I expected some sophisticated statistical number crunching, but anyway, nice,
short and easy to understand paper...

--- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com, David Timpe <dptimpe@...> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure *Significance* even qualifies as a peer-reviewed journal.  Oh,
> well.  The pictures are nice, and it's something open access from Wiley.
>
> Dave
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Steve Wang <swang003@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > This is a nice and colored compendium on current development but nothing
> > really new if you have been following the debate--JHE's November special
> > issue on *H. floresiensis* (13 articles) is now in print.  I've uploaded
> > the Jungers/Baab paper in *Significance *for those interested...
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com, "bramhesse" <br.hessels@> wrote:
> > >
> > > From the journal Significance. The paper is open acces.
> > > http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122688405/abstract
> > > <http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122688405/abstract>
> > >
> > >
> > > The geometry of hobbits: Homo floresiensis and human evolution
> > >
> > > William Jungers and Karen Baab
> > >
> > > ABSTRACT
> > >
> > > Until quite recently modern humans shared the earth with now extinct
> > > relatives—Neanderthals and others—in Europe and Asia. Homo
> > > floresiensis—dubbed the "hobbits" in the popular press—is the
> > > most recent, and the most surprising, addition to the human family tree.
> > > Were the tiny hobbit people of Flores dwarfed descendents of known
> > > species, modern humans suffering from a skull-shrinking genetic disease
> > > or a new species entirely?William Jungers and Karen Baab look at the
> > > time, the space and the body-shape of the astonishing hobbits.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

I don't get the impression that in their case lumping means that populations are "really" the same and that differences are unimportant.

These three groups,  A. anamensis ----new finds from Woranso-Mille----A. afarensis, document part of an evolving lineage, interesting in itself, but not easy to describe in terms of species definitions.

--- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com, Anne Gilbert <avgilbert@...> wrote:
>
> Dave:
>
> The people who made these assessments are apparently "lumpers". Which is interesting, because there is even more "splitting" of australopithecines, as far as I can tell, than there is with all these species("species"?) of Homo.
> Anne G
>
>
>
>
>
> Looks like the species problem again.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Steve Wang swang003@... wrote:
>
>
> New hominid fossils from Woranso-Mille (Central Afar, Ethiopia) and taxonomy of early Australopithecus
> Yohannes Haile-Selassie 1 *, Beverly Z. Saylor 2, Alan Deino 3, Mulugeta Alene 4, Bruce M. Latimer 5
>
> 1The Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Cleveland, OH 44106
> 2Department of Earth Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106
> 3Berkeley Geochronology Center, Berkeley, CA 94709
> 4Department of Earth Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
> 5Department of Anthropology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106
>
> Keywords
> Australopithecus • Pliocene • taxonomy • Woranso-Mille • Ethiopia
>
> Abstract
> The phylogenetic relationship between Australopithecus anamensis and Australopithecus afarensis has been hypothesized as ancestor-descendant. However, the weakest part of this hypothesis has been the absence of fossil samples between 3.6 and 3.9 million years ago. Here we describe new fossil specimens from the Woranso-Mille site in Ethiopia that are directly relevant to this issue. They derive from sediments chronometrically dated to 3.57-3.8 million years ago. The new fossil specimens are largely isolated teeth, partial mandibles, and maxillae, and some postcranial fragments. However, they shed some light on the relationships between Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis. The dental morphology shows closer affinity with Au. anamensis from Allia Bay/Kanapoi (Kenya) and Asa Issie (Ethiopia) than with Au. afarensis from Hadar (Ethiopia). However, they are intermediate in dental and mandibular morphology between Au. anamensis and the older Au. afarensis material from Laetoli. The new fossils lend strong support to the hypothesized ancestor-descendant relationship between these two early Australopithecus species. The Woranso-Mille hominids cannot be unequivocally assigned to either taxon due to their dental morphological intermediacy. This could be an indication that the Kanapoi, Allia Bay, and Asa Issie Au. anamensis is the primitive form of Au. afarensis at Hadar with the Laetoli and Woranso-Mille populations sampling a mosaic of morphological features from both ends. It is particularly difficult to draw a line between Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis in light of the new discoveries from Woranso-Mille. The morphology provides no evidence that Au. afarensis and Au. anamensis represent distinct taxa. Am J Phys Anthropol 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the palanthsci
group.

