Archaic hominin introgression into modern human genomes

Gökçümen, Ömer

doi:10.1002/ajpa.23951

Cited by 66 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 139 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An explosion of recent paleogenomic research, along with new techniques for identifying fossil human bone fragments from archaeological contexts have given us new data on the timing of modern humans' arrival and colonization of the inner parts of Asia. Moreover, there is now evidence of multiple encounters (for a review, see Gokcumen, 2019) between the (so far) three different metapopulations, the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans. Where exactly these encounters took place is not clear, but the amount of time spent in chrono-spatial overlap between them is large enough that the entire territory of central Asia is a possibility (see also Boivin et al, 2013).…”

Section: Central Asia As a Crossroads For Paleolithic Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In search of a Paleolithic Silk Road in Kazakhstan

Ioviţă

Varis

Namen

et al. 2020

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paleoanthropological data suggest that the Late Pleistocene was a time of population contact and possibly dispersal in Central Asia. Geographic and paleoclimatic data suggest that a natural corridor through Kazakhstan linked areas to the north and east (Siberia, China) to those further to the west and south (Uzbekistan), much akin to a Paleolithic Silk Road. We review the known Pleistocene archaeology and paleoclimatic setting of this region and provide a geoarchaeological framework for contextualizing preliminary survey results of the PALAEOSILKROAD project's first three seasons of fieldwork. We discuss some systematic biases in three geomorphic and sedimentary archives: karst, loess, and spring deposits, specifying ways in which these biases might determine the kinds of data that are extractable by systematic survey. In particular, we caution about the possibility of future systematic biases in chronology that could come about as a result of the type of geomorphic context in which the sites are recovered. We conclude with recommendations for future work in the area.

show abstract

Section: Central Asia As a Crossroads For Paleolithic Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In search of a Paleolithic Silk Road in Kazakhstan

Ioviţă

Varis

Namen

et al. 2020

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A complicating factor, however, is that several phases of contact between H. sapiens and archaic humans existed, and populations mixed multiple times across the Eurasian continent, resulting in fertile offspring (e.g. Green et al 2010;Posth et al 2017;Wolf and Akey 2018;Gokcumen 2019;Villanea and Schraiber 2019;Chen et al 2020). Admixture events took place, for example, at~120 ka in the Near East (Hovers 2006;Kuhlwilm et al 2016), most likely in western Asia at~60-50 ka (Nielsen et al 2017), and as late as 42-37 ka in present-day Romania (Fu et al 2015;Gokcumen 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-Field Co-evolutionary Model for Human Cognition: Variation in the Middle Stone Age/Middle Palaeolithic

Lombard

Högberg

2021

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here we explore variation and similarities in the two best-represented population groups who lived during the Middle Stone Age and Middle Palaeolithic—the Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Building on approaches such as gene-culture co-evolution, we propose a four-field model to discuss relationships between human cognitive evolution, biology, technology, society, and ecology. We focus on the pre-50-ka phase, because we reason that later admixing between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens in Eurasia may make it difficult to separate them in terms of cognition, or any of the other fields discussed in this paper. Using our model enabled us to highlight similarities in cognition between the two populations in terms of symbolic behaviour and social learning and to identify differences in aspects of technical and social cognition. Dissimilarities in brain-selective gene variants and brain morphology strongly suggest differences in some evolutionary trajectories that would have affected cognition. We therefore suggest that rather than insisting that Neanderthals were cognitively ‘the same’ as Homo sapiens, it may be useful to focus future studies on Neanderthal-specific cognition that may have been well-developed within their specific context at the time.

show abstract

“…53,94,104 Finally, recent recognition of the fact that there are multiple modes for the inheritance of evolutionarily relevant variation from generation to generation (genetic, epigenetic, behavioral and cultural/ symbolic), 87 mandates that attention must be paid in our investigations of Homo evolution specifically to the transmission of variation across genetic, epigenetic, and behavioral avenues. 35,75 This is underway with the augmented study of aDNA and paleoproteins, 50,106,107 with the analyses and inferences of life history shifts and developmental processes via fossil remains 108 and via increased attention to specific modulations and modification of material and ecological indicators of behavior in the archeological record. 97 Because humans can also create and inherit symbols, perceptions and beliefs, which can be evolutionarily relevant [109][110][111]…”

Section: The Ees Is Necessary To Better Understand Human Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ripples of modernity: How we can extend paleoanthropology with the extended evolutionary synthesis

Kissel

Fuentes

2021

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary understandings of paleoanthropological data illustrate that the search for a line defining, or a specific point designating, “modern human” is problematic. Here we lend support to the argument for the need to look for patterns in the paleoanthropological record that indicate how multiple evolutionary processes intersected to form the human niche, a concept critical to assessing the development and processes involved in the emergence of a contemporary human phenotype. We suggest that incorporating key elements of the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) into our endeavors offers a better and more integrative toolkit for modeling and assessing the evolution of the genus Homo. To illustrate our points, we highlight how aspects of the genetic exchanges, morphology, and material culture of the later Pleistocene complicate the concept of “modern” human behavior and suggest that multiple evolutionary patterns, processes, and pathways intersected to form the human niche.

show abstract

Archaic hominin introgression into modern human genomes

Cited by 66 publications

References 139 publications

In search of a Paleolithic Silk Road in Kazakhstan

In search of a Paleolithic Silk Road in Kazakhstan

Four-Field Co-evolutionary Model for Human Cognition: Variation in the Middle Stone Age/Middle Palaeolithic

The ripples of modernity: How we can extend paleoanthropology with the extended evolutionary synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About