The Mousterian child from Teshik‐Tash is a Neanderthal: A geometric morphometric study of the frontal bone

In the 1930s subadult hominin remains and Mousterian artifacts were discovered in the Teshik‐Tash cave in South Uzbekistan. Since then, the majority of the scientific community has interpreted Teshik‐Tash as a Neanderthal. However, some have considered aspects of the morphology of the Teshik‐Tash skull to be more similar to fossil modern humans such as those represented at Skhūl and Qafzeh, or to subadult Upper Paleolithic modern humans. Here we present a 3D geometric morphometric analysis of the Teshik‐Tash frontal bone in the context of developmental shape changes in recent modern humans, Neanderthals, and early modern humans. We assess the phenetic affinities of Teshik‐Tash to other subadult fossils, and use developmental simulations to predict possible adult shapes. We find that the morphology of the frontal bone places the Teshik‐Tash child close to other Neanderthal children and that the simulated adult shapes are closest to Neanderthal adults. Taken together with genetic data showing that Teshik‐Tash carried mtDNA of the Neanderthal type, as well as its occipital bun, and its shovel‐shaped upper incisors, these independent lines of evidence firmly place Teshik‐Tash among Neanderthals. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Femoral curvature in Neanderthals and modern humans: a 3D geometric morphometric analysis

Since their discovery, Neanderthals have been described as having a marked degree of anteroposterior curvature of the femoral shaft. Although initially believed to be pathological, subsequent discoveries of Neanderthal remains lead femoral curvature to be considered as a derived Neanderthal feature. A recent study on Neanderthals and middle and early Upper Palaeolithic modern humans found no differences in femoral curvature, but did not consider size-corrected curvature. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to use 3D morphometric landmark and semi-landmark analysis to quantify relative femoral curvature in Neanderthals, Upper Palaeolithic and recent modern humans, and to compare adult bone curvature as part of the overall femoral morphology among these populations.Comparisons among populations were made using geometric morphometrics (3D landmarks) and standard multivariate methods. Comparative material involved all available complete femora from Neanderthal and Upper Palaeolithic modern human, archaeological (Mesolithic, Neolithic, Medieval) and recent human populations representing a wide geographical and lifestyle range. There are significant differences in the anatomy of the femur between Neanderthals and modern humans. Neanderthals have more curved femora than modern humans. Early modern humans are most similar to recent modern humans in their anatomy. Femoral curvature is a good indicator of activity level and habitual loading of the lower limb, indicating higher activity levels in Neanderthals than modern humans. These differences contradict robusticity studies and the archaeological record, and would suggest that femoral morphology, and curvature in particular, in Neanderthals may not be explained by adult behavior alone and could be the result of genetic drift, natural selection or differences in behavior during ontogeny.     

The bony labyrinth of Neanderthals

This paper presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of the Neanderthal bony labyrinth, a structure located inside the petrous temporal bone. Fifteen Neanderthal specimens are compared with a Holocene human sample, as well as with a small number of European Middle Pleistocene hominins, and early anatomically modern and European Upper Palaeolithic humans. Compared with Holocene humans the bony labyrinth of Neanderthals can be characterized by an anterior semicircular canal arc which is smaller in absolute and relative size, is relatively narrow, and shows more torsion. The posterior semicircular canal arc is smaller in absolute and relative size as well, it is more circular in shape, and is positioned more inferiorly relative to the lateral canal plane. The lateral semicircular canal arc is absolutely and relatively larger. Finally, the Neanderthal ampullar line is more vertically inclined relative to the planar orientation of the lateral canal. The European Upper Palaeolithic and early modern humans are most similar, although not fully identical to Holocene humans in labyrinthine morphology. The European Middle Pleistocene hominins show the typical semicircular canal morphology of Neanderthals, with the exception of the arc shape and inferiorly position of the posterior canal and the strongly inclined ampullar line. The marked difference between the labyrinths of Neanderthals and modern humans can be used to assess the phylogenetic affinities of fragmentary temporal bone fossils. However, this application is limited by a degree of overlap between the morphologies. The typical shape of the Neanderthal labyrinth appears to mirror aspects of the surrounding petrous pyramid, and both may follow from the phylogenetic impact of Neanderthal brain morphology moulding the shape of the posterior cranial fossa. The functionally important arc sizes of the Neanderthal semicircular canals may reflect a pattern of head movements different from that of modern humans, possibly related to aspects of locomotor behaviour and the kinematic properties of their head and neck.     

