400,000-year-old human DNA adds new tangle to our origin

Opmmur

Time Travel Professor
Messages
5,049
400,000-year-old human DNA adds new tangle to our origin story
Alan Boyle, Science Editor NBC News

Dec. 4, 2013 at 1:02 PM ET

2D9844017-131204-coslog-huesos-9a.blocks_desktop_large.jpg

Javier Trueba / Madrid Scientific Films

The Sima de los Huesos people lived about 400,000 years ago in Spain.

The oldest human DNA ever recovered is throwing scientists for a loop: The 400,000-year-old genetic material comes from bones that have been linked to Neanderthals in Spain — but its signature is most similar to that of a different ancient human population from Siberia, known as the Denisovans.

The researchers who did the analysis said their findings show an "unexpected link" between two of our extinct cousin species. Follow-up studies could crack the mystery — not only for the early humans who lived in the cave complex known as Sima de los Huesos (Spanish for "Pit of Bones"), but for other mysterious populations in the Pleistocene epoch.

"Ancient DNA sequencing techniques have become sensitive enough to warrant further investigation of DNA survival at sites where Middle Pleistocene hominins are found," the research team, led by Matthias Meyer and Svante Pääbo of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, wrote in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature. ("Hominin" is the currently accepted term for humans and our close evolutionary cousins.)

As anthropologists are getting better at extracting DNA from ancient bones, genetic mysteries are cropping up more frequently: Last month, researchers at scientific meetings talked about not-yet-published findings that hinted at interbreeding among Neanderthals, Denisovans and previously unknown populations of early humans.

A new standardThe age of the mitochondrial DNA analyzed for the Nature study sets a new standard: Researchers used statistical analysis of the DNA and other samples to estimate that the material was roughly 400,000 years old. That meshed with the estimated age for similar DNA extracted from bear bones found in the same cave.

More than 6,000 human fossils, representing about 28 individuals, have been recovered from the Sima de los Huesos site, a hard-to-get-to cave chamber that lies about 100 feet (30 meters) below the surface in northern Spain. The fossils are unusually well-preserved, thanks in part to the undisturbed cave's constant cool temperature and high humidity.

2D9844019-131204-coslog-bone-9a.blocks_desktop_large.jpg

Javier Trueba / Madrid Scientific Films



The thigh bone of a 400,000-year-old hominin yielded mitochondrial DNA for analysis.

Researchers drilled a series of tiny holes into the cracks in a human femur recovered from the cave to obtain nearly 2 grams (0.07 ounce) of powdered bone. At first, they looked for the signature of ancient nuclear DNA, which could have provided information about the genome of the individual behind the femur — but that information was overwhelmed by the signature of modern-day human contamination.

Then they turned their attention to the mitochondrial DNA, which lies outside the cell's nucleus and is passed down from a mother to her children. That strategy was more successful.

Unusual findingPrevious analysis of bones from the cave had led researchers to assume that the Sima de los Huesos people were closely related to Neanderthals on the basis of their skeletal features. But the mitochondrial DNA was far more similar to that of the Denisovans, an early human population that was thought to have split off from Neanderthals around 640,000 years ago. The first Denisovan specimens were identified in 2010, based on an analysis of 30,000-year-old bones excavated in Siberia.

2D9844018-131204-coslog-skeleton-9a.blocks_desktop_small.jpg

Javier Trueba / Madrid Scientific Films



This skeleton from the Sima de los Huesos cave has been assigned to an early human species known as Homo heidelbergensis. However, researchers say the skeletal structure is similar to that of Neanderthals - so much so that some say the Sima de los Huesos people were actually Neanderthals rather than representatives of Homo heidelbergensis.
The latest DNA analysis sent scientists scrambling for an explanation.

"This unusual finding could be due to at least two different scenarios, both relating to the material inheritance of mtDNA [mitochondrial DNA] and the ease with which it can be lost in a lineage," Chris Stringer, a paleoanthropologist at London's Natural History Museum who was not involved in the Nature study, wrote in an email.

One scenario could be that the DNA was passed down the maternal line from a population that was ancestral to the Sima de los Huesos humans as well as the Denisovans, but that the lineage died out among Neanderthals and modern humans.

The other scenario is that an as-yet-undetermined population interbred with ancestors of the Spanish cave-dwellers as well as the Denisovans. Meyer, Pääbo and their colleagues tentatively favor that scenario. "Based on the fossil record, more than one evolutionary lineage may have existed in Europe during the Middle Pleistocene," they write.

"Either way, this new finding can help us start to disentangle the relationships of the various human groups known from the last 600,000 years," Stringer said. "If more mtDNA can be recovered from the Sima 'population' of fossils, it may demonstrate how these individuals were related to each other, and how varied their population was."

Update for 10:30 p.m. ET Dec. 4: Erik Trinkaus, a paleoanthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, told NBC News that the DNA findings were interesting from a technical standpoint — but he pointed out that the mitochondrial DNA alone doesn't reveal how the Sima de los Huesos people and their ancestors lived. He suspects that further DNA studies will show that the relationships between populations of early humans were messier and more tangled than the typical diagrams of human origins would suggest. That's appropriate, he said, "because I think the real world is messy."
 

