[ad_1]
While we are drawn to the headlines of “Oldest Human Fossil Found” and “New Human Ancestor Found”, the idea that we are on the way to unearthing a single point in time and space for origins. modern humans is unlikely. A new study suggests that instead of continuing to research the origin and timing of modern human ancestry, the focus should be on solving other mysteries.
If the subject of human ancestry is undoubtedly fascinating, EurekAlert! notes that “the meaning of words like ancestor and ancestry is rarely discussed in detail.” This is where the new study comes in, with a different perspective. A team of experts from the Natural History Museum, the Francis Crick Institute and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History Jena presented a new article titled “ Origins of modern human ascestry ” in the journal Nature.
A single starting point will not be found in the genetic or fossil record
The study explores the current understanding of modern human ancestry and how it can be traced back to the distant past, as well as some of the human ancestors found on this timeline. He also asserts that no specific starting point can currently be identified when we speak of modern human ancestry.
Locations of the earliest individuals of modern human ancestry in Eurasia, as well as sites that may indicate earlier dispersal in Asia and the Sahul (the continental shelf centered on Australia). (Bergström et al. 2021 / Nature)
They write: “No precise point in time can currently be identified where modern human ancestry has been confined to a limited birthplace, and that the models of the first appearance of anatomical or behavioral traits used to define Homo sapiens are consistent with a range of evolutionary histories. ”
Professor Chris Stringer, co-author of the new study and researcher at the Natural History Museum, explained that there simply wasn’t enough information to work on. He said:
Some of our ancestors will have lived in groups or populations that can be identified in the fossil record, while we will know very little about the others . Over the next decade, the growing recognition of our complex origins is expected to extend the geographic scope of paleoanthropological fieldwork to regions previously considered peripheral to our evolution, such as Central and West Africa, the Indian subcontinent, and Southeast Asia.
This skull from Jebel Irhoud in Morocco is often referred to as a modern human ancestor. The subject of human ancestry is carefully examined in a new study. ( Chris Stringer )
Study co-author Pontus Skoglund, from the Francis Crick Institute, continued the idea, saying:
Contrary to what many believe, neither the genetic or fossil record has so far revealed a definite time and place for the origin of our species. Such a point in time, when the majority of our ancestry was found in a small geographic area and the traits we associate with our species appeared, may not have existed. For now, it would be useful to move away from the idea of a single time and place of origin.
What should researchers be looking for instead?
The study identifies three significant phases of human ancestry and the major questions that still surround these phases. They suggest that future research should explore these avenues instead of trying to find the elusive starting point of human history.
The first of three points of interest is given in the article as “the global expansion of modern humans between 40 and 60 thousand years (ka) and their last known contact with archaic groups such as Neanderthals and Denisovans”. A second objective “is associated with an African origin in the broad sense of modern human diversity between 60 and 300 ka”. Finally, experts believe that there should be more interest in “the complex separation of modern human ancestors and archaic human groups 0.3 to 1 million years ago.”
a, Locations of major human fossils of H. sapiens, Neanderthals, Denisovan, and other archaics from the past 500,000 years. Pale colors indicate uncertain but possible lineage assignments. b, Chronology of archaic human populations that are unlikely to have contributed to modern human ancestry. These include Homo naledi, Homo floresiensis, and Homo luzonensis. (Bergström et al. 2021 / Nature)
According to study co-author Eleanor Scerri of the Pan-African Evolution Research Group at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, these major questions “concern the mechanisms that have driven and sustained this human patchwork, with all of its various ancestral sons, in time and space. Further, Scerri clarified that “Understanding the relationship between fractured habitats and changing human niches will undoubtedly play a key role in resolving these questions, clarifying the demographic patterns that best fit the genetic and paleoanthropological records. ”
What do we need to shift the focus of research on human ancestry?
To accomplish the monumental task of answering these questions, the researchers note that the old genetic record must be amplified. To do this, they suggest that improvements are needed in the technology used to recover and screen ancient DNA, including the ability to find ancient sedimentary genetic material. More interdisciplinary work on fossil, archaeological and genetic records is also encouraged.
Top image: New study suggests three key phases in human ancestry for scientists to focus on future research. Source: pure adrenaline / Adobe Stock
By Alicia McDermott
[ad_2]
Source link