   File        : /Balter - Better Homes and Hearth, Neandertal-Style - 09.pdf
   Uploaded by : bramhesse <br.hessels@...>
   Description : Balter - Better Homes and Hearth, Neandertal-Style - 09

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palanthsci/files/Balter%20-%20Better%20Homes%20and\
%20Hearth%2C%20Neandertal-Style%20-%2009.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

bramhesse <br.hessels@...>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the palanthsci
group.

   File        : /Johnson - Megafaunal Collapse intro - 09.pdf
   Uploaded by : bramhesse <br.hessels@...>
   Description : Johnson - Megafaunal Collapse intro

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palanthsci/files/Johnson%20-%20Megafaunal%20Collap\
se%20intro%20-%2009.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

bramhesse <br.hessels@...>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the palanthsci
group.

   File        : /Gill - Megafaunal Collapse - 09.pdf
   Uploaded by : bramhesse <br.hessels@...>
   Description : Gill - Megafauna collapse

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palanthsci/files/Gill%20-%20Megafaunal%20Collapse%\
20-%2009.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

bramhesse <br.hessels@...>

 

 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the palanthsci
group.

File : /Balter - Better Homes and Hearth, Neandertal-Style - 09.pdf
Uploaded by : bramhesse <br.hessels@planet.nl>
Description : Balter - Better Homes and Hearth, Neandertal-Style - 09

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palanthsci/files/Balter%20-%20Better%20Homes%20and%20Hearth%2C%20Neandertal-Style%20-%2009.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

bramhesse <br.hessels@planet.nl>

 

 

I don't get the impression that in their case lumping means that populations are "really" the same and that differences are unimportant.

These three groups,  A. anamensis ----new finds from Woranso-Mille----A. afarensis, document part of an evolving lineage, interesting in itself, but not easily to discribe in terms of species definitions.

--- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com, Anne Gilbert <avgilbert@...> wrote:
>
> Dave:
>
> The people who made these assessments are apparently "lumpers". Which is interesting, because there is even more "splitting" of australopithecines, as far as I can tell, than there is with all these species("species"?) of Homo.
> Anne G
>
>
>
>
>
> Looks like the species problem again.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Steve Wang swang003@... wrote:
>
>
> New hominid fossils from Woranso-Mille (Central Afar, Ethiopia) and taxonomy of early Australopithecus
> Yohannes Haile-Selassie 1 *, Beverly Z. Saylor 2, Alan Deino 3, Mulugeta Alene 4, Bruce M. Latimer 5
>
> 1The Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Cleveland, OH 44106
> 2Department of Earth Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106
> 3Berkeley Geochronology Center, Berkeley, CA 94709
> 4Department of Earth Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
> 5Department of Anthropology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106
>
> Keywords
> Australopithecus • Pliocene • taxonomy • Woranso-Mille • Ethiopia
>
> Abstract
> The phylogenetic relationship between Australopithecus anamensis and Australopithecus afarensis has been hypothesized as ancestor-descendant. However, the weakest part of this hypothesis has been the absence of fossil samples between 3.6 and 3.9 million years ago. Here we describe new fossil specimens from the Woranso-Mille site in Ethiopia that are directly relevant to this issue. They derive from sediments chronometrically dated to 3.57-3.8 million years ago. The new fossil specimens are largely isolated teeth, partial mandibles, and maxillae, and some postcranial fragments. However, they shed some light on the relationships between Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis. The dental morphology shows closer affinity with Au. anamensis from Allia Bay/Kanapoi (Kenya) and Asa Issie (Ethiopia) than with Au. afarensis from Hadar (Ethiopia). However, they are intermediate in dental and mandibular morphology between Au. anamensis and the older Au. afarensis material from Laetoli. The new fossils lend strong support to the hypothesized ancestor-descendant relationship between these two early Australopithecus species. The Woranso-Mille hominids cannot be unequivocally assigned to either taxon due to their dental morphological intermediacy. This could be an indication that the Kanapoi, Allia Bay, and Asa Issie Au. anamensis is the primitive form of Au. afarensis at Hadar with the Laetoli and Woranso-Mille populations sampling a mosaic of morphological features from both ends. It is particularly difficult to draw a line between Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis in light of the new discoveries from Woranso-Mille. The morphology provides no evidence that Au. afarensis and Au. anamensis represent distinct taxa. Am J Phys Anthropol 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
>

