Upper pleistocene human remains from Vindija cave,Croatia, Yugoslavia

Human remains excavated from Vindija cave include a large although fragmentary sample of late Mousterian-associated specimens and a few additional individuals from the overlying early Upper Paleolithic levels. The Mousterian-associated sample is similar to European Neandertals from other regions. Compared with earlier Neandertals from south central Europe, this sample evinces evolutionary trends in the direction of Upper Paleolithic Europeans. Compared with the western European Neandertals, the same trends can be demonstrated, although the magnitude of difference is less, and there is a potential for confusing temporal with regional sources of variation. The early Upper Paleolithic-associated sample cannot be distinguished from the Mousterian-associated hominids. We believe that this site provides support for Hrdli?ka's “Neandertal phase” of human evolution, as it was originally applied in Europe.     

Population bottlenecks and Pleistocene human evolution

We review the anatomical and archaeological evidence for anearly population bottleneck in humans and bracket the time whenit could have occurred. We outline the subsequent demographicchanges that the archaeological evidence of range expansionsand contractions address, and we examine how inbreeding effectivepopulation size provides an alternative view of past populationsize change. This addresses the question of other, more recent,population size bottlenecks, and we review nonrecombining andrecombining genetic systems that may reflect them. We examinehow these genetic data constrain the possibility of significantpopulation size bottlenecks (i.e., of sufficiently small sizeand/or long duration to minimize genetic variation in autosomaland haploid systems) at several different critical times inhuman history. Different constraints appear in nonrecombiningand recombining systems, and among the autosomal loci most areincompatible with any Pleistocene population size expansions.Microsatellite data seem to show Pleistocene population sizeexpansions, but in aggregate they are difficult to interpretbecause different microsatellite studies do not show the sameexpansion. The archaeological data are only compatible witha few of these analyses, most prominently with data from Aluelements, and we use these facts to question whether the viewof the past from analysis of inbreeding effective populationsize is valid. Finally, we examine the issue of whether inbreedingeffective population size provides any reasonable measure ofthe actual past size of the human species. We contend that ifthe evidence of a population size bottleneck early in the evolutionof our lineage is accepted, most genetic data either lack theresolution to address subsequent changes in the human populationor do not meet the assumptions required to do so validly. Itis our conclusion that, at the moment, genetic data cannot disprovea simple model of exponential population growth following abottleneck 2 MYA at the origin of our lineage and extendingthrough the Pleistocene. Archaeological and paleontologicaldata indicate that this model is too oversimplified to be anaccurate reflection of detailed population history, and thereforewe find that genetic data lack the resolution to validly reflectmany details of Pleistocene human population change. However,there is one detail that these data are sufficient to address.Both genetic and anthropological data are incompatible withthe hypothesis of a recent population size bottleneck. Suchan event would be expected to leave a significant mark acrossnumerous genetic loci and observable anatomical traits, butwhile some subsets of data are compatible with a recent populationsize bottleneck, there is no consistently expressed effect thatcan be found across the range where it should appear, and thisabsence disproves the hypothesis.     

An Australasian test of the recent African origin theory using the WLH-50 calvarium

This analysis investigates the ancestry of a single modern human specimen from Australia, WLH-50 (Thorne et al., in preparation; Webb, 1989). Evaluating its ancestry is important to our understanding of modern human origins in Australasia because the prevailing models of human origins make different predictions for the ancestry of this specimen, and others like it. Some authors believe in the validity of a complete replacement theory and propose that modern humans in Australasia descended solely from earlier modern human populations found in Late Pleistocene Africa and the Levant. These ancestral modern populations are believed to have completely replaced other archaic human populations, including the Ngandong hominids of Indonesia. According to this recent African origin theory, the archaic humans from Indonesia are classified as Homo erectus, a different evolutionary species that could not have contributed to the ancestry of modern Australasians. Therefore this theory of complete replacement makes clear predictions concerning the ancestry of the specimen WLH-50. We tested these predictions using two methods: a discriminant analysis of metric data for three samples that are potential ancestors of WLH-50 (Ngandong, Late Pleistocene Africans, Levant hominids from Skhul and Qafzeh) and a pairwise difference analysis of nonmetric data for individuals within these samples. The results of these procedures provide an unambiguous refutation of a model of complete replacement within this region, and indicate that the Ngandong hominids or a population like them may have contributed significantly to the ancestry of WLH-50. We therefore contend that Ngandong hominids should be classified within the evolutionary species, Homo sapiens. The Multiregional model of human evolution has the expectation that Australasian ancestry is in all three of the potentially ancestral groups and best explains modern Australasian origins.     

THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY HOMO: A REPLY TO SCOTT

Scott presents a welcome reply to our article, “A single lineage in early Pleistocene Homo” (Van Arsdale and Wolpoff 2012 ). However, Scott's reply mischaracterizes and fails to directly address the hypothesis of a single lineage that we test. Additionally, the approach taken by Scott fails to replicate the methods used in our analysis. As Scott himself suggests, our null hypothesis of a single evolving lineage in early Homo remains without refutation. Although many evolutionary scenarios might explain the complex pattern of variation present in the early Homo fossil record, the most parsimonious remains that of a single lineage displaying evolutionary change over time.     

Habiline variation: A new approach using STET

The problem of whether the hominid fossil sample of habiline specimens is comprised of more than one species has received much attention in paleoanthropology. The core of this debate has critical implications about when and how variation can be explained by taxonomy. In this paper, we examine the problem of whether the observed variation in habiline samples reflects species differences. We test the null hypothesis of no difference by examining the degree of variability in habiline sample in comparison with other single-species early hominid fossil samples from Sterkfontein and Swartkrans (Sterkfontein is earlier than the habiline sample, Swartkrans may be within the habiline time span). We developed a new method for this examination, which we call STandard Error Test of the null hypothesis of no difference (STET). Our sampling statistic is based on the standard error of the slope of regressions between pairs of specimens, relating all of the homologous measurements that each pair shares. We show that the null hypothesis for the habiline sample cannot be rejected. The similarities of specimen pairs within the habiline sample are not more than those observed between the specimens in the australopithecine samples we analyzed.     

Systematic variation in early hominid corpus dimensions.

Regression analysis is used to show that the same breadth/height relation characterizes all of the early Plio-Pleistocene hominids, regardless of the number of taxa represented.     

Neandertals and modern humans in Western Asia.

Edited by Takeru Akazawa, Kenichi Aoki, and Ofer Bar-Yosef. 1998. New York: Plenum Press. 552 pp. ISBN 0-306-45924-8. $79.50 (cloth).     

Sagittal cresting in the South African australopithecines

The evidence for sagittal cresting, and more generally the position of the temporal lines is reviewed in the South African australopithecine sample. The position of the lines is dependent on both the allometric relation of the masticatory apparatus to cranial size and on individual variation. In the Swartkrans specimens, with generally bigger body size, the influence of allometry predominates, actually overshadowing the influence of individual variation. At Sterkfontein and Makapansgat with generally smaller body size and a resulting smaller allometric ratio, individual variation has a greater influence. Of the eleven adult South African specimens, the four largest are crested. The one smaller crested specimen comes from Sterkfontein. The crested Makapan specimen is intermediate in size. The pattern of australopithecine cresting is somewhat different from other hominoids, and is part of a total morphological pattern suggesting adaptation to a diet requiring powerful crushing during mastication.