Does Homo neanderthalensis play a role in modern human ancestry? The mandibular evidence

Data obtained from quantifying the upper part of the mandibular ramus (the coronoid process, the condylar process, and the notch between them) lead us to conclude that Neanderthals (both European and Middle Eastern) differ more from Homo sapiens (early specimens such as Tabun II, Skhul, and Qafzeh, as well as contemporary populations from as far apart as Alaska and Australia) than the latter differs from Homo erectus. The specialized Neanderthal mandibular ramus morphology emerges as yet another element constituting the derived complex of morphologies of the mandible and face that are unique to Neanderthals. These morphologies provide further support for the contention that Neanderthals do not play a role in modern human biological ancestry, either through "regional continuity" or through any other form of anagenetic progression.     

The Neanderthal "chignon": variation, integration, and homology

The occipital bun ("chignon") is cited widely as a Neanderthal derived trait. It encompasses the posterior projection/convexity of the occipital squama and is associated with lambdoid flattening on the parietal. A 'hemibun' in some Upper Paleolithic Europeans is thought by some authors to indicate interbreeding between Neanderthals and early modern Europeans. However, 'bunning' is difficult to measure, and the term has been applied to a range of morphological patterns. Furthermore, its usefulness in phylogenetic reconstruction and its homologous status across modern and fossil humans have been disputed. We present a geometric morphometric study that quantitatively evaluates the chignon, assesses its usefulness in separating Neanderthals from modern humans, and its degree of similarity to Upper Paleolithic 'hemibuns.' We measured the three-dimensional coordinates of closely spaced points along the midsagittal plane from bregma to inion and of anatomical landmarks in a large series of recent human crania and several Middle and Late Pleistocene European and African fossils. These coordinate data were processed using the techniques of geometric morphometrics and analyzed with relative warps, canonical variates, and singular warps. Our results show no separation between Neanderthals and modern humans, including early modern Europeans, when the shape of the occipital plane midsagittal-profile is considered alone. On the other hand, Neanderthals are well separated from both recent and fossil modern humans when information about the occipital's relative position and relative size are also included. Furthermore, the occurrence of a highly convex and posteriorly projecting midline occipital profile (interpreted as the occipital bun) is highly correlated (>0.8) with a flat parietal midsagittal profile and with antero-superiorly positioned temporal bones across both our recent and our fossil human samples. We conclude that the shape of the occipital profile alone should not be considered an independent trait, as it is very tightly integrated with braincase shape. Our analysis does not support differences in integration of the posterior midsagittal profile and the cranial base in Pleistocene and recent humans.     

Mugharet el'Aliya: Affinities of an enigmatic north African Aterian maxillary fragment

Objectives

This study uses a virtual framework to examine the left maxillary fragment of the juvenile fossil from Mugharet el'Aliya, Morocco, found in association with an Aterian lithic industry. Previously, this fossil had been ascribed to modern humans or the Neanderthal lineage based on its “archaic”/“Neanderthal-like” features and apparent large size. Here, we conducted a novel 3D shape comparative analysis of the maxillary fragment to clarify its taxonomic affinities with regard to its size and ontogeny.

