Aurignacian Male Crania, Jaws and Teeth from the Mladeč Caves, Moravia, Czech Republic

Frayer, David W.; Jelı́nek, Jan; Oliva, Martin; Wolpoff, Milford H.

doi:10.1007/978-3-211-49294-9_9

Cited by 39 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The largest sample of reliably dated modern human remains comes from Mladeč (Czech Republic) (Wild et al, 2005; and references therein). This 31-kya-old sample exhibits diagnostically modern human features (Churchill and Smith, 2000;Trinkaus, 2005;Frayer et al, 2006;Wolpoff et al, 2006). The presence of Neandertal traits in some of the crania, however, such as a suprainiac fossa in Mladeč 6, midfacial prognathism in Mladeč 1 and 2, and occipital bunning in Mladeč males in general (see Fig.…”

Section: The Biology Of Up People Craniodental Morphologymentioning

confidence: 78%

Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people

Holt

Formicola

2008

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Upper Paleolithic represents both the phase during which anatomically modern humans appeared and the climax of hunter-gatherer cultures. Demographic expansion into new areas that took place during this period and the diffusion of burial practices resulted in an unprecedented number of well-preserved human remains. This skeletal record, dovetailed with archeological, environmental, and chronological contexts, allows testing of hypotheses regarding biological processes at the population level. In this article, we review key studies about the biology of Upper Paleolithic populations based primarily on European samples, but integrating information from other areas of the Old World whenever possible. Data about cranial morphology, skeletal robusticity, stature, body proportions, health status, diet, physical activity, and genetics are evaluated in Late Pleistocene climatic and cultural contexts. Various lines of evidence delineate the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) as a critical phase in the biological and cultural evolution of Upper Paleolithic populations. The LGM, a long phase of climatic deterioration culminating around 20,000 BP, had a profound impact on the environment, lifestyle, and behavior of human groups. Some of these effects are recorded in aspects of skeletal biology of these populations. Groups living before and after the LGM, Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) and Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP), respectively, differ significantly in craniofacial dimensions, stature, robusticity, and body proportions. While paleopathological and stable isotope data suggest good health status throughout the Upper Paleolithic, some stress indicators point to a slight decline in quality of life in LUP populations. The intriguing and unexpected incidence of individuals affected by congenital disorders probably indicates selective burial practices for these abnormal individuals. While some of the changes observed can be explained through models of biocultural or environmental adaptation (e.g., decreased lower limb robusticity following decreased mobility; changes in body proportions along with climatic change), others are more difficult to explain. For instance, craniodental and upper limb robusticity show complex evolutionary patterns that do not always correspond to expectations. In addition, the marked decline in stature and the mosaic nature of change in body proportions still await clarifications. These issues, as well as systematic analysis of specific pathologies and possible relationships between genetic lineages, population movements and cultural complexes, should be among the goals of future research. Yrbk Phys Anthropol 51: 70-99, 2008. V

show abstract

Section: The Biology Of Up People Craniodental Morphologymentioning

confidence: 78%

Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people

Holt

Formicola

2008

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should be borne in mind that whether it is a supraorbital torus or superciliary arch is somewhat irrelevant in the investigation into affinity