门齿孔位置在中国古人类化石与现代人群的表现及其演化意义

魏敦瑞在研究周口店北京直立人化石时发现,位于上颌骨硬腭表面的门齿孔位置在周口店标本靠后,而在现代人靠近齿槽。此后,门齿孔位置作为具有演化意义的形态特征被用于古人类学研究。迄今,对门齿孔位置在中国古人类化石表现的专门研究仅有周口店一件标本,而在现代中国人的数据尚属空白。鉴于此,本文对门齿孔位置在中国古人类化石以及现代中国人标本进行了观察、测量和数据统计。在此基础上,结合世界其他地区古人类数据资料,本文对门齿孔位置在中国古人类化石的表现特点及其演化意义进行了探讨。本研究发现,从更新世早期到更新世晚期,门齿孔位置在中国古人类呈现由后向前的总体变化趋势。更新世早期和中期直立人(郧县曲远河口、周口店)的门齿孔位置都比较靠后;中更新世晚期的部分中国古人类(大荔、长阳、华龙洞)的门齿孔位置前移,并与现代人接近,而金牛山和巢县门齿孔位置比较靠后,位于直立人范围;在更新世晚期,所有中国古人类都比较靠前,位于现代人变异范围。本文对现代人标本的观测显示,门齿孔位置在现代中国人比较靠前。现代人门齿孔大小及形态存在较大变异,这种表现特点在一定程度上影响对门齿孔位置及演化意义的判定。几乎全部现代人标本门齿孔前缘呈...     

水洞沟遗址第2地点古人类“行为现代性”及演化意义

解剖学意义上的现代人及其行为的演化与扩散是古人类学和旧石器考古学关注的重大科学问题。本文对水洞沟第2地点生态、技术、经济社会组织和象征行为方面的行为特征进行分析,于不同的文化层揭示出了不同的创新行为,它们分别预示了不同的演化意义。距今4~2万年间中国北方连续发展的石片石器技术系统从人类行为角度支持中国古人类连续演化的假说,在此理论背景下,探求中国古人类的行为创新需要关注人类行为的演化历程,进而总结创新表现,而非将总结自欧非等地区的现代行为清单与中国的考古学材料简单比对,进而讨论行为的现代与否。现代人出现后中国古人类行为的特殊性和多样性,促使研究者更多地关注行为变异性及不同适应策略产生的原因,而非将一系列的特征总称为现代行为;同时提醒学者们不应以总结自旧大陆西部的现代行为清单衡量和定性中国乃至东亚旧石器时代晚期人群的生物学属性和社会行为能力。     

卡氏尖在中国古人类化石中出现及其演化意义

欧洲与亚洲古人类之间的关系一直是人类演化研究的关注点。基于对化石形态的研究,一些学者认为中国与欧洲古人类之间在更新世中、晚期存在一定程度的基因交流,并提供了支持基因交流的系列形态证据,但古人类学界对其中一些形态特征的人群属性、功能意义及形成机制存在不同认识。本文采用釉质外表观察和CT扫描方法对卡氏尖在98枚中国古人类上颌臼齿化石的出现和表现情况进行了数据统计和分析,并与非洲和欧洲古人类进行了对比。本研究发现卡氏尖在中国古人类具有较高的出现率(27.6%-62.5%)和多种形态表现。此外,在多枚中国古人类上颌臼齿发现两个通常只出现在在黑猩猩和非洲早期人类的原始卡氏尖表现:齿带-原尖脊和齿冠舌侧横行沟及屋檐状结构。基于这些发现,作者支持卡氏尖是从猿类,经过不同演化阶段的古人类,一直延续到现代人的一个古老特征的观点。卡氏尖在中国古人类的表现特点提示出现在中国古人类的卡氏尖更有可能是古老原始特征的残余。本研究显示,卡氏尖在中国与欧洲古人类都具有较高出现率,而卡氏尖在中国古人类的表现程度较同时期欧洲古人类更为显著。因此目前还没有足够的可信证据支持卡氏尖是中国与欧洲古人类之间基因交流的造成化石形态特征。     

中国古人类牙齿尺寸演化特点及东亚直立人的系统地位

对中国境内不同时代人类牙齿测量数据的发析显示,中国古人类牙齿尺寸的总体演化趋势与世界其它地区人类一致,呈缩小变化,其中一个表现特点是中国直立人与早期智人在牙齿尺寸上不差别不大,但作者根据对中国古人类化石形态特征,生存年代等方面的综合分析认为中国直立人在化石形态,生存年代等方面均与智人有明显的不同,取消直立人,将其并入智人意见的证据还是不够充分的,目前仍宜将直立人与智人作为人属内两个不同的种来看待,     