 

 

There's some suprising hints at cognitive complexity in this story.  The paper is in PLoS one, if you're antsy to read it.

 

Dave

All:


A friendly BBC correspondent, stationed in Indonesia, went to see a local celebrity. . . .
Anne G

BBC News | News Front Page | World Edition Get the latest BBC World news: international news, features and analysis from Africa, Americas, South Asia, Asia-Pacific, Europe and the Middle East.

Paleo-celebrity In From Our Own Correspondent A journey to the Java home of an ancient alpha male

All:

I don't know how interesting any of this information will be at the moment, nor can I quite remember if anybody has posted anything on this forum previously ab out this. But it seems there is a cornucopia of articles in JHE

All:

Sorry for the double mailing here. I got cut off in the middle. Anyway, this article and JHE have a bunch of papers about the "hobbits". Which I'm sure some people will be interested in reading.
Anne G

Many things have significance to many other things. Must be a journal of broad
scope...

--- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com, David Timpe <dptimpe@...> wrote:
>
> It all depends on the significance of the word significance.
>
> Bill Clinton.
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:22 AM, bramhesse <br.hessels@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I expected some sophisticated statistical number crunching, but anyway,
> > nice, short and easy to understand paper...
> >
> >
> > --- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com <palanthsci%40yahoogroups.com>, David
> > Timpe <dptimpe@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not sure *Significance* even qualifies as a peer-reviewed journal.
> > Oh,
> > > well. The pictures are nice, and it's something open access from Wiley.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> >  > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Steve Wang <swang003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is a nice and colored compendium on current development but
> > nothing
> > > > really new if you have been following the debate--JHE's November
> > special
> > > > issue on *H. floresiensis* (13 articles) is now in print. I've uploaded
> > > > the Jungers/Baab paper in *Significance *for those interested...
> > > >
> > > > -Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In palanthsci@yahoogroups.com <palanthsci%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "bramhesse" <br.hessels@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > From the journal Significance. The paper is open acces.
> > > > > http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122688405/abstract
> > > > > <http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122688405/abstract>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The geometry of hobbits: Homo floresiensis and human evolution
> > > > >
> > > > > William Jungers and Karen Baab
> > > > >
> > > > > ABSTRACT
> > > > >
> > > > > Until quite recently modern humans shared the earth with now extinct
> > > > > relatives—Neanderthals and others—in Europe and Asia. Homo
> > > > > floresiensis—dubbed the "hobbits" in the popular press—is the
> > > > > most recent, and the most surprising, addition to the human family
> > tree.
> > > > > Were the tiny hobbit people of Flores dwarfed descendents of known
> > > > > species, modern humans suffering from a skull-shrinking genetic
> > disease
> > > > > or a new species entirely?William Jungers and Karen Baab look at the
> > > > > time, the space and the body-shape of the astonishing hobbits.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

 

 

At least that's what this study reported in Science Daily says.  It would seem to be another argument against those who occasionally suggest that some kuru-like disease killed off the Neandertals.  It's also another case of recent (and in this case, very recent) evolution.

