Neanderthals’ Mysterious Extinction

Neanderthal DNA reveals 50,000-year-old viruses that could help explain their extinction. In a study of ancient Neanderthal DNA, researchers found traces of 3 viruses that cause colds, cold sores, genital warts, and cancer.

Ancient humans might have been responsible for spreading these bugs, but I don’t think we need to blame only homo erectus, for there were several types of ancient humans around at the same time as Neanderthals.

Most experts think the Neanderthal species went extinct from a variety of causes, including changing climate, low fertility rates and human interactions. As can be seen from illnesses that swept through American Natives after the arrival of European settlers, trying to recover from unfamiliar illnesses introduced by distant cousins wouldn’t have helped. Poor health can have a negative impact on survival.

Not only could these ancient viruses help explain the Neanderthals’ extinction, but they might help us better understand the modern versions that still infect humans today.

About 54,000 years ago, a group of Neanderthals lived in Chagyrskaya Cave in Southern Siberia. Researchers studied the DNA data of two people from the cave to look for 3 viruses: adenovirus, herpesvirus, and papillomamirus. Adenovirus can cause colds and flu, herpesviruses can cause cold sores or genital warts, and some cancers are linked to papillomavirus.

A 2021 study discovered adenovirus in 31,600-year-old human teeth from Siberia. This more-recent study is nearly 50,000 years old. Some experts estimate humans and Neanderthals interbred between 60,000 and 50,000 years ago. Besides DNA, they probably passed around diseases.

A 2016 study suggested that breeding with Neanderthals may have boosted humans’ immunity to previously unknown diseases. But the Neanderthals may have been less lucky. A cold does not have to be fatal to decrease hunting efficiency or other abilities. With an already small population, getting sick might have contributed to Neanderthals’ extinction roughly 40,000 years ago.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/scientists-discovered-50-000-year-old-viruses-in-neanderthal-dna-that-could-help-explain-their-mysterious-extinction/ar-BB1nKNuC?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=f10bd090b2834e28ca31725fb862078f&ei=41

 

The Cro-Magnon People

I remember when I was a young girl, one of my older sisters did a project for the school science fair. She was comparing 3 types of early humans; Neanderthals, Cro-Magnons and modern humans. I was fascinated by the display she made, and that was probably what started my attraction to all things pre-historic. But people don’t speak of Cro-Magnons anymore, and I finally found out why.

Human evolution is filled with terms and names related to past humans that can get quite confusing. Cro-Magnons are an example of that. They lived in Europe around the time of the last Ice Age, from 40,000 to 10,000 years ago. They were initially named after the Cro-Magnon rock shelter in France where the first of their skeletons were discovered in the 1860s. Now, however, scientists refer to them as Early Modern Humans or Anatomically Modern Humans.

The bones of the first Cro-Magnon specimens were discovered in 1868 during road construction in the Dordogne Valley in southwestern France. The remains were of 4 adults and an infant. The rock shelter where they were found showed clear signs of occupation, including ornaments such as pendants and necklaces made from shells and animal teeth. This led researchers to believe the occupants had been deliberately buried in the shelter as a single grave.

Scientists compared the skeletons to those of Neanderthals that had been discovered in England and later in France. They came to the conclusion that the Cro-Magnons were distinct enough to warrant their own designation. However, advances in anthropology and genetics eventually established that these people were fully modern humans, indistinguishable from people today. Therefore, the term ‘Cro-Magnon’ was phased out by the end of the 20^th century, as they were recognized as part of a larger population of early modern humans who migrated across Europe, Asia, and Africa during the Upper Palaeolithic era.

Another reason why the name was changed was because ‘Cro-Magnon’ did not refer to a specific taxonomy; it was the name of a cave and was considered inappropriate for palaeontology.

The individuals found at Cro-Magnon were anatomically similar to people living today. They had high foreheads, prominent chins and slight brow ridges. They were generally taller than Neanderthals, sometimes by as much as a foot. And their skeletons indicate they lived tough, physically demanding lives.

The skull of Cro-Magnon 1, an adult man found at the cave, shows signs of a fungal infection, while some of the others had fused vertebrae in their necks, which would have likely come from traumatic injuries. And one of the females found at the site appears to have lived with a fractured skull.

Despite living through extremely difficult conditions, the ‘Cro-Magnon’ people lived in complex social structures. Archaeologists have recovered sophisticated tools made from bone, stone, and antlers. They also had artistic creations such as cave paintings, jewelry, decorated artifacts, and carvings. They are recognized for creating some of the earliest depictions of animals and human figures, as well as abstract patterns.

