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.     

Archaic admixture in the human genome

One of the enduring questions in the evolution of our species surrounds the fate of 'archaic' forms of Homo. Did Neanderthals go extinct without interbreeding with modern humans 25-40 thousand years ago or are their genes present among modern-day Europeans? Recent work suggests that Neanderthals and an as yet unidentified archaic African population contributed to at least 5% of the modern European and West African gene pools, respectively. Extensive sequencing of Neanderthal and other archaic human nuclear DNA has the potential to answer this question definitively within the next few years.     

The timing of selection at the human FOXP2 gene

Krause J, Lalueza-Fox C, Orlando L, et al. recently examined patterns of genetic variation at FOXP2 in 2 Neanderthals. This gene is of particular interest because it is involved in speech and language and was previously shown to harbor the signature of recent positive selection. The authors found the same 2 amino acid substitutions in Neanderthals as in modern humans. Assuming that these sites were the targets of selection and no interbreeding between the 2 groups, they concluded that selection at FOXP2 occurred before the populations split, over 300 thousand years ago. Here, we show that the data are unlikely under this scenario but may instead be consistent with low rates of gene flow between modern humans and Neanderthals. We also collect additional data and introduce a modeling framework to estimate levels of modern human contamination of the Neanderthal samples. We find that, depending on the assumptions, additional control experiments may be needed to rule out contamination at FOXP2.     

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.     

Neanderthals

Neanderthals are a group of fossil humans that inhabited Western Eurasia from approximately 300 to 30,000 years ago (ka). They vanished from the fossil record a few millennia after the first modern humans appeared in Europe (ca. 40 ka BP). They are characterized by a unique combination of distinctive anatomical features, and are found with stone tools of the Mousterian stone tool industry. Current consensus views them as a distinct Eurasian human lineage isolated from the rest of the Old World and sharing a common ancestor with modern humans sometime in the early Middle Pleistocene. The extreme cold of the European Ice Ages is considered at least partly responsible for the evolution of some of the distinctive Neanderthal anatomy, although other factors (functional demands, effects of chance in small populations) were probably also important. The causes for the Neanderthal extinction are not well understood. Worsening climate and competition with modern humans are implicated. Neanderthals were our sister species, much more closely related to us than the chimpanzees, our closest living relatives are today.     

Neanderthal and Denisova genetic affinities with contemporary humans: Introgression versus common ancestral polymorphisms

Analyses of the genetic relationships among modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans have suggested that 1–4% of the non-Sub-Saharan African gene pool may be Neanderthal derived, while 6–8% of the Melanesian gene pool may be the product of admixture between the Denisovans and the direct ancestors of Melanesians. In the present study, we analyzed single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) diversity among a worldwide collection of contemporary human populations with respect to the genetic constitution of these two archaic hominins and Pan troglodytes (chimpanzee). We partitioned SNPs into subsets, including those that are derived in both archaic lineages, those that are ancestral in both archaic lineages and those that are only derived in one archaic lineage. By doing this, we have conducted separate examinations of subsets of mutations with higher probabilities of divergent phylogenetic origins. While previous investigations have excluded SNPs from common ancestors in principal component analyses, we included common ancestral SNPs in our analyses to visualize the relative placement of the Neanderthal and Denisova among human populations. To assess the genetic similarities among the various hominin lineages, we performed genetic structure analyses to provide a comparison of genetic patterns found within contemporary human genomes that may have archaic or common ancestral roots. Our results indicate that 3.6% of the Neanderthal genome is shared with roughly 65.4% of the average European gene pool, which clinally diminishes with distance from Europe. Our results suggest that Neanderthal genetic associations with contemporary non-Sub-Saharan African populations, as well as the genetic affinities observed between Denisovans and Melanesians most likely result from the retention of ancient mutations in these populations.     

