Check out what's new in the Thinking Meat Bookstore!
Jan 262010
 

Some things that change in time seem to be following a particular trajectory. Hard drives get smaller. Cell phones gain functionality. Internet advertising gets more annoying. Primate brains get bigger. Well, wait a minute. Human technologies may be progressing along a particular path, but the evolution of the primate brain is not quite the same. Evolution adapts organisms to their circumstances over time, and evidently in some primate lineages, this results in smaller rather than larger brains. A recent study, spurred by the discovery of fossilized remains of diminutive (and small-brained) Homo floresiensis, examined brain size and body size over time in a variety of primate species. Although brains have certainly gotten bigger in some lineages, most notably us, in other branches of the primate family tree, brains have gotten smaller. This article from Scientific American has more.

P.S. Oops, I somehow accidentally deleted the sentence about how this study supports the idea that the small brain size of Homo floresiensis is a result of standard evolutionary procedure rather than evidence of deformity.

Share
Mar 202008
 

Several news items have appeared lately about human evolution. This article from the New York Times examines some new evidence in the debate over the disputed new species, Homo floresiensis. Small hominin fossils discovered on the Indonesian island of Flores are believed by some to represent a newly discovered species of humans, and by others to be the bones of modern humans, perhaps adapted for island life (which often reduces the size of a species over time) or perhaps suffering from congenital disorders. Now another set of fossils from small humans has been discovered, this batch on a Micronesian island. The new fossils share some facial traits with the Flores fossils, but had bigger brains and are believed to be smaller versions of modern humans, suggesting that perhaps the Flores bones are not a new species either. There’s no end in sight yet for the debate, which the article summarizes.

This article from Live Science covers a new study into skeletal differences between humans and Neanderthals, our fellow hominins who likely shared the planet with us before dying out around 30,000 years ago. After examining human and Neanderthal skulls, a research team concluded that the differences between them are random individual characteristics and not evidence of any evolutionary adaptations that gave humans the edge over Neanderthals. One possible conclusion is that it was not a physiological or anatomical difference that made us better equipped to thrive on the planet, but some kind of social or cultural edge. On the other hand, Erik Trinkaus, Neanderthal researcher at Washington University in St. Louis and unconnected with the recent skull study, sees very little meaningful difference of any sort between the two species, and argues that perhaps it was just luck that led to the success of humans and the death of Neanderthals.

And finally, going much further back in time, recent research suggests that bipedalism did not arise relatively recently in the hominin lineage but goes clear back to a species called Orrorin tugenensis. This very early hominin lived in Africa around six million years ago, somewhere around the time that the chimpanzee and human branches diverged from each other. Measurements of fossil thigh bones indicate that it walked upright on two legs some of the time and also spent some time climbing trees on all fours; biomechanically its gait differed from that of modern humans. Walking upright evidently has a longer and more complicated story than we knew before. This story from US News & World Report has the details.

Share
Sep 212007
 

Fossilized bones of a mysterious undersized and small-brained hominid discovered several years ago on the Indonesian island of Flores have given rise to plenty of controversy. Are they, as their discoverers claim, the remains of a distinct species, Homo floresiensis, or are they the same species as us, but simply microcephalic (born with unusually small brains)? The debate goes back and forth. The latest evidence sounds fairly convincing to me: The wrist bones of the hominid resemble those of a modern chimpanzee or an early hominid, and are very unlike those of a modern human, indicating that the bones do belong to a previously unknown species of human and are not simply evidence of deformed modern humans. You can read more at the New Scientist and MSNBC/Newsweek.

Share
Jan 312007
 

One more bit of news about the debate over the fossils found in Indonesia (Homo floresiensis or otherwise): the site where the bones were found is being re-opened for further exploration. Perhaps more samples will provide evidence that will end the debate over whether the bones are from a new species or from a microcephalic Homo sapiens. There’s a brief news item at Scientific American.

Share
Jan 292007
 

In 2003, some unusual hominid bones were discovered on the Indonesian island of Flores. The short, small-headed, so-called “hobbit” specimen sparked an ongoing debate about whether the bones belonged to a physically deformed (perhaps microcephalic, or unusually small-brained) modern human or to a different species, dubbed Homo floresiensis. In August of 2006, an international team published the results of its investigations, which indicated that the bones were not those of a new species. However, the latest news is that Dean Falk’s team at Florida State, which first identified the bones as those of a new species in April 2005, has completed further studies of the skull that support their earlier conclusion, contrary to the other team’s August 2006 results. Casts of the skull reveal details of brain anatomy and show that the ancient hominid’s brain resembles that of a modern human rather than a microcephalic brain, although it also has unique features that would justify its designation as a new species. This press release gives more details. This evidently settles the question enough for Falk that she says it’s time to start working on other questions about Homo floresiensis, but I don’t know if we’ve really heard the last of the debate.

Share
Aug 292006
 

This news article from Nature gives an overview of the argument over the Indonesian fossils that some claim are a new species, Homo floresiensis. Recently an international team published some results indicating that the fossils are not from a different species, but came from pygmy Homo sapiens, and that peculiarities in some of the bones are due to deformity and are not the features of a different species. However, some of those who believe that the fossils represent a unique species are not deterred. This article makes the point that it’s hard to see how the argument will be resolved. More fossils might not be forthcoming any time soon because further excavations are not allowed (for political reasons) at the site where the bones were found. DNA recovery would be an excellent way to settle the question, but the specimens are old enough that it might not be possible.

Share
Aug 212006
 

The latest analysis of the hominid bones found on the island of Flores in Indonesia indicates that they do not belong to a new species after all. This press release from Penn State describes the work of a team of scientists who concluded that the bones come from predecessors of the modern-day pygmies who inhabit Flores, and that one of these ancestors suffered from microcephaly and various other developmental abnormalities. In 2004 the find was hailed as being the remnants of a new species of humans, Homo floresiensis, but the new team found several errors in the original analysis: The bones were compared not to humans in the region where they were found, but to people from other places, mostly Europeans; the geographical evidence for isolation is lacking; features that were thought to be unique in fact aren’t, or are the result of deformity rather than signs of a new species.

Share
Oct 112005
 

Here’s the latest in the story about the unusually small hominid fossil found on the island of Flores in Indonesia a couple of years ago. While some think that the find represents a different species of hominids (which I’ve heard called Homo floresiensis) that was alive as late as 12,000 years ago, others say that it’s from a modern human with a condition called microcephaly. More bones have been found, giving scientists evidence of at least nine separate individuals and strengthening the claim that this is indeed a separate species. They sound like an unusually proportioned species, not variants of modern humans or Homo erectus but maybe descended from Australopithecus afarensis. Scientists have also found indications that the hominids knew how to start fires and butchered stegodons (a kind of dwarf elephant) for their meat. The site where these bones have been found is mostly unexplored, so there might well be a lot more material out there.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8128

Share