Metric and geometric morphometric analysis of new hominin fossils from Maba (Guangdong, China)

Dong-fang, Xiao; Bae, Christopher J.; Shen, Guanjun; Delson, Eric; Jin, Jennie J.H.; Webb, Nicole M.; Qiu, Licheng

doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.04.003

Cited by 30 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kaifu (2017) also reviews the "late archaic Homo" record from eastern Asia. It should be noted that some authors refer to these fossils as "mid-Pleistocene Homo" given the nomenclatural baggage with assigning the word "archaic" to a taxonomic group (for various discussions, see Bae 2010;Tattersall 1986;Tattersall and Schwartz 2008;Xiao et al 2014).…”

Section: What Do the Fossils Say?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene

Bae¹,

Douka²,

Petraglia³

2017

Current Anthropology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin and evolution of modern humans continues to be of great interest to the scientific and public communities alike; the field has long been dominated by findings from Europe and Africa. With new discoveries of hominin fossils and archaeological sites, in addition to the application of recent genomic and paleoclimate modeling studies, findings from Asia are serving to revolutionize the field of modern human origins. The identification of Neanderthals and Denisovans in Siberia, for example, along with growing fossil and archaeological evidence for the presence of early modern humans in East and Southeast Asia, much earlier than originally thought, places the spotlight on the evolutionary history of our species in Asia over the last 125,000 years. Exciting and unanticipated new discoveries call for a need to critically reexamine the Asian record. Taking a multidisciplinary perspective, a group of active researchers participated in a week-long Wenner-Gren symposium titled "Human Colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene" (#153) in March 2016. Here we review the major themes and findings emerging from the symposium and discuss avenues to move the field forward.

show abstract

Section: What Do the Fossils Say?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene

Bae¹,

Douka²,

Petraglia³

2017

Current Anthropology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morphological observations were also made by DC on a range of original human remains and casts including Pleistocene remains from Wadjak, Keilor, Kow Swamp, the Willandra Lakes, Zhoukoudian Upper Cave and Liujiang. Metrical data for comparative materials were taken from the literature (Von Bonin, 1931;Suzuki and Hanihara, 1982;Cuong, 1986;Brown, 1989Brown, , 2015Storm, 1995;Wu and Poirier, 1995;Howells, 1996;Matsumura and Zuraina, 1999;Matsumura et al, 2001Matsumura et al, , 2008Bulbeck, 2005;Green and Curnoe, 2005;Matsumura and Pookajorn, 2005;Matsumura and Hudson, 2005;Curnoe and Thorne, 2006;Demeter et al, 2012;Bae et al, 2014;Xiao et al, 2014;Liu et al, 2015) and on casts or original remains by DC. We undertook multivariate analyses of 18 variables combining continuous and discrete (presence/absence) data.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deep Skull from Niah Cave and the Pleistocene Peopling of Southeast Asia

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Deep Skull from Niah Cave in Sarawak (Malaysia) is the oldest anatomically modern human recovered from island Southeast Asia. For more than 50 years its relevance to tracing the prehistory of the region has been controversial. The most widely held view, originating with Brothwell's 1960 description and analysis, is that the Niah individual is related to Indigenous Australians. Here we undertake a new assessment of the Deep Skull and consider its bearing on this question. In doing so, we provide a new and comprehensive description of the cranium including a reassessment of its ontogenetic age, sex, morphology, and affinities. We conclude that this individual was most likely to have been of advanced age and female, rather than an adolescent male as originally proposed. The morphological evidence strongly suggests that the Deep Skull samples the earliest modern humans to have settled Borneo, most likely originating on mainland East Asia. We also show that the affinities of the specimen are most likely to be with the contemporary indigenous people of Borneo, although, similarities to the population sometimes referred to as Philippine Negritos cannot be excluded. Finally, our research suggests that the widely supported "two-layer" hypothesis for the Pleistocene peopling of East/Southeast Asia is unlikely to apply to the earliest inhabitants of Borneo, in-line with the picture emerging from genetic studies of the contemporary people from the region.

show abstract

“…The primary observations from their studies were: Behavioural stages cannot be defined by the presence/absence of various vertebrate faunas, particularly mid-Pleistocene Homo (term as described by Xiao et al. 2014). Behavioural stages cannot be defined strictly by geochronology, because if a site is later found to be much older or younger, then by default it would require the site and materials to be moved to an older or younger cultural stage. Judging from four standard archaeological criteria (raw materials, core reduction, retouch and typology), a distinct ‘Middle Palaeolithic’ is not present in China. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%