Dave

All:

It looks like at least some "modern" humans had tooth growth patterns that were rather similar to those of Neandertals. . . . John Hawks at his finest, as usual.
Anne G

 

 

At least that's what this study reported in Science Daily says.  It would seem to be another argument against those who occasionally suggest that some kuru-like disease killed off the Neandertals.  It's also another case of recent (and in this case, very recent) evolution.

Dave

Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve?

http://www.archaeologydaily.com/news/200911242702/Are-Chinese-descendants-of-an-\
African-Eve.html

2009/11/25 Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51@...>
>
>
> Can somebody please explain to me how the same species, capable of complete
fertile interbreeding, can evolve independently in different locations?

Can't do.

Then again, the article is poorly written and demonstrates little or
no grasp of what multiregionalism is.

Mike:

 

FWIW, very few people seem to have a grasp of the multiregional concept.

Anne G

 

2009/11/25 Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51@yahoo.co.uk>
>
>
> Can somebody please explain to me how the same species, capable of complete fertile interbreeding, can evolve independently in different locations?

Can't do.

Then again, the article is poorly written and demonstrates little or
no grasp of what multiregionalism is.

 

 

Although I think it likely that Neandertal cannibalized members of the group that died during periods of scarce game, I don't think it was a routine practice.  I am still not sure that some of the evidence for cannibalism may not have been raiding AMH who still practice cannibalism.  I have visited the Fore in the PNG Highlands and I saw someone wasting from Kuru.  It was pitiful.  The question is whether this prion disease and Creutzfeldt-Jakob, GSS and FFI existed in the Paleolithic.  Unfortunately we cannot ID a prion disease from just skeletal fossils but as the research goes on maybe there will be some clues about the origins of prions.  Were they endogenous retroviruses that lost their nucleic material?  I hate not being actively engaged in research any more.  Makes me nuts. LOL

 

Jack

 

Can somebody please explain to me how the same species, capable of complete fertile interbreeding, can evolve independently in different locations? Doesn't that fly in the face of every known genetic and evolutionary principle?   Paul --- On Wed, 25/11/09, Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal.net> wrote: From: Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal.net> Subject: [palanthsci] Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? To: palanthsci@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, 25 November, 2009, 5:55   Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? http://www.archaeol ogydaily. com/news/ 200911242702/ Are-Chinese- descendants- of-an-African- Eve.html

 

 



In Weidenreich's original formulation of the hypothesis multiregional evolution wasn't supposed to happen independently. The basic idea is that a widely distributed species (Homo erectus) diversified and adapted to local conditions while having just enough gene flow between the different demes to prevent any speciation. Modern multiregionalists like Wolpoff regard H. erectus as a just a sub- or chronospecies of sapiens. Thus the species H. sapiens really only evolved once (as erectus) and in one location (Africa), but the sapiens characteristics evolved later as all the different demes evolved in (incomplete) geographic isolation with just enough gene flow to spread the sapiens traits around the planet and prevent speciation. I guess it is a theoretically possible scenario, but the RooA scenario is a lot simpler. (Not to mention better supported.)

 

 

Can somebody please explain to me how the same species, capable of complete fertile interbreeding, can evolve independently in different locations? Doesn't that fly in the face of every known genetic and evolutionary principle?   Paul --- On Wed, 25/11/09, Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal.net> wrote: From: Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal.net> Subject: [palanthsci] Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? To: palanthsci@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, 25 November, 2009, 5:55   Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? http://www.archaeol ogydaily. com/news/ 200911242702/ Are-Chinese- descendants- of-an-African- Eve.html

Hi Paul,

I would purchase a copy of Wolpoff's Paleoanthropology if I were you
to be able to understand the intricacies of the model (there are
different models of multiregionalism anyways; Trinkaus's differs, for
example) in detail. There are also a number of papers from the early
1990s which give his stance and the reasons behind it.

