Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By News Staff | December 10th 2008 12:00 AM | 3 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
It is widely accepted that Upper Paleolithic early modern humans spread westward across Europe about 42,000 years ago, variably displacing and absorbing Neandertal (alt. spelling Neanderthal) populations in the process. However, Middle Paleolithic assemblages persisted for another 8,000 years in Iberia, presumably made by Neandertals. It has been unclear whether these late Middle Paleolithic Iberian assemblages were made by Neandertals, and what the nature of those humans might have been. 

New research, published Dec. 8 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is now shedding some light on what were probably the last Neandertals. 

The research is based on a study of human fossils found during the past decade at the Sima de la Palomas, Murcia, Spain by Michael Walker, professor at Universidad de Murcia, and colleagues, and published by Michael Walker, Erik Trinkaus, professor of Anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis, and colleagues. 



The human fossils from the upper levels of the Sima de las Palomas are anatomically clearly Neandertals, and they are now securely dated to 40,000 years ago. They therefore establish the late persistence of Neandertals in this southwestern cul-de-sac of Europe. This reinforces the conclusion that the Neandertals were not merely swept away by advancing modern humans. The behavioral differences between these human groups must have been more subtle than the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic technological contrasts might imply. 

In addition, the Palomas Neandertals variably exhibit a series of modern human features rare or absent in earlier Neandertals. Either they were evolving on their own towards the modern human pattern, or more likely, they had contact with early modern humans around the Pyrenees. If the latter, it implies that the persistence of the Middle Paleolithic in Iberia was a matter of choice, and not cultural retardation. 

From the Sima de las Palomas, other late Neandertal sites, and recent discoveries of the earliest modern humans across Europe, a complex picture is emerging of shifting contact between behaviorally similar, if culturally and biologically different, human populations. Researchers are coming to see them all more as people, flexibly making a living through the changing human and natural landscapes of the Late Pleistocene.


Comments

jgerke's picture
This is really interesting stuff.  I wonder if we'll ever have evidence that they intermated.  Back then, everybody was dirty, everybody was smelly....I imagine it happened, but the genetic evidence might not exist today.

There is clearly a very difficult merging of color in modern U.S.A. today. Humans do tend to spill over ethnic, color and social barriers for whatever reason. We are anatomically compatible with the great apes and Chimps, barriers yet to be proven breached. We must first know how great the barriers before we can speculate on inter-breeding, or even inter-mingling! We may never know.

Gerhard Adam's picture
I'm not sure that genetic evidence for interbreeding is actually necessary.  Forgetting issues of appeal between members of different groups, the ultimate point is that of reproduction and not simply sex.

Besides anatomical compatibility, there would have to be sufficient genetic compatibility to ensure that any fertilized egg be viable enough for gestation.  During gestation one has to question the role of hormones, etc and the influence they would have on the embryo.  In other words, does the mother's biochemistry potentially override those of a male (in a case of close species compatibility)?   As we already known from other species cross-breeding, the mother will significantly influence the development of the offspring since her biochemistry must attempt to ensure a viable delivery and successful birth.

Even with a successful gestation, the issue of delivery and long-term care become significant issues which also indicates a closer relationship between individuals and groups than simply tossing if off to "inter-breeding".  In addition, the resultant offspring must also have a viable reproductive future, or the issue of "inter-breeding" becomes irrelevant.  The issues are many and varied, so while there may not be direct genetic evidence for interbreeding, there are certainly enough secondary factors to provide some strong hints regarding the likelihood of such pairings. 

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.