So, it appears that, rather than being very distant relatives like the Neanderthals, the ‘Cro-Magnons’ are simply a part of the human family. I can’t blame my sister for having erroneous information in her project, considering she put it together in the late 1950s with the best information she could find in the small town where we lived. And I’m still fascinated with pre-history.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/who-were-the-cro-magnon-people/ar-AA1tKDNb?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=2f57b4f4f07b49a58069b2bf77c09911&ei=69

What is This World Coming to? 5

Okay, I did find something to say on this subject, from a totally unexpected source. I was watching an episode on Nova the other night. Our local channel has 2 episodes on Wednesdays, and we usually watch the first, but not the second, because that’s getting too late for my husband, who is an early bird. That night, I heard that the 2nd episode was on Neanderthals, and human evolution has always been an interest of mine, so I stayed up to watch it.

As a whole, the episode explored a lot of different information about the humans known as Neanderthals, but my interest picked up during their talk about the small colony of Neanderthals who lived in caves currently located at the base of the Rock of Gibraltar.

One question this episode was asking is, “Did Modern Humans have any part in eliminating the Neanderthals?” They didn’t have an answer to that question, in the end. Not a simple one, anyway.

Neanderthals lived in the Middle East, Western Asia and Europe for as much as 700,000 years. During all of that time, the world was in an ice age, but the Neanderthals were built for it, and apparently did not find that a hardship.

About 100,000 years ago (maybe as early as 125,000 years ago), modern humans started to populate these same areas. The cold probably made them wear more clothes than the Neanderthals. And maybe there were instances of violence between the 2 sub-species.

However, the scientists said, it was unlikely the modern humans had traveled all the way around the Mediterranean Sea and got to the Rock of Gibraltar before that particular group of Neanderthals died out. What the scientists discovered in those caves showed that the Neanderthals living there not only hunted and gathered, they ate a variety of sea life as well, from seals to clams. Today, the mouths of those caves are practically at the sea line, but during the brunt of the ice age, the water line would have been about 59 feet (18 meters) lower.

Neanderthals lived in small groups. Scientists estimate their entire population may have been about 100,000, scattered in small groups across a quarter of the world. (How big is the town you live in?) And as they studied this particular group, they realized that it died out during a long and severe drought that hit the area.

My thought? Neanderthals were suited for cold. Not so much for heat. They had a short, stocky build that would help them retain body heat. But when the world heats up, that doesn’t do you much good.

If the world were going through the gradual changes of leaving the ice age, the flora and fauna would no doubt evolve in order to survive. But the current rapid pace of warming that we are in doesn’t leave us time for that. Those who currently live in the tropics might manage by migrating north or south to the temperate zones. Those in the temperate zones might find some comfort in the polar regions, although there’s not a lot of land for them to settle on. Once Antarctica thaws, that land would be available. Would it be fertile? Who knows?

It won’t be a matter of the fit being able to survive. Those who can accept what’s happening and deal with it will have a chance to survive.

And I’m back to looking for potential food for that migrating population.

Oldest People in England

Anthropologists theorize that the human family tree began in Africa, and at some point, various versions of our ancestors spread into the Arabian peninsula, Europe, Asia, Australia… and eventually the Americas. Lucy and the skeletons of many other almost-humans have been found scattered across Africa. Besides the skeletons and various stone tools, scientists have also discovered footprints, most notably some that are 3.75 million years old in Tanzania, and others left 1.5 million years ago in Kenya.

Long ago, I read that footprints were not a common find in the world of paleontology and anthropology; the footprint had to be made in a type of soil soft enough to take an impression, but firm enough to retain it, then covered and filled in by something else that would not disturb the impression. After all, a footprint is not a body that can be fossilized; it’s an impression that needs to be retained without being squashed.

But lately, I wandered across an article concerning ancient footprints discovered in England. These are the oldest footprints discovered (so far) outside Africa.

In May of 2013 (reported in February of 2014), about 50 footprints were discovered in Happisburgh, in Norwich. Previous footprints found in England were only 7,500 years old, but the Happisburgh prints were 900,000 years old, made by members of the extinct homo antecessor branch. (You remember Aunty Cessor, don’t you? No? Perhaps she was a bit before your time.) The prints came to light on the beach through erosion, and unfortunately, they disappeared the same way. Scientists got them measured and photographed, but only lifted a mold from one before they were gone.

These prints were made by 5 individuals, both adult and children, walking across the wet silt of an ancient estuary. They are the oldest direct evidence of humanoids in all of Europe, let alone England. The next oldest evidence in Europe is a 780,000 year old skull fragment found in southern Spain. Before this discovery, England had some 700,000 year old stone tools to indicate a human presence.