Materials and Methods

Eighty Computed Tomography and surface scans representing ontogenetic samples of Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis were used to capture species-specific differences. The toolkit of geometric morphometrics in combination with surface registration and an elastic iterative closest point algorithm were used to create a dataset of meshes with an identical number of corresponding vertices for the maxillae. Multivariate statistics were applied to Procrustes superimposed coordinates derived from the vertices of this dataset.

Results

Our analysis showed affinities of the Mugharet el'Aliya individual with our H. sapiens sample, especially with a subadult individual from Qafzeh. No size-independent affinities with Neanderthals of comparable dental age could be identified.

Discussion

Our results add to the evidence connecting fossils from western Asia, especially Qafzeh and Skhul, and the North African Aterian. Furthermore, Mugharet el'Aliya adds to our knowledge of the ontogenetic development of adult morphology that is frequently used to characterize hominin groups, for example, Neanderthals and modern humans.     

The Neanderthal taxonomic position: models of intra- and inter-specific craniofacial variation

The Neanderthal taxonomic position is a matter of wide disagreement among paleoanthropologists. Some workers consider this fossil human group to represent a different species, Homo neanderthalensis, while others see it as a subspecies of Homo sapiens. This study developed two models of morphological variation to be applied to a comparison between Neanderthals and modern humans: modern human populations provided a measure of intra-specific variation, while the species and subspecies of Pan provided measures of both intra- and inter-specific morphological differences. Although such an approach has been advocated strongly, it has not been systematically undertaken until recently. The techniques of geometric morphometrics were used to collect data in the form of three-dimensional coordinates of craniofacial landmarks. The data were processed using generalized procrustes analysis, and analyzed by an array of multivariate statistical methods, including principal components analysis, canonical variates analysis and Mahalanobis D(2). The morphological distances between Neanderthals and modern humans, and between Neanderthals and Late Paleolithic/early anatomically modern specimens, are consistently greater than the distances among recent human populations, and greater than the distances between the two chimpanzee species. Furthermore, no strong morphological similarities were found between Neanderthals and Late Paleolithic Europeans. This study does not find evidence for Neanderthal contribution to the evolution of modern Europeans. Results are consistent with the recognition of Neanderthals as a distinct species.     

The Neanderthal lower arm

Neanderthal forearms have been described as being very powerful. Different individual features in the lower arm bones have been described to distinguish Neanderthals from modern humans. In this study, the overall morphology of the radius and ulna is considered, and morphological differences among Neanderthals, Upper Paleolithic Homo sapiens and recent H. sapiens are described.Comparisons among populations were made using a combination of 3D geometric morphometrics and standard multivariate methods. Comparative material included all available complete radii and ulnae from Neanderthals, early H. sapiens and archaeological and recent human populations, representing a wide geographical and lifestyle range.There are few differences among the populations when features are considered individually. Neanderthals and early H. sapiens fell within the range of modern human variation. When the suite of measurements and shapes were analyzed, differences and similarities became apparent. The Neanderthal radius is more laterally curved, has a more medially placed radial tuberosity, a longer radial neck, a more antero-posteriorly ovoid head and a well-developed proximal interosseous crest. The Neanderthal ulna has a more anterior facing trochlear notch, a lower M. brachialis insertion, larger relative mid-shaft size and a more medio-lateral and antero-posterior sinusoidal shaft. The Neanderthal lower arm morphology reflects a strong cold-adapted short forearm. The forearms of H. sapiens are less powerful in pronation and supination. Many differences between Neanderthals and H. sapiens can be explained as a secondary consequence of the hyper-polar body proportions of the Neanderthals, but also as retentions of the primitive condition of other hominoids.     

Comparative biometrical study of the Mousterian mandible from Cueva del Boquete de Zafarraya (Málaga, Spain)

The Zafarraya Neanderthal mandible has a very late date for Neanderthals and biometrical analysis shows it shares some specific traits with modern humans.     

