Unknown: Cave of Bones - Netflix new doc
Fascinating!
https://news.wisc.edu/south-african-cave-yields-yet-more-fossils-of-a-newfound-relative/
South African cave yields yet more fossils of a newfound relative
The discovery of the new Homo naledi fossils, representing the remains of at least three juvenile and adult specimens, includes a “wonderfully complete skull,” says UW-Madison anthropologist John Hawks.
ils, says finding more remains of multiple individuals in a chamber some distance from the chamber containing the original Homo naledi fossils lends heft to the idea that Homo naledi was caching its dead — a surprising behavior that suggests great intelligence and possibly the first stirrings of culture.
A Pit Burial - hole that is dug and a body put in and covered up -
Other burial sites were dug horizontally into slopes, with bodies placed inside, showing that the remains didn’t end up there by other, nondeliberate means, Berger said.
“It’s not a body that died in a depression or hole. It was a whole body that was covered in dirt and then decayed within the grave itself, in part demonstrating that it was buried at the time as a whole flesh entity, but not by some dramatic collapse or being washed in,” Berger said.
Homo naledi, representing the skeletons of at least 18 individuals,” Hawks says. “There are more Homo naledi specimens than any other extinct species or population of hominins except for Neanderthals.”
The notion that Homo naledi were caching their dead in underground chambers that are exceedingly difficult to get to has one parallel in Neanderthals. In a deep Spanish cave known as Sima de los Huesos, there is evidence that Neanderthals were caching the bodies of their dead companions 400,000 years ago.
“What is so provocative about Homo naledi is that these are creatures with brains one third the size of ours,” Hawks says. “This is clearly not a human, yet it seems to share a very deep aspect of behavior that we recognize, an enduring care for other individuals that continues after their deaths. It awes me that we may be seeing the deepest roots of human cultural practices.”
Homo naledi displayed a unique combination of human and non-human traits throughout its skeleton. Prof Stringer explains, 'Some of Homo naledi's features, such as its hands, wrist and feet, are very similar to those of modern humans and Neanderthals. 'Other characteristics are much more primitive.
Homo naledi's curved fingers suggest the species retained an apelike ability to climb trees, while its long thumb points to a capability for tool use.Oct 6, 2015
https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2021/08/my-trps1-gene-claim-on-height-from.html
A mysterious but well-preserved hominid skull found nearly a century ago comes from a population that lived in Africa around 300,000 years ago, as the earliest Homo sapiens were evolving, a new study finds. The result suggests that later Middle Pleistocene Africa contained multiple contemporaneous hominin lineages (that is, Homo sapiens8,9, H. heidelbergensis/H. rhodesiensis and Homo naledi10,11), similar to Eurasia, where Homo neanderthalensis, the Denisovans, Homo floresiensis,Homo luzonensisand perhaps also Homo heidelbergensis and Homo erectus12 were found contemporaneously. the super-archaics were in the first wave of hominids who left Africa,” Rogers says. ...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10816-020-09501-7
We develop a framework to differentiate the technological niches of co-existing hominin species by reviewing some theoretical biases influential in thinking about techno-behaviours of extinct hominins, such as a teleological bias in discussing technological evolution. We suggest that some stone-tool classification systems underestimate technological variability, while overestimating the complexity of the behaviours most commonly represented. To model the likely technological niches of extinct populations, we combine ecological principles (i.e. competitive exclusion) with physical anthropology and the archaeological record. We test the framework by applying it to the co-existence of Homo naledi and Homo sapiens during the late Middle Pleistocene in southern Africa. Based on our analysis, we suggest that tool use was probably not an essential part of H. naledi’s niche, but that technology occasionally provided caloric benefits. In contrast, tool use was a structural part of the H. sapiens way of life. We provide reasoning for our interpretation that the latter population is associated with more sophisticated reduction strategies and the development of prepared core technology. The method also has applicability to cases such as the co-existence of different toolmakers during the Earlier Stone Age (ESA) in East Africa and the co-existence of Neanderthals and H. sapiens in Eurasia.
small-brained hominins co-existed with large-brained ones on the same landscape.