How did people get across the Channel to trek to the west side of the island? At 1,000,000 years ago, there was no channel; England was connected by land to the mainland, and that could have been the case for another 100,000 years. Maybe a geologist could tell you when the channel became a water-way, but the Happisburgh footprints were made just as the ice age was beginning, so the water level was lower.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/news/the-million-year-old-family-human-footprints-found-in-britain-are-oldest-ever-seen-outside-of-africa-9114151.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10623660/900000-year-old-footprints-of-earliest-northern-Europeans-discovered.html

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26025763

Nomads

One of the panels I’ve given at several conventions this year has been “Where did the first Americans Come From?” In that panel, we discuss 6 different theories held by various scientists, from the one most of them agree is most likely to the one most people ridicule.

In doing my research for that panel-and just generally reading up on science subjects that spark my interest-I have arrived at one conclusion about humans and our ancestors... We have been nomads pretty much as long as we’ve been hominins. An article I read this past week has done much to confirm that, in my mind.

The article was actually about the Tibetan people and how they can thrive in the rarified atmosphere of the high altitudes where they live. Genetic studies have shown that most Tibetans (and a much lower percentage of the Han people in China) have an archaic gene. Not a mutant gene. An archaic gene inherited from a type of human that no longer exists.

This dead species of human is called the Denisovans. They are believed to have been related to-but distinct from-The Neanderthals (also extinct). And scientists probably would not know anything about the Denisovans at all, if someone had not found a single finger bone and 2 teeth in a Siberian cave. DNA study of those 41,000-year-old bones showed they belonged to people who were not Neanderthals, but definitely not modern human, either.

A genetic study of the Tibetan and Han people revealed they had inherited just enough Denisovan genetics to have the ability to up the production of hemoglobin in their blood. This increases their ability to get enough oxygen to their cells in an environment where most of us would have a tough time, due to lack of oxygen.

So, in order for the more modern humans to have bred with Denisovans (or the Neanderthals, for that matter) those earlier versions must have not just left Africa at some earlier time, but spread out across all of Eurasia. After all, Siberia is just about as far away from Africa as they could have gone. And later groups of hominins and humans would have exchanged DNA as they moved into the area, or passed through the area, or whatever.

If humans were not naturally nomads, they might never have left Africa, and then where would we be? Well, I guess we might all still be in Africa.

Distant Ancestors

In my never-ending quest to get my science knowledge a little more up-to-date (the better to write science fiction), I periodically surf the net in search of interesting but not too complicated science articles. This past week, I ran across quite a few articles about Neanderthals; when they died out, where they died out, why they died out, and so on.

You know about the Neanderthals; big heavy brows, broad flat noses, short chunky bodies. All those characteristics were helpful to them as they lived in Europe during ice age conditions. I don't remember how the heavy brows were helpful, but the noses helped warm the frigid air before it hit their lungs, and their compact bodies conserved body heat.

Up until recently, it was believed that the last of the Neanderthals died out in the area of Spain about 40-42,000 years ago, helped along on the road to extinction by the arrival of 'modern man' into Europe shortly before the demise of the Neanderthals. It wasn't certain that the two groups came into direct conflict and poked holes into one another, but if nothing else, they were both vying for the same food supply, and it was thought Neanderthals just couldn't effectively compete.

According to what I read this week, a new dating technique for old skeletons and other remains has now pushed the demise of the Spanish Neanderthals to around 50,000 years ago. So, were they completely gone before 'modern man' arrived? Probably not. The scientists were going to be conducting more tests on other sites, but it was rather expected that the new dating technique would also push back the date of modern man's arrival into Europe a similar amount of time. So, other than changing the position of a couple dots on a timeline, this didn't really change much.

On the other hand, genetic anthropologists have been analyzing tiny bits of Neanderthal DNA wherever they could find it, and by combining the results of all their work, they figure they've got about 12% of a complete Neanderthal DNA workup.

And it seems Jean Auel was correct when she wrote in Clan of the Cave Bear that Neanderthals and modern man had babies together. Scientists have compared current DNA to Neanderthal DNA and found that modern people have as much as 2% of their DNA from Neanderthals. The amount varies between ethnicities, but it's there.

So... I blame my son's unibrow on Several-times-great-grandfather Oogh, of the German Neanderthals.

Dogs of the World

I like dogs. (I love cats, but that's another story.) Lately I've been reading a few articles having to do with the genealogy of dogs, particularly in the Americas.

When I was a kid, school described North American indian tribes as having horses and ponies. I was too young to question that at the time. Later, it was explained that the ponies originated with the Spanish explorers in Mexico, and that they quickly spread throughout North America. I assumed the indian dogs were a similar story.