安徽东至华龙洞遗址洞穴演化与古人类活动

安徽东至华龙洞因发现距今约30万年的古人类头骨化石和大量动物化石及石制品受到学术界广泛关注。本文对华龙洞遗址的地质、地貌、沉积物特点及洞穴演化过程与古人类活动的关系进行分析。华龙洞地处扬子陆块区西北缘,周边呈现低山—丘陵—湖泊平原地貌景观。与华龙洞遗址密切关联的岩溶洞穴,发育在上寒武统微晶灰岩和白云质灰岩岩系内,中更新以来的地壳运动和岩溶发育是其形成的主要营力。华龙洞遗址是一处坍塌的洞穴,其发育大致经历发育初期（中更新世早期甚至更早）—稳定发育期（中更新世中期）—坍塌埋藏期（中更新世中晚期）等三个阶段,岩溶发育和洞外溪谷的侵蚀使得原始洞穴和堆积物一起在重力作用下坍塌。洞穴坍塌沉积物主要包括围岩岩块与碎屑、各种岩溶沉积物和文化遗物,胶结坚硬,不规则地埋藏于裂隙和巨石之间。古人类在遗址的活动时间处在距今约30万年前的稳定发育期,石制品和骨骼表面痕迹证据表明,华龙洞古人类具备依据不同原料的特点采取砸击法与锤击法并用的技术策略;石片边缘的使用痕迹和动物骨骼表面痕迹显示,古人类在遗址可能进行过肢解动物的行为。本研究对揭示长江下游中更新世中晚期古人类演化与适应生存行为具有重要意义。     

中更新世晚期中国古人类化石的形态多样性及其演化意义

近年对许家窑、许昌、华龙洞、澎湖、夏河、哈尔滨等人类化石开展的系统研究,引发了学界对中更新世晚期人类演化及分类的不同认识。基于对相关中国人类化石形态特征的分析,作者提出这一时期中国人类化石形态特征表现为四种类型：1）以中更新世晚期人类共有特征为主;2）以原始特征为主;3）以现代特征为主;4）独特形态组合。多数化石形态特征表现为前三种类型,而许昌和许家窑这种以硕大的头骨和巨大颅容量构成的独特形态组合在其他同时期化石还没有发现。化石形态的多样性提示,不同类型的中更新世晚期中国古人类对现代人的形成贡献不同。作者认为在该时期的人类化石形态多样性规律还未阐明的情况下,将具有混合或镶嵌特征的相关人类化石归入分类地位不确定的人群较为合适。     

制作工具在人类演化中的地位与作用

制作工具曾经被视作人类独有的行为能力,"人类"曾经据此而定义。但目前学术界将直立行走作为人类区别于其他灵长类最重要的体质与行为特征。少量其他动物种类,尤其是非人高等灵长类,也能使用工具乃至简单制作工具。如何认识制作工具在人类演化中的作用?人类制作工具的能力与其他动物有何区别?考古学是否有能力分辨人类的工具和其他灵长类的产品?本文通过对现代巴西猴群敲砸石头的行为及其产品、4300年前黑猩猩的"石制品"和早期人类石制品的比较研究,指出人类的工具与其他动物制作和使用的工具存在根本的区别;工具制作和使用对确定人类的演化方向,增强人类的适应生存能力,塑造人类的大脑与心智及行为方式,提升语言和交流能力,形成现代人类的身心和社会,至关重要,不可或缺。考古工作者一方面需要谨慎分辨、研究人类工具制作初期的产品,不使其与自然的产物和其他动作的作品相混淆,另一方面应该认识到人类工具制作在计划性、目的性、预见性、规范性和精美度上具有唯一性,有内在的智能控制、思维逻辑和规律可循。学科发展的积累和现代科技的支撑使考古学者具有多方面的利器,能够把人类工具制作的历史挖掘、复原出来,能够破译特定的石器技术和功能,进而将人类演化的历史画卷描绘得更加精细,更加完整。     

早期现代人在中国的出现与演化

兴起于上世纪80年代的现代人起源研究与争论在近10年来呈现出一些新的趋势或特点, 主要体现在对现代人起源与演化细节过程的关注。这些新的关注点涉及早期现代人的出现与扩散、中更新世晚期-晚更新世早期人类化石特征变异及演化, 以及早期现代人出现与演化过程中的健康与生存适应活动三个方面。围绕这些问题, 中国古人类学界开展了相关研究并获得了一些新的发现和认识。本文对近10年来早期现代人在中国出现与演化领域的研究进行了回顾, 并对相关问题进行了讨论。     