Evaluating developmental shape changes in Homo antecessor subadult facial morphology

The fossil ATD6-69 from Atapuerca, Spain, dated to ca. 900 ka (thousands of years ago) has been suggested to mark the earliest appearance of modern human facial features. However, this specimen is a subadult and the interpretation of its morphology remains controversial, because it is unclear how developmental shape changes would affect the features that link ATD6-69 to modern humans. Here we analyze ATD6-69 in an evolutionary and developmental context. Our modern human sample comprises cross-sectional growth series from four populations. The fossil sample covers human specimens from the Pleistocene to the Upper Paleolithic, and includes several subadult Early Pleistocene humans and Neanderthals. We digitized landmarks and semilandmarks on surface and CT scans and analyzed the Procrustes shape coordinates using multivariate statistics. Ontogenetic allometric trajectories and developmental simulations were employed in order to identify growth patterns and to visualize potential adult shapes of ATD6-69. We show that facial differences between modern and archaic humans are not exclusively allometric. We find that while postnatal growth further accentuates the differences in facial features between Neanderthals and modern humans, those features that have been suggested to link ATD6-69's morphology to modern humans would not have been significantly altered in the course of subsequent development. In particular, the infraorbital depression on this specimen would have persisted into adulthood. However, many of the facial features that ATD6-69 shares with modern humans can be considered to be part of a generalized pattern of facial architecture. Our results present a complex picture regarding the polarity of facial features and demonstrate that some modern human-like facial morphology is intermittently present in Middle Pleistocene humans. We suggest that some of the facial features that characterize recent modern humans may have developed multiple times in human evolution.     

Quantitative analysis of Neanderthal temporal bone morphology using three-dimensional geometric morphometrics

The temporal bone is the location of several traits thought to differentiate Neanderthals from modern humans, including some proposed Neanderthal-derived traits. Most of these, however, are difficult to measure and are usually described qualitatively. This study applied the techniques of geometric morphometrics to the complex morphology of the temporal bone, in order to quantify the differences observed between Neanderthal and modern human anatomy. Two hundred and seventy modern human crania were measured, representing 9 populations of 30 individuals each, and spanning the extremes of the modern human geographical range. Twelve Neanderthal specimens, as well as Reilingen, Kabwe, Skhul 5, Qafzeh 9, and 4 Late Paleolithic European specimens, were included in the fossil sample. The data were collected in the form of three-dimensional (3-D) landmark coordinates, and specimen configurations were superimposed using generalized Procrustes analysis. The fitted coordinates were then analyzed by an array of multivariate statistical methods, including principal components analysis, canonical variates analysis, and Mahalanobis D(2). The temporal bone landmark analysis was very successful in separating Neanderthals from modern humans. Neanderthals were separated from modern humans in both the principal components and canonical variates analyses. They were much further in Mahalanobis distances from all modern human populations than any two modern human groups were from each other. Most of the previously described temporal bone traits contributed to this separation.     

Comparison of dental measurement systems for taxonomic assignment of Neanderthal and modern human lower second deciduous molars

Traditional morphometric approaches for taxonomic assignment of Neanderthal and modern human dental remains are mainly characterized by caliper measurements of tooth crowns. Several studies have recently described differences in dental tissue proportions and enamel thickness between Neanderthal and modern human teeth. At least for the lower second deciduous molar (dm₂), a three-dimensional lateral relative enamel thickness index has been proposed for separating the two taxa. This index has the advantage over other measurements of being applicable to worn teeth because it ignores the occlusal aspect of the crown. Nevertheless, a comparative evaluation of traditional crown dimensions and lateral dental tissue proportion measurements for taxonomic assignment of Neanderthal and modern human dm₂s has not yet been performed.In this study, we compare various parameters gathered from the lateral aspects of the crown. These parameters include crown diameters, height of the lateral wall of the crown (lateral crown height = LCH), lateral enamel thickness, and dentine volume of the lateral wall, including the volume of the coronal pulp chamber (lateral dentine plus pulp volume = LDPV), in a 3D digital sample of Neanderthal and modern human dm₂s to evaluate their utility in separating the two taxa.The LDPV and the LCH allow us to discriminate between Neanderthals and modern humans with 88.5% and 92.3% accuracy, respectively. Though our results confirm that Neanderthal dm₂s have lower relative enamel thickness (RET) index compared with modern humans (p = 0.005), only 70% of the specimens were correctly classified on the basis of the RET index. We also emphasize that results of the lateral enamel thickness method depend on the magnitude of the interproximal wear. Accordingly, we suggest using the LCH or the LDPV to discriminate between Neanderthal and modern human dm₂s. These parameters are more independent of interproximal wear and loss of lateral enamel.     