Brain size is an influential concept in human evolution, also used as a criterion for the inclusion of species in the genus Homo (Wood 2014). Increasing brain size is often assumed to confer greater cognitive ability (but see Lombard and Högberg 2021 for later humans). As a result, subsistence strategies, technological repertoires, and social systems are thought to become more elaborate (Foley and Gamble 2009). However, large brains also entail significant evolutionary costs, due to high energetic demands (e.g. Aiello and Key 2002; Isler and van Schaik 2009; Navarrete et al. 2011). This suggests encephalising hominins faced strong selection pressures favouring brain growth.
It appears that distinct large-brained taxa co-existed in Africa (Hublin et al. 2017; Grün et al. 2020). This is supported by genetic indications for archaic admixture in contemporary genomes (Hammer et al. 2011). For the purposes of our study, we regard these fossils as belonging to an evolutionary lineage with a last common ancestor that lived at a more recent time than the last common ancestor of H. naledi and the larger-brained populations. Both early H. sapiens and H. heidelbergensis/rhodesiensis have been found associated with Middle Stone Age stone artefacts (Richter et al. 2017; Grün et al. 2020). The specimens of Elandsfontein, Kabwe, and Florisbad demonstrate that the encephalising lineage was present in southern Africa during the Middle Pleistocene. The age estimate of H. naledi implies that the encephalising lineage co-existed with a small-brained species—challenging notions of s steady temporal increase in brain size across different hominin species.
Homo Naledi likely made fire!
Homo naledi was able to see what they were doing inside the caves by using fire. There is evidence spread throughout the caves, including soot, charcoal and burnt bone, to show that they were actively setting fires, Berger said.
Yet, from such discoveries, we can document a long and varied record of organic tools from bone digging implements in South Africa at 2.3 Mya (Backwell and d'Errico 2008; Stammers et al. 2018), to in Indonesian H. erectus shell tools at 500 ka (Joordens et al. 2015), and wooden spears (~ 300 ka) and digging sticks (~ 170 ka) used by Neanderthals (Aranguren et al. 2018; Milks et al. 2019). Taphonomy thus largely obscures a major component of hominin tool use.
Similarly, the use of unmodified stones is understudied, due to a lack of sound methodological approaches (Caruana et al. 2014). Nevertheless, it is clearly in evidence in later populations that exhibit obligatory tool use such as Neanderthals (Pop et al. 2018). The oldest knapped stone tools may date back to 3.3 Mya although the stratigraphic provenance of the published artefacts has been critiqued (Harmand et al. 2015; Lewis and Harmand 2016; Domínguez-Rodrigo and Alcalá 2017; Archer et al. 2020). In any event, it appears that knapped stone tool use was occasional until ~ 1.7 Mya (Shea 2017). And knapping was not practised equally by all hominin populations. This is illustrated by the potential ‘loss’ of knapped stone tool technologies by Homo erectus populations inhabiting the Far East (Joordens et al. 2015). The use of archaeologically less visible tool types likely exerted important selective pressures on hominin lifeways.
a small-brained species (Berger et al. 2015; Dirks et al. 2015), was sympatric with large-brained H. sapiens sensu lato in southern Africa (Lombard et al. 2018). The species was discovered in a deep cave context near Johannesburg, South Africa. Based on its primitive anatomical characters it was originally anticipated that H. naledi would shed light on the “early evolution of humans and their close relatives” (Berger et al. 2015, pp. 3). A dating programme subsequently constrained the likely age of the fossil deposit to between 335 and 236 ka—the late Middle Pleistocene (Dirks et al. 2017).