But it turns out that dogs had already been here when the Spaniards, the Vikings, and other Europeans arrived. It had been assumed that when the indigenous people died out, their dogs died with them, having no one to take care of them.

These recent articles explained that the original 'American' dogs came over the land bridge from Asia and Siberia with the people who became indigenous indian tribes. Those dogs did not die out and were not supplanted by European dogs. They survived, interbred with the European dogs, and are still here.

This was discovered by comparing the DNA of American dogs with that of Asian and European dogs. The American DNA was much closer to the Asian DNA than the European DNA. This was true as far east as Greenland.

So the Mexican hairless, the Peruvian hairless, and any number of other breeds are about as American as they can get.

My family has a mutt. He's a great addition to our family, and I assume he's an 'American' mutt. How about you? Tell me about your dog.

A Rose by Any Other Name...

We’re all aware that language evolves, right?

Somewhere in school - probably in an English class - the teacher gave us a glimpse at that evolution. Language in Europe and Asia started from an unknown Indo-European language that split into other languages, including Germanic and Latin. Latin developed into French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese. That was all we heard about the ‘Romance Languages’.

That teacher spent much more time on the Germanic tongue. I remember she mentioned High German and Low German, though I don’t remember what the difference was. As I remember it, the Low German used in the British Isles became Old English, then Middle English, and eventually, something that resembled the English we speak today. To emphasize how much the English language had changed, she had us students read The Canterbury Tales - in the original (Old? Middle? I don’t remember).

It seemed hopeless, but I tried. If I was lucky, I might have seen 1 word out of 10 that possibly bore some semblance to a modern word, although the meaning had probably changed. Our ‘reading’ of the Tales was more of her translating to us.

This past week, I read an article that asserted that at least 23 words had traveled down through the various versions of language relatively unchanged for the past 15,000 years. I read the article twice to be sure I understood what they were saying: A core vocabulary has remained fairly unchanged from the original Indo-European, and sound remarkably similar in the various regional languages in that area today.

This list includes thou (you), I, not, that, we, who, man, mother, and hand. These are words that would have been used all the time, no matter what time period a person lived in. But as cave-dwellers became farmers, they would have needed new words to describe the soil, the plants and what they were doing with them. And so on until man’s vocabulary became full of ebooks, cyberspace and so on.

A few words that appeared on this basic vocabulary list did surprise the researchers, and one was bark (of a tree). It’s not a word we use incredibly often today, and those not constantly used are the ones that change. Anthropologists explained that 10-15,000 years ago, tree bark would have been extremely important; people would have talked about it all the time.

So, words change over time. It makes me wonder what a rose would have been called way back when. Maybe some sound combination that roughly translates into “pretty thing that stings”?

Who's Your Distant Ancestor?

Back when I was in grade school, I remember one of my sisters preparing a display for her high school science fair project. In that project, she compared Neanderthals to Cro-Magnons. I don’t remember what kind of grade she received, but I found her project fascinating. Two types of humans, living at the same time! I wondered what their interactions would have been like.

Since then, the same question has been explored in various medias. Jean Auel’s Clan of the Cave Bear made a big splash with readers as it followed the life of a young Cro-Magnon, also known as a modern human, who was raised by Neanderthals, if I remember correctly. Various educational shows on TV have been made about the Neanderthals, the Homo Sapiens, how they were different, how they were alike, and how they might have interacted before the Neanderthals died out.

The impression I’ve gotten over all these years was that scientists didn’t feel these two species of humans had interbred, and I wondered why they thought that way. Neanderthals are depicted as kind of squat, hairy, with a heavy brow, broad noses and receding chins. I could look around and see people who had those attributes, although it’s usually one per person, not all of them. But no, it seemed we were determined to blame our own ancestors for killing the last of the Neanderthals.

At last, a skeleton has been discovered in northern Italy that appears to be that of a mixed breed. Although mostly that of a modern human, the jaw displays a receding chin. The DNA reveals this person had Neanderthal mitochondrial (maternal) DNA. So it would seem the two species did interbreed, at least once.

Which opens up a whole new mess of ancient ancestors we didn’t realize were in the gene pool.

Sometimes when I’m working out the background for a story, I pick 2 or 3 genetic things to track throughout the population and then work out how those attributes manifest in the population over the generations. The gene for dark hair, for instance, will dominate a gene for lighter hair, and blond will dominate red hair. But after a few generations of almost all the people having dark hair, you will start getting a generation or two of lots of blonds, and a few redheads will crop up. The number of blonds will ebb and flow; the number of redheads tends to remain fairly steady.

I never thought to track the occurrence of receding chins.