The Strength of Selection against Neanderthal Introgression

Hybridization between humans and Neanderthals has resulted in a low level of Neanderthal ancestry scattered across the genomes of many modern-day humans. After hybridization, on average, selection appears to have removed Neanderthal alleles from the human population. Quantifying the strength and causes of this selection against Neanderthal ancestry is key to understanding our relationship to Neanderthals and, more broadly, how populations remain distinct after secondary contact. Here, we develop a novel method for estimating the genome-wide average strength of selection and the density of selected sites using estimates of Neanderthal allele frequency along the genomes of modern-day humans. We confirm that East Asians had somewhat higher initial levels of Neanderthal ancestry than Europeans even after accounting for selection. We find that the bulk of purifying selection against Neanderthal ancestry is best understood as acting on many weakly deleterious alleles. We propose that the majority of these alleles were effectively neutral—and segregating at high frequency—in Neanderthals, but became selected against after entering human populations of much larger effective size. While individually of small effect, these alleles potentially imposed a heavy genetic load on the early-generation human–Neanderthal hybrids. This work suggests that differences in effective population size may play a far more important role in shaping levels of introgression than previously thought.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The Vindija Neanderthal scapular glenoid fossa: comparative shape analysis suggests evo-devo changes among Neanderthals

Although the shape of the scapular glenoid fossa (SGF) may be influenced by epigenetic and developmental factors, there appears to be strong genetic control over its overall form, such that variation within and between hominin taxa in SGF shape may contain information about their evolutionary histories. Here we present the results of a geometric morphometric study of the SGF of the Neanderthal Vi-209 from Vindjia Cave (Croatia), relative to samples of Plio-Pleistocene, later Pleistocene, and recent hominins. Variation in overall SGF shape follows a chronological trend from the plesiomorphic condition seen in Australopithecus to modern humans, with pre-modern species of the genus Homo exhibiting intermediate morphologies. Change in body size across this temporal series is not linearly directional, which argues against static allometry as an explanation. However, life history and developmental rates change directionally across the series, suggesting an ontogenetic effect on the observed changes in shape (ontogenetic allometry). Within this framework, the morphospace occupied by the Neanderthals exhibits a discontinuous distribution. The Vindija SGF and those of the later Near Eastern Neanderthals (Kebara and Shanidar) approach the modern condition and are somewhat segregated from both northwestern European (Neandertal and La Ferrassie) and early Mediterranean Neanderthals (Krapina and Tabun). Although more than one scenario may account for the pattern seen in the Neanderthals, the data is consistent with palaeogenetic evidence suggesting low levels of gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans in the Near East after ca. 120-100 ka (thousands of years ago) (with subsequent introgression of modern human alleles into eastern and central Europe). Thus, in keeping with previous analyses that document some modern human features in the Vindija Neanderthals, the Vindija G₃ sample should not be seen as representative of ‘classic’ - that is, unadmixed, pre-contact - Neanderthal morphology.     

To what extent did Neanderthals and modern humans interact?

Neanderthals represent an extinct hominid lineage that existed in Europe and Asia for nearly 400,000 years. They thrived in these regions for much of this time, but declined in numbers and went extinct around 30,000 years ago. Interestingly, their disappearance occurred subsequent to the arrival of modern humans into these areas, which has prompted some to argue that Neanderthals were displaced by better suited and more adaptable modern humans. Still others have postulated that Neanderthals were assimilated into the gene pool of modern humans by admixture. Until relatively recently, conclusions about the relationships between Neanderthals and contemporary humans were based solely upon evidence left behind in the fossil and archaeological records. However, in the last decade, we have witnessed the introduction of metagenomic analyses, which have provided novel tools with which to study the levels of genetic interactions between this fascinating Homo lineage and modern humans. Were Neanderthals replaced by contemporary humans through dramatic extinction resulting from competition and/or hostility or through admixture? Were Neanderthals and modern humans two independent, genetically unique species or were they a single species, capable of producing fertile offspring? Here, we review the current anthropological, archaeological and genetic data, which shed some light on these questions and provide insight into the exact nature of the relationships between these two groups of humans.     