Opmmur

Time Travel Professor
Messages
5,049
Did the human family tree just get simpler?
Skull stirs up debate

Alan Boyle, Science Editor NBC News
Oct. 17, 2013 at 2:33 PM ET

8C9411404-131017-coslog-skulls1-930a.blocks_desktop_medium.jpg

Georgian National Museum

An oddball skull from a site in the former Soviet republic of Georgia has sparked a debate over early human evolution.
Putting together the pieces of a 1.8 million-year-old skull from the former Soviet republic of Georgia has led researchers to a surprising conclusion: Specimens that supposedly represent several early human species might be merely different-sized individuals from the same species.

If the conclusion holds up, the skull discovery would require a major rewrite for the story of early human evolution. Such species as Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis, long a part of humanity's "bushy" family tree, could be folded into a wide-ranging species known as Homo erectus.

"It is really an extraordinary find in many respects," Christoph Zollikofer of Zurich's Anthropological Institute and Museum, one of the researchers behind the study published in this week's issue of the journal Science, told reporters during a teleconference.

The key to the claim is the assembly of a fossil called Skull 5. The specimen was discovered in separate pieces at a sprawling excavation in Dmanisi, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from Tbilisi, Georgia's capital. Over the past eight years, Skull 5's jaw and the cranium were painstakingly matched up and compared with four other hominid skulls unearthed at the site.

The researchers were struck by the fact that Skull 5's braincase was relatively small, while the face was relatively large. What's more, other skeletal fossils associated with Skull 5 suggested that the individual's body proportions were much like a modern human's.

8C9411406-131017-coslog-skulls3-930a.blocks_desktop_large.jpg

C. Zollikofer and M. S. Ponce de Leon / Univ. of Zurich

This graphic shows the five skulls found at the Dmanisi dig, numbered 1 through 5.

"Had the braincase and the face of Skull 5 been found as separate fossils at different sites in Africa, they might have been attributed to different species," Zollikofer said in a news release. He and his colleagues also noticed size variations among all five of the Dmanisi skulls — which led them to wonder whether different species in the genus Homo were being defined too narrowly.

An analysis of the various early Homo skulls from Africa, dating from 2.4 million and 1.2 million years ago, found that the size variations were no wider than the variations found in modern humans. The size differences were also in the range for chimpanzees and bonobos, the modern species that are considered closest to humans on the evolutionary tree.

"Since we see a similar pattern and variation in the African fossil record ... it is sensible to assume that there was a single Homo species at that time in Africa," Zollikofer said. "And since the Dmanisi hominids are so similar to the African ones, we further assume that they both represent the same species."

That claim will have to be debated over the months and years ahead. Science quoted other experts as saying Skull 5 and the other fossils from Dmanisi may represent yet another new species in the genus Homo, or perhaps Homo habilis. One paleontologist, Fred Spoor of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, told Science's Ann Gibbons that Skull 5 may well represent Homo erectus. But he balked at the idea that all the early Homo fossils from Africa should be classified as Homo erectus as well.

8C9411405-131017-coslog-skulls2-930a.blocks_desktop_small.jpg

J.H. Matternes

Researchers say the individual represented by Skull 5 had a relatively small braincase but a long face and body proportions similar to a modern human's, as shown in this artist's conception.

The study's lead author, David Lordkipanidze of the Georgian National Museum, told reporters that the Dmanisi site could provide further insights into the migration of early humans and how they interacted with their environment. "It's a real snapshot in time, and maybe a time capsule which preserves the whole ecosystem which existed 1.8 million years ago," he said.

Although the researchers' hypothesis would trim back the earlier branches of the human family tree, it doesn't address what happened during later eras of human evolution. The conventional wisdom is that the descendants of early Homo species differentiated into Neanderthals, Denisovans, so-called "hobbits" and modern Homo sapiens.

"There is a big gap in the fossil record," Zollikofer told NBC News. "I would put a question mark there. Of course it would be nice to say this was the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and us, but we simply don't know."

Update for 3:25 p.m. ET Oct. 17: Arizona State University paleoanthropologist Donald Johanson, who discovered the famous 3.2 million-year-old Lucy fossil skeleton almost four decades ago, said Lordkipanidze and his colleagues have produced "a beautiful little paper" — but he doesn't buy the claim that all of the earliest human species should be lumped together.

"I think it's probably premature to dump everything into Homo erectus," Johanson told NBC News. "This is what you're going to find the most opposition to."

Johanson said the entire collection of specimens of early Homo species from East Africa shows "considerably more variation than you see in this sample [from Dmanisi], which is not surprising, because you're looking at fossils from very different regions."

He said the Dmanisi skulls reminded him of Homo ergaster, an African species that's similar to Homo erectus specimens found farther east. "It strengthens the view that many of us have held, that [Homo] ergaster was the species that got out of Africa to give rise to this Dmanisi population, and that ultimately evolved into Homo erectus in Java," Johanson said.

Skull 5's small braincase also raised interesting questions, because humans living in Africa during the same time period had larger brains. "That may suggest that these populations in Africa and in Georgia were under different selective pressures," Johanson said.

He expected that "there'll be the normal bickering" over how to classify the Dmanisi skulls. Do they represent an existing fossil species, a new species, a subspecies or a sub-subspecies? In any case, Johanson said the newly reported findings will make a significant contribution to the study of early human evolution.

"It's just marvelous to have a real sample from a single locality of the same geological age, and such a comprehensive sample," Johanson told NBC News. "It's unsurpassed for the genus Homo of this antiquity."
 


Top