Berger et al. (2017) argue that H. naledi is a potential author of prepared core technology typical of the Middle Stone Age. For example, they say: “H. naledi has traits that were long considered to be adaptations for creating material culture. Its wrist, hand and fingertip morphology share several derived features with Neanderthals and modern humans that are absent in H. habilis, H. floresiensis, and Au. sediba (Kivell et al., 2015). If these features evolved to support habitual tool manufacture in Neanderthals and modern humans, then it is reasonable to conclude that H. naledi was also fully competent in using tools” (Berger et al. 2017: 9). “MSA variants are characterized by the manufacture of blades and by the presence of the Levallois flaking technique and hafted implements […]” (Berger et al. 2017:10). “Considering the context, it is possible that H. naledi sustained MSA traditions” (Berger et al. 2017: 10). Yet, as already mentioned, large-brained taxa (Neanderthals, H. sapiens, H. heidelbergensis) are widely accepted as makers of such Levallois (mode 3) technologies (e.g. Eren and Lycett 2012).
The combination of derived features facilitating tool use and indications for intensive arboreal locomotion is unknown in other hominins. As such, it is unclear if there is a loss of functionality implied for either behaviour in H. naledi (Kivell et al. 2015). Some of the derived anatomy was likely inherited from the common ancestor of H. naledi and its closest relatives H. antecessor and H. erectus (Dembo, et al. 2016). But due to the rarity of fossil hands (Kivell, et al. 2015), it is unclear to what degree H. naledi’s wrist anatomy was inherited and to what degree H. naledi was itself under selection for an effective precision grip.
Homo Naledi was found buried with a Stone Tool in the Hand - buried with objects!
it looks like a blade....
The last common ancestor of H. naledi and its closest relatives (H. antecessor, H. heidelbergensis, H. sapiens, and Neanderthals) likely knapped stone tools (Dembo et al. 2016)
Instead, we propose the small-brained lineage likely evolved a reliance on simple transmission mechanisms and latent solutions (Tennie, et al. 2017), which could lead to the habitual use of tools, and to expedient ways of shaping them, such as grinding down the tips of digging implements or producing flakes with bipolar reduction. We therefore hypothesise that H. naledi occupied a niche focusing on the efficient exploitation of plant foods, insects, and probably small prey such as birds, lizards, rodents, etc. They likely relied on their fat reserves and on low-quality vegetable fallback foods to deal with uncertainty in food supply (Navarrete et al. 2011). In such a niche, the use of relatively simple, perhaps non-knapped tools, would result in important caloric and fitness benefits, differentiating their niches from both knowledge-intensive foraging by H. sapiens and the generalist, omnivore chacma baboon.
Carved Pictographs in the rocks in the cave - by Homo Naledi!
Dec 13, 2019 — It has a number of primitive features in its anatomy and is most similar to early Homo species like H. habilis, H. rudolfensis and H. erectus.
The symbols include deeply carved hashtag-like cross-hatchings and other geometric shapes. Similar symbols found in other caves were carved by early Homo sapiens 80,000 years ago and Neanderthals 60,000 years ago and were thought to have been used as a way to record and share information.
“These recent findings suggest intentional burials, the use of symbols, and meaning-making activities by Homo naledi. It seems an inevitable conclusion that in combination they indicate that this small-brained species of ancient human relatives was performing complex practices related to death,” said Berger, lead author on two of the studies and coauthor on the third, in a statement. “That would mean not only are humans not unique in the development of symbolic practices, but may not have even invented such behaviors.”
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/05/world/homo-naledi-burials-carvings-scn/index.html
Dolomite is halfway to a diamond (at the top of the scale) in terms of hardness, which means it would have taken an extreme amount of time and effort to carve into the walls, Berger said.
Riadh Abed, Paul St John-Smith Cambridge University Press, Sep 29, 2022 book on evolution
So Homo Erectus became hairless over 2 million years yet Naledi still had primate hair!!
Homo Erectus survived till 100,000 years ago...
"the precise place of Homo Naledi on the hominin tree remains unanswered"
Closer to the older Homo Habilis than Erectus? Or like floresiensis - with a latter adaption of smaller size... 5 feet 2 inches is tallest height....It's shoulder girdle made it well-adapted to the rock climbing where it was found....