ABO Genetic Variation in Neanderthals and Denisovans

Variation at the ABO locus was one of the earliest sources of data in the study of human population identity and history, and to this day remains widely genotyped due to its importance in blood and tissue transfusions. Here, we look at ABO blood type variants in our archaic relatives: Neanderthals and Denisovans. Our goal is to understand the genetic landscape of the ABO gene in archaic humans, and how it relates to modern human ABO variation. We found two Neanderthal variants of the O allele in the Siberian Neanderthals (O1 and O2), one of these variants is shared with an European Neanderthal, who is a heterozygote for this O1 variant and a rare cis-AB variant. The Denisovan individual is heterozygous for two variants of the O1 allele, functionally similar to variants found widely in modern humans. Perhaps more surprisingly, the O2 allele variant found in Siberian Neanderthals can be found at low frequencies in modern Europeans and Southeast Asians, and the O1 allele variant found in Siberian and European Neanderthal is also found at very low frequency in modern East Asians. Our genetic distance analyses suggest both alleles survive in modern humans due to inbreeding with Neanderthals. We find that the sequence backgrounds of the surviving Neanderthal-like O alleles in modern humans retain a higher sequence divergence than other surviving Neanderthal genome fragments, supporting a view of balancing selection operating in the Neanderthal ABO alleles by retaining highly diverse haplotypes compared with portions of the genome evolving neutrally.     

Neanderthals: fossil evidence and DNA

Neanderthals inhabited Western Eurasia from approximately 300 to 30 thousand years ago (ka). They are distinguished by a unique combination of anatomical traits, and are commonly associated with Middle Paleolithic lithic industries. Current consensus among paleoanthropologists is that they represented a separate Eurasian human lineage, which evolved in isolation from the rest of the Old World and which shared a common ancestor with modern humans in the Middle Pleistocene. It is thought that some aspects of the distinctive Neanderthal anatomy evolved in response to selection related to the extreme cold of the European glacial cycles. Nevertheless, genetic drift seems to be partially responsible for the evolution of these traits. The last appearance of Neanderthals in the fossil record ca. 30 ka BP dates a few millennia after the first appearance of modern humans in Europe. The retrieval of ancient mitochondrial and, more recently, nuclear DNA from Neanderthal fossil puts us in the unique position to combine fossil with genetic evidence to address questions about their evolution, paleobiology and eventual fate.     

Obstetric implications of neanderthal robusticity and bone density

Neanderthal pelvic morphology is not well understood, despite the recent find and analysis of the Kebara 2 pelvis. Many of the proposed hypotheses focus on the possible need for a larger birth canal. A previously unexplored aspect involves possible direct obstetric implications of bone robusticity and density. These characteristics ocan affect obstetrics in modern humans, especially the molding of the neonate's head during parturition: engineering studies have shown that denser neonate cranial bones undergo less deformation, and thicker (more robust) cranial bones would also be expected to deform less during the birth process. These bone characteristics may also result in a less flexible birth canal. Thus, more robust or denser bones could result in the need for a larger birth canal or a smaller neonate head, due to decreased flexibility. Examples from modern populations are discussed and the conclusions applied to Neanderthals, who are known to have had high bone robusticity and may have had high bone density, given their heavy musculature. (A positive association between muscle mass and bone density has been observed repeatedly in modern humans.) We conclude that bone robusticity and density may have obstetrical implications for Neanderthals, with particular importance for neonate head molding during birth.     