Mike

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Date: 2009/11/26
Subject: [Safaannounce-l] Papers on Africa in Antiquity
To: safaannounce-l@



Dear Colleagues,

The most recent issue of Antiquity (December 2009) has ‘hit the ether’ so to
speak, and is now online. There are three exciting research articles on
African topics:

http://antiquity.ac.uk/index.html

E. Huysecom, M. Rasse, L. Lespez, K. Neumann, A. Fahmy, A. Ballouche, S.
Ozainne, M. Maggetti, Ch. Tribolo and S. Soriano, “The emergence of pottery
in Africa during the tenth millennium cal BC: new evidence from Ounjougou
(Mali)”

Nick Brooks, Joanne Clarke, Salvatore Garfi and Anne Pirie, “The archaeology
of Western Sahara: results of environmental and archaeological
reconnaissance”

Thomas X. Schuhmacher, João Luís Cardoso and Arun Banerjee, “Sourcing
African ivory in Chalcolithic Portugal”

In addition, there is a book review of Adrar Bous: archaeology of a Central
Saharan granitic ring complex in Niger by J. Desmond Clark, Elizabeth J.
Agrilla, Diana C. Crader, Alison Galloway, Elena A.A. Garcea, Diane
Gifford-Gonzalez, David N. Hall, Andrew B. Smith and Martin A.J. Williams.

Also check-out the online gallery for news about recent work at Kalambo
Falls by Larry Barham and colleagues
http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/barham322/

And if that was not enough, there is a good plug for African Archaeology and
a mention of the forthcoming PAA/SAfA meeting in Dakar next year in the
December editorial.  http://antiquity.ac.uk/ant/083/ant0830899.htm

Antiquity’s editor Martin Carver, a colleague here at York, is always
reminding me to encourage Africanist colleagues to submit papers to him – so
please do.  And DO make use of the gallery for publishing short updates on
your field projects.

With best wishes

Paul Lane
President, SAfA



Paul Lane, MA, PhD, FSA
HEEAL Project Team Leader
Department of Archaeology,
University of York
King's Manor
York YO1 7EP
UK

 

 

That explains the concept; thanks for that.  Out of Africa seems more likely to me just from an "Ockham's Razor" point of view; these widely scattered sparse populations succesfully meeting up across the whole of Eurasia enough to maintain breeding continuity seems a bit of a stretch.  Also, from what I understand of the fossil and archaeological record, the AMH seem to crop up remarkably rapidly and abruptly, and I'd expect much more gradual change from multi-regional.   Then there's the inductive evidence; do we know of any other species that has clearly evolved multiregionally?   I guess the key point is whether or not H. erectus and H. sapiens are in fact one species.  They seem very different to me; I'm no anatomist but based on the pictures I've seen, if you put an erectus skull and an AMH one on the table, I could tell you which was which pretty easily.  Far more easily than I could tell a lion skull from a tiger skull for example, and they clearly are different species.             In Weidenreich' s original formulation of the hypothesis multiregional evolution wasn't supposed to happen independently. The basic idea is that a widely distributed species (Homo erectus) diversified and adapted to local conditions while having just enough gene flow between the different demes to prevent any speciation. Modern multiregionalists like Wolpoff regard H. erectus as a just a sub- or chronospecies of sapiens. Thus the species H. sapiens really only evolved once (as erectus) and in one location (Africa), but the sapiens characteristics evolved later as all the different demes evolved in (incomplete) geographic isolation with just enough gene flow to spread the sapiens traits around the planet and prevent speciation. I guess it is a theoretically possible scenario, but the RooA scenario is a lot simpler. (Not to mention better supported.)     Can somebody please explain to me how the same species, capable of complete fertile interbreeding, can evolve independently in different locations? Doesn't that fly in the face of every known genetic and evolutionary principle?   Paul --- On Wed, 25/11/09, Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal. net> wrote: From: Joe Cooper <joe0727@sbcglobal. net> Subject: [palanthsci] Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? To: palanthsci@yahoogro ups.com Date: Wednesday, 25 November, 2009, 5:55   Are Chinese descendants of an African Eve? http://www.archaeol ogydaily. com/news/ 200911242702/ Are-Chinese- descendants- of-an-African- Eve.html