The "ghost archaic" accounting for the small stature of Pygmies and San Bushmen is a still unknown archaic "ghost" hominin that interbred AFTER the San Bushmen left Africa to spread around the world! aka an introgression by an introgressor. 2% to 19% of West Africans have this "ghost archaic" that is possibly Homo Heidelbergenesis (700,000 year old ancestor of Neanderthal/Denisovan/Sapiens and derived from Homo Erectus).
The problem with trying to find out is that despite the rich fossil human record in Africa – once home to Homo sapiens, Homo naledi, Homo erectus and others – the continent has so far yielded no genomes from archaic humans.
This population split from the ancestor of modern-day humans and Neanderthals between 360,000 years ago and one million years ago, before modern humans and Neanderthals split from each other.
Whether the enigmatic ‘ghost’ hominin is one that’s been seen in the fossil record – Homo erectus, perhaps, or Homo naledi from southern Africa – remains a mystery. Given the lack of genetic information on archaic humans from Africa, it’s incredibly hard to pinpoint, says Sankararaman.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/west-africans-share-genes-with-ancient-mystery-man/
https://subspecieist.com/phenotypes/physiognomy-modern-africans/
San have a rounder shape at the back of the head than the Pygmies. Naledi did not have such a round shape to the back of the head. So I would say Pygmies and Naledi are closer and then another thing in between may be in the San.
It is possible that the Xu San have less Homo naledi in than the Kwe San. The eye shape and the mouth shape in the Kwe San of the Central inland Cape is different from the Xu San. The 1 group has more slanted eyes and the other group has more beady eyes.
https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/37/10/2944/5874945?login=false
https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(23)00101-0.pdf
We observe that the ancestors of southern African San and central African rainforest hunter-gatherers (RHG) diverged from other populations >200 kya and maintained a large effective population size. We observe evidence for ancient population structure in Africa and for multiple introgression events from “ghost” populations with highly diverged genetic lineages. Although currently geographically isolated, we observe evidence for gene flow between eastern and southern Khoesan-speaking hunter-gatherer populations lasting until ∼12 kya.
When the team allowed for gene flow in their models, they found that the southern African Khoesan-speaking group, the San, as well as Central African, rainforest-dwelling hunter-gatherers appeared at the root of the tree. "That's a very novel result," Tishkoff says. Previous analyses had pointed to only the San as descending from the most ancient populations.
They also found that the San and Central Africa hunter-gatherer groups split from one another, and from other known populations, more than 200,000 years ago.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/03/230302114147.htm
analysis of modern and ancient DNA indicates that there has been gene flow between the ancestors of the Hadza and Sandawe and the ancestors of the San, which could potentially explain some similarities in their language.
Sent to Jerome Lewis!
When the team allowed for gene flow in their models, they found that the southern African Khoesan-speaking group, the San, as well as Central African, rainforest-dwelling hunter-gatherers appeared at the root of the tree. "That's a very novel result," Tishkoff says. Previous analyses had pointed to only the San as descending from the most ancient populations.
They also found that the San and Central Africa hunter-gatherer groups split from one another, and from other known populations, more than 200,000 years ago.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/03/230302114147.htm
https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/penn-genomic-study-indigenous-africans-paints-complex-picture-human-origins-and-local-adaptation
analysis of modern and ancient DNA indicates that there has been gene flow between the ancestors of the Hadza and Sandawe and the ancestors of the San, which could potentially explain some similarities in their language.
“There are things about the antiquity of the Bushmen’s culture that we didn’t know. A musicologist found very important music which was used at a woman’s first menarche called ‘elan music’ (honoring the fat-rich antelope). This ‘elan music’ was also present in other language groups of other Bushmen language groups and also the noun-less speakers who are not exactly Bushmen but they’re related. This means that way back before these groups diverged,
somebody invented or composed (this) music and then they took it with them.”
Interview with Elizabeth Marshall Thomas, Paula Gordon Show (Peterborough, New Hampshire, July
19, 2008).
thanks,
drew hempel
No comments:
Post a Comment