No evidence of a Neanderthal contribution to modern human diversity

The relationship between Neanderthals and modern humans is contentious, but recent advances in Neanderthal genomics have shed new light on their evolutionary history. Here we review the available evidence and find no indication of any Neanderthal contribution to modern genetic diversity.     

Genome digging: insight into the mitochondrial genome of Homo

Background

A fraction of the Neanderthal mitochondrial genome sequence has a similarity with a 5,839-bp nuclear DNA sequence of mitochondrial origin (numt) on the human chromosome 1. This fact has never been interpreted. Although this phenomenon may be attributed to contamination and mosaic assembly of Neanderthal mtDNA from short sequencing reads, we explain the mysterious similarity by integration of this numt (mtAncestor-1) into the nuclear genome of the common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans not long before their reproductive split.

Principal Findings

Exploiting bioinformatics, we uncovered an additional numt (mtAncestor-2) with a high similarity to the Neanderthal mtDNA and indicated that both numts represent almost identical replicas of the mtDNA sequences ancestral to the mitochondrial genomes of Neanderthals and modern humans. In the proteins, encoded by mtDNA, the majority of amino acids distinguishing chimpanzees from humans and Neanderthals were acquired by the ancestral hominins. The overall rate of nonsynonymous evolution in Neanderthal mitochondrial protein-coding genes is not higher than in other lineages. The model incorporating the ancestral hominin mtDNA sequences estimates the average divergence age of the mtDNAs of Neanderthals and modern humans to be 450,000–485,000 years. The mtAncestor-1 and mtAncestor-2 sequences were incorporated into the nuclear genome approximately 620,000 years and 2,885,000 years ago, respectively.

Conclusions

This study provides the first insight into the evolution of the mitochondrial DNA in hominins ancestral to Neanderthals and humans. We hypothesize that mtAncestor-1 and mtAncestor-2 are likely to be molecular fossils of the mtDNAs of Homo heidelbergensis and a stem Homo lineage. The d_N/d_S dynamics suggests that the effective population size of extinct hominins was low. However, the hominin lineage ancestral to humans, Neanderthals and H. heidelbergensis, had a larger effective population size and possessed genetic diversity comparable with those of chimpanzee and gorilla.     

Tooth wear, Neanderthal facial morphology and the anterior dental loading hypothesis

The Anterior Dental Loading Hypothesis states that the unique Neanderthal facial and dental anatomy was an adaptive response to the regular application of heavy forces resulting from both the masticatory and cultural use of the anterior teeth. Heavy anterior tooth wear frequently observed in Neanderthal specimens is cited as a main source of evidence for heavy forces being applied to these teeth. From this, it might be predicted that the wear shown on the anterior teeth of Neanderthals would greatly exceed that of the posterior teeth and that this differential would be greater than in other hominins with different facial morphologies.In this paper, a new method of examining tooth wear patterns is used to test these predictions in a large assemblage of Late Pleistocene hominins and a group of recent hunter-gatherers from Igloolik, Canada. The results show that all Late Pleistocene hominins, including Neanderthals, had heavily worn anterior teeth relative to their posterior teeth but, contrary to expectations, this was more pronounced in the modern humans than in the Neanderthals. The Igloolik Inuit showed heavier anterior tooth wear relative to their posterior teeth than any Late Pleistocene hominins. There was, however, a characteristic Neanderthal pattern in which wear was more evenly spread between anterior teeth than in modern humans. Overall, the evidence presented here suggests that all Late Pleistocene hominins habitually applied heavy forces between their anterior teeth and that Neanderthals were not exceptional in this regard. These results therefore does not support the Anterior Dental Loading Hypothesis.