Possible ancestral structure in human populations

Determining the evolutionary relationships between fossil hominid groups such as Neanderthals and modern humans has been a question of enduring interest in human evolutionary genetics. Here we present a new method for addressing whether archaic human groups contributed to the modern gene pool (called ancient admixture), using the patterns of variation in contemporary human populations. Our method improves on previous work by explicitly accounting for recent population history before performing the analyses. Using sequence data from the Environmental Genome Project, we find strong evidence for ancient admixture in both a European and a West African population (p ≈ 10⁻⁷), with contributions to the modern gene pool of at least 5%. While Neanderthals form an obvious archaic source population candidate in Europe, there is not yet a clear source population candidate in West Africa.     

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.     

Neanderthal genomics suggests a pleistocene time frame for the first epidemiologic transition

High quality Altai Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes are revealing which regions of archaic hominin DNA have persisted in the modern human genome. A number of these regions are associated with response to infection and immunity, with a suggestion that derived Neanderthal alleles found in modern Europeans and East Asians may be associated with autoimmunity. As such Neanderthal genomes are an independent line of evidence of which infectious diseases Neanderthals were genetically adapted to. Sympathetically, human genome adaptive introgression is an independent line of evidence of which infectious diseases were important for AMH coming in to Eurasia and interacting with Neanderthals. The Neanderthals and Denisovans present interesting cases of hominin hunter‐gatherers adapted to a Eurasian rather than African infectious disease package. Independent sources of DNA‐based evidence allow a re‐evaluation of the first epidemiologic transition and how infectious disease affected Pleistocene hominins. By combining skeletal, archaeological and genetic evidence from modern humans and extinct Eurasian hominins, we question whether the first epidemiologic transition in Eurasia featured a new package of infectious diseases or a change in the impact of existing pathogens. Coupled with pathogen genomics, this approach supports the view that many infectious diseases are pre‐Neolithic, and the list continues to expand. The transfer of pathogens between hominin populations, including the expansion of pathogens from Africa, may also have played a role in the extinction of the Neanderthals and offers an important mechanism to understand hominin–hominin interactions well back beyond the current limits for aDNA extraction from fossils alone. Am J Phys Anthropol 160:379–388, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

新证据下的现代人起源模型

解剖结构上的现代人是指具有近圆球形头骨、短而平的面颅、纤细的骨骼等特征的区别于其他古老人类的化石和现今的人群。支持多地区演化模型和支持近期非洲起源模型的学者,在“解剖结构上的现代人”的应用范围方面是不同的,前者以连续演化为基本思想,认为这一名词只包括智人中较进步的类群;而后者以分支系统学思想为基础,认为包括所有智人。分子古生物学研究显示,尼人、丹人和智人在遗传学水平上属于不同的人种。新近的以标本-种群为单元的系统分析,因为不是以属、种等分类学阶元进行的,因此与分类学的阶元划分无关。该系统分析的结果显示智人属于单系类群,哈尔滨人、大荔人等组成其姊妹群。尼人与智人的分异早于1百万年,与基因组水平的谱系分析相符合。多次多向的穿梭扩散是统计学上符合系统关系的模型。     

Ancient structure in Africa unlikely to explain neanderthal and non-african genetic similarity

Neanderthals have been shown to share more genetic variants with present-day non-Africans than Africans. Recent admixture between Neanderthals and modern humans outside of Africa was proposed as the most parsimonious explanation for this observation. However, the hypothesis of ancient population structure within Africa could not be ruled out as an alternative explanation. We use simulations to test whether the site frequency spectrum, conditioned on a derived Neanderthal and an ancestral Yoruba (African) nucleotide (the doubly conditioned site frequency spectrum [dcfs]), can distinguish between models that assume recent admixture or ancient population structure. We compare the simulations to the dcfs calculated from data taken from populations of European, Chinese, and Japanese descent in the Complete Genomics Diversity Panel. Simulations under a variety of plausible demographic parameters were used to examine the shape of the dcfs for both models. The observed shape of the dcfs cannot be explained by any set of parameter values used in the simulations of the ancient structure model. The dcfs simulations for the recent admixture model provide a good fit to the observed dcfs for non-Africans, thereby supporting the hypothesis that recent admixture with Neanderthals accounts for the greater similarity of Neanderthals to non-Africans than Africans.     

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.