Electron Spin Resonance Dating and the Evolution of Modern Humans

Grün, Rainer; Stringer, Chris

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4754.1991.tb00696.x

Cited by 317 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The key fact to emerge is that there is a chronological fault line in the appearance of modern humans. In eastern Africa, northern Africa, southern Africa, and the adjacent Levantine region, the first modern humans are over ∼100,000 years old (Stringer et al 1989;Grun et al 1990;Grun and Stringer 1991). In Europe, eastern Asia, and virtually everywhere else archaic hominids persist until <40,000 years ago, largely unchanged, and modern humans are not found until after these dates (Mercier et al 1991;Hublin et al 1996;Swisher et al 1996).…”

Section: Chronologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Context of Human Genetic Evolution

Foley¹

1998

Genome Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate on modern human origins has often focused on the relationship between genes and fossils. Although more and more genetic evidence has been accumulating in favor of a recent African origin for modern humans, it has been assumed by many that the fossil evidence remains ambiguous. On the contrary, it has been clear for some time that the fossil evidence does not support the multiregional model: Fossils and archeology indicate a pattern of multiple dispersals from and beyond Africa, against which the genetic data can be compared. The continuing value of paleobiology is in complementing genetic information by revealing the context of human evolution: locating the dispersals and extinctions of populations in time and space, correlating these events with the environmental forces that shaped them, and providing an increasingly detailed understanding of the morphology and technology of early humans.Molecular biology has revolutionized the study of human evolution. The importance of fossils as the primary source of information about our past has been steadily undermined as it has become possible to infer detailed aspects of recent human history from the distribution and frequency of genes found around the world today. To some extent, a fusion of paleontological and genetic approaches came about last year with the extraction and sequencing of ancient DNA from an extinct hominid, the Neanderthal type specimen (Krings et al. 1997), but this is likely to remain a rarity. Ancient DNA, however, has been able to confirm that humans and Neanderthals belonged to different populations over the last quarter of a million years and that Neanderthals did become effectively extinct.These results fit in with an increasingly consistent interpretation of human evolutionary genetics. Compared with chimpanzees and other apes, the human population is relatively lacking in genetic diversity (Ruvolo et al. 1993); such genetic variation as does exist occurs primarily within populations rather than between (Relethford and Harpending 1994); African populations are more diverse genetically than those found anywhere else in the world (Vigilant et al. 1991;Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994;Watson et al. 1997); and for the most part, non-African patterns of genetic variation can be treated as a subset of African ones. The chronological and demographic context of the processes of diversification has been strongly disputed, but several genetic systems indicate that living populations derive from a relatively small population (effective population size between 5000 and 50,000 individuals) (Rogers and

show abstract

Section: Chronologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Context of Human Genetic Evolution

Foley¹

1998

Genome Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All were recovered from cave fill of caverns within Pre-Cambrian limestone and are associated with a Levalloiso-Mousterian Middle Stone Age industry, which precedes the Aterian in North Africa. An early electron spin resonance (ESR) study by Grün and Stringer (1991) placed the Jebel Irhoud specimens within the broad interval of 100-200 ka. More recently, T. Smith et al (2007) reported a uranium-series and ESR date for the site of 160 ± 16 ka.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurocranial evolution in modern humans: the case of Jebel Irhoud 1

Bruner

Pearson

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jebel Irhoud 1 represents an almost complete cranium from the North African late Middle Pleistocene. Despite the good preservation of most of its anatomical regions, its phylogenetic position is still uncertain, particularly its relationship to the emergence of the modern human lineage. The present paper supplies a basic morphometric description and comparison of the endocast of Jebel Irhoud 1. The endocast's maximum width is large when compared with the hemispheric length, with values similar to those of Neandertals. Conversely, the frontal width is less pronounced, showing proportions compatible with modern and non-modern human taxa. The vertical proportions are similar to those displayed by Homo erectus, while the lateral proportions are comparable to Neandertals. Furthermore, the upper parietal areas show a certain parasagittal lateral bulging, as in European Neandertals. It remains to be established if this trait evolved independently in both the Neandertal and modern human lineages, or if it was already present in a common ancestor of these two groups. Given that Jebel Irhoud 1 in North Africa and Herto in East Africa have similar geological age, similar facial morphology, but different vault proportions, it seems likely that the origin of the modern human lineage may have predated the origin of many aspects of the modern human brain.

show abstract

“…Neanderthals were craniofacially distinct, highly active, and comparatively very muscular. The fossil remains from the Ϸ80,000-to 100,000-year-old site of Skhul (5) and the Ϸ100,000-year-old site of Qafzeh (1,2), both in Israel, are craniofacially more modern and less muscular than Neanderthals. Both groups are associated with Middle Paleolithic archeological complexes (6)(7)(8)(9), indicating they used typologically and technologically similar toolkits for their subsistence activities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Near Eastern Neanderthals are known from a number of 50,000-to 120,000-year-old sites in Israel, Syria, and Iraq (1)(2)(3)(4). Neanderthals were craniofacially distinct, highly active, and comparatively very muscular.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral inferences from the Skhul/Qafzeh early modern human hand remains

Niewoehner

2001

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two groups of humans are found in the Near East Ϸ100,000 years ago, the late archaic Neanderthals and the early modern Skhul͞ Qafzeh humans. Observations that Neanderthals were more heavily muscled, had stronger upper-limb bones, and possessed unusual shapes and orientations of some upper-limb joint complexes relative to the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids, have led some researchers to conclude that significant between-group upperlimb-related behavioral differences must have been present, despite the association of the two groups with similar Middle Paleolithic archeological complexes. A three-dimensional morphometric analysis of the hand remains of the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids, Neanderthals, early and late Upper Paleolithic humans, and Holocene humans supports the dichotomy. The Skhul͞Qafzeh carpometacarpal remains do not have any unique morphologies relative to the other fossil samples remains examined. However, in the functionally significant metacarpal 1 and 3 bases they resemble Upper Paleolithic humans, not Neanderthals. Furthermore, the Skhul͞Qafzeh sample differs significantly from the Neanderthals in many other aspects of hand functional anatomy. Given the correlations between changes in tool technologies and functional adaptations seen in the hands of Upper Paleolithic humans, it is concluded that the Skhul͞Qafzeh hand remains were adapted to Upper Paleolithic-like manipulative repertoires. These results support the inference of significant behavioral differences between Neanderthals and the Skhul͞Qafzeh hominids and indicate that a significant shift in human manipulative behaviors was associated with the earliest stages of the emergence of modern humans.

show abstract

Electron Spin Resonance Dating and the Evolution of Modern Humans

Cited by 317 publications

References 87 publications

The Context of Human Genetic Evolution

The Context of Human Genetic Evolution

Neurocranial evolution in modern humans: the case of Jebel Irhoud 1

Behavioral inferences from the Skhul/Qafzeh early modern human hand remains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About