reached full isolation, is defined as an incipient species. One mechanism used by incipient species to further drive speciation is the use of mate recognition signals. The spring peeper, Pseudacris crucifer, is a North American frog that can be classified as an incipient species, as previous studies have found 6 distinct mitochondrial lineages within its range. Spring peepers use vocal signals for mate recognition and exhibit a female choice mating system where the males call to attract females. This study investigates the evolution of calling in spring peepers. Using calls from each lineage across the full range of spring peepers, I analyzed 11 different characteristics to determine whether the calls were different, and if so, which characteristics are being selected for. Preliminary evidence suggests that the calls between the lineages are distinct and that certain characteristics of the call are more heavily selected for than others. Full analysis on the data has not been completed at this time. This study will expand the understanding of the evolution of spring peepers, as well as offer insight into the role of mating systems on reproductive isolation.

scholarly journals Arguments that Prehistorical and Modern Humans Belong to the Same Species

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Kühne
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Homo Neanderthalensis ◽  
Out Of Africa

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.  

A timeline for the acquisition of symbolic cognition in the human lineage

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Tattersall
Keyword(s):  
Brain Function ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Skeletal Structure ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Brain Volumes ◽  
Symbolic Cognition ◽  
The World ◽  
Neural Underpinnings ◽  
Fossil Records ◽  
Mental Symbols

Human beings are symbolic in the sense that they—uniquely—partition the world into a vocabulary of mental symbols that can be recombined to make statements not only about things as they are, but as they might be. An appraisal of the archaeological and fossil records shows that this unusual way of manipulating information was a recent acquisition, and one that occurred within the tenure of Homo sapiens on the planet. Almost certainly, the necessary neural underpinnings were exaptively acquired along with the distinctive skeletal structure of Homo sapiens, although the new potential was only subsequently released by a necessarily cultural stimulus. This stimulus was most likely the spontaneous and sudden invention of language, the quintessential symbolic activity. That the algorithmic change in brain function involved was more frugal metabolically than its intuitive predecessor is strongly supported by the observed 12.7 percent diminution in average human brain volumes since the late Pleistocene.

Evolution of intentional teaching

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Gärdenfors ◽  
Anders Högberg
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Symbolic Language ◽  
Human Species ◽  
Evolution Of Language ◽  
Archaeological Evidence ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Teaching By Demonstration

Only among humans is teaching intentional, socially structured, and symbolically mediated. In this chapter, evidence regarding the evolution of the mindreading and communicative capacities underlying intentional teaching is reviewed. Play, rehearsal, and apprenticeship are discussed as central to the analyses of teaching. We present a series of levels of teaching. First of all, we separate non-intentional from intentional teaching. For non-intentional teaching, we discuss facilitation and approval/disapproval and analyze examples from non-human species. We then distinguish between six levels of intentional teaching: (1) intentional approval/disapproval, (2) drawing attention, (3) demonstrating, (4) communicating concepts, (5) explaining concept relations, and (6) narrating. We hypothesize that level after level has been added during the evolution of teaching. We analyze communicative requirements for the levels, concluding that displaced communication is required for level 4 and symbolic language only for levels 5 to 6. We focus on the role of demonstration and pantomime and argue that pantomime has been instrumental in the evolution of language. We present archaeological evidence for when the different levels of teaching emerge. We argue that learning Oldowan technology requires teaching by demonstration, and that learning Acheulean hand-axe technology requires communicating concepts. It follows that several levels of intentional teaching predate homo sapiens.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document