Robustoschwagerinids的个体发育及其在演化分析中的意义

一、前言在已绝灭的化石门类中,(竹蜓)类动物具有演化迅速、形态及构造整体演化趋势比较明显、演化阶段明确的特点。(竹蜓)类动物的壳形、旋壁构造、隔壁特征以及旋脊(和拟旋脊)、通道(和复通道)的演化趋势及其地层分布规律已为广大古生物学家所熟知,并在石炭、二叠纪海相地层的划分对比中得到了广泛的应用(Thompson, 1948; Dunbar, 1963; Douglass, 1976; Rauzer_Chernousova, 1963; Ross, 1964)。尽管Ross(1972,1982)曾借助现代有孔虫的材料对(竹蜓)类动物生物学做过有益的探讨,但是这类工作毕竟很少。和(竹蜓)类生物地层学的研究相比,有关(竹蜓)     

Out of Africa and the evolution of human behavior

Twenty‐one years ago, a landmark exploration of mitochondrial DNA diversity popularized the idea of a recent African origin for all living humans. 1 The ancestral African population was estimated to have existed 200 ka (thousands of years ago) plus or minus a few tens of thousands of years. A corollary was that at some later date the fully modern African descendants of that population expanded to swamp or replace the Neanderthals and other nonmodern Eurasians. The basic concept soon became known as “Out of Africa,” after the Academy Award winning film (1985) that took its title, in turn, from Isak Dinesen's classic autobiography (1937). Many subsequent genetic analyses, including those of Ingman and coworkers 2 and Underhill and coworkers, 3 have reaffirmed the fundamental Out of Africa model. The fossil and archeological records also support it strongly. The fossil record implies that anatomically modern or near‐modern humans were present in Africa by 150 ka; the fossil and archeological records together indicate that modern Africans expanded to Eurasia beginning about 50 ka.     

The ecology of social transitions in human evolution

We know that there are fundamental differences between humans and living apes, and also between living humans and their extinct relatives. It is also probably the case that the most significant and divergent of these differences relate to our social behaviour and its underlying cognition, as much as to fundamental differences in physiology, biochemistry or anatomy. In this paper, we first attempt to demarcate what are the principal differences between human and other societies in terms of social structure, organization and relationships, so that we can identify what derived features require explanation. We then consider the evidence of the archaeological and fossil record, to determine the most probable context in time and taxonomy, of these evolutionary trends. Finally, we attempt to link five major transitional points in hominin evolution to the selective context in which they occurred, and to use the principles of behavioural ecology to understand their ecological basis. Critical changes in human social organization relate to the development of a larger scale of fission and fusion; the development of a greater degree of nested substructures within the human community; and the development of intercommunity networks. The underlying model that we develop is that the evolution of ‘human society’ is underpinned by ecological factors, but these are influenced as much by technological and behavioural innovations as external environmental change.     

Genetics and modern human origins

The past decade has brought considerable debate on the subject of modern human origins. The nature of the transition from Homo erectus to archaic Homo sapiens to modern H. sapiens has been examined primarily in terms of the relative contribution of archaic populations to later moderns, both within and among geographic regions. The recent African origin model proposes that modern humans appeared first in Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, and then spread through the rest of the Old World, replacing preexisting populations.^1–6 This model has been referred to by a variety of names, including “replacement”, “Garden of Eden”, “Noah's Ark”, and “out of Africa”. The recent African origin model contrasts with the multiregional model, which proposes a species-wide transition to modern humans throughout the Old World during the past million years or more.^7–10 Indeed, some proponents of the multiregional model advocate placing Homo erectus and all subsequent species of Homo in the evolutionary species Homo sapiens.¹¹ This contrasts with the view that there were multiple hominid species during the Middle Pleistocene. The debate continues.^12,13 Although the multiregional model is often portrayed as proposing a simultaneous transition to anatomically modern humans in different geographic regions, it explicitly allows for varying degrees of continuity across time and space.¹⁰ This model, in the broad sense, does not rule out the possibility that modern human morphology appeared first in Africa and then spread through the rest of the Old World through gene flow. However, not all advocates of the multiregional model adhere to this specific subset of the general model.⁹ Comparison of the African and multiregional models is complicated by considering other, less extreme, hypotheses. Some versions of the recent African origin model imply a speciation event associated with the initial origin of modern humans. Another version, which suggests the possibility of some admixture between “moderns” leaving Africa and preexisting “archaics” elsewhere in the Old World,^14,15 is similar to some variants of the multiregional model, which also suggest that modern morphology appeared first in Africa, but involved admixture with other Old World populations.¹⁶ The major difference between these views appears to be the extent of admixture, although the exact level is never specified. A further complication is the possibility that multiple dispersals from Africa produced a more complicated pattern of worldwide variation.¹⁷     

DNA and recent human evolution

The study of recent human evolution, or the origin of modern humans, is currently dominated by two theories. The recent African origin hypothesis holds that there was a single origin of modern humans in Africa about 100,000 years ago, after which these humans dispersed throughout the rest of the world, mixing little or not at all with nonmodern populations. The multiregional evolution hypothesis holds that there was no single origin of modern humans but, instead, that the mutations and other traits that led to modern humans were spread in concert throughout the old world by gene flow, leading to genetic continuity among old world populations during the past million years. Although both of these theories are based on observations stemming from the fossil record, much discussion and controversy during the past six years has focused on the application and interpretation of studies of DNA variation, particularly mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). The past year, especially, has brought new data, interpretations, and controversies. Indeed, I initially resisted writing this review, on the grounds that new information would be likely to render it obsolete by the time it was published. However, now that the dust is starting to settle, it seems timely to review various investigations and interpretations and where they are likely to lead. While the focus of this review is the mtDNA story, brief mention is made of studies of nuclear DNA variation (both autosomal and Y-chromosome DNA) and the implications of the genetic data with regard to the fossil record and our understanding of recent human evolution.     

The North African Middle Stone Age and its place in recent human evolution

The North African Middle Stone Age (NAMSA, ～300‐24 thousand years ago, or ka) features what may be the oldest fossils of our species as well as extremely early examples of technological regionalization and ‘symbolic’ material culture (d'Errico, Vanhaeren, Barton, Bouzouggar, Mienis, Richter, Hublin, McPherron, Louzouet, & Klein, 2009 ; Scerri, 2013a ; Richter, Grün, Joannes‐Boyau, Steele, Amani, Rué, Fernandes, Raynal, Geraads, Ben‐Ncer Hublin, McPherron, 2017 ). The geographic situation of North Africa and an increased understanding of the wet‐dry climatic pulses of the Sahara Desert also show that North Africa played a strategic role in continental‐scale evolutionary processes by modulating human dispersal and demographic structure (Drake, Blench, Armitage, Bristow, & White, 2011 ; Blome, Cohen, Tryon, Brooks, & Russell, 2012 ). However, current understanding of the NAMSA remains patchy and subject to a bewildering array of industrial nomenclatures that mask underlying variability. These issues are compounded by a geographic research bias skewed toward non‐desert regions. As a result, it has been difficult to test long‐established narratives of behavioral and evolutionary change in North Africa and to resolve debates on their wider significance. In order to evaluate existing data and identify future research directions, this paper provides a critical overview of the component elements of the NAMSA and shows that the timing of many key behaviors has close parallels with others in sub‐Saharan Africa and Southwest Asia.     

The evolution of modern human behavior in East Asia: Current perspectives

Behavioral modernity is considered one of the defining characteristics separating modern humans from earlier hominin lineages. Over the course of the past two decades, the nature and origins of modern human behavior have been among the most debated topics in paleoanthropology. 1 - 7 There are currently two primary competing hypotheses regarding how and when modern human behavior arose. The first one, which we shall term the saltational model, argues that between 50–40 kya modern human behavior appeared suddenly and as a “package”; that is, the entire range of traits appeared more or less simultaneously. The proposed reason most often cited for this sudden change in behavior is a genetic mutation, possibly related to communication, 7 that occurred around 50 kya. The second major hypothesis, which we shall term the gradualistic model, argues that modern human behavior arose slowly and sporadically over the course of the past 150,000 years and may be related to increasing population pressure. 2 In general, many European scholars subscribe to the saltational model, while many Africanists seem to prefer the gradualistic model. As McBrearty and Brooks 2 noted, the disagreement may be related to different developmental histories underlying the research traditions in Europe and Africa.     

现代人出现和演化的化石证据

近年来,新材料的发现、新测年结果的更新以及分子生物学的加入,刷新了关于现代人在各主要区域出现时间、在迁徙扩散中与古老人群的交流模式、晚更新世晚期现代人演化复杂场景等方面的认识。本文梳理了关于现代人出现和演化路径的主要化石证据和研究成果。目前化石证据显示：非洲准现代人的出现时间最早可到MIS 9阶段,非洲现代人在中更新世晚期到晚更新世化石证据连续;欧亚大陆现代人的出现时间可追溯到MIS 6阶段,在MIS 5a-MIS 4阶段经历“瓶颈期”,在MIS 3阶段开始广泛分布。从已有证据来看,MIS 3和MIS 2阶段,欧亚大陆不同区域的现代人演化链条并非单一线性,而是呈现有断点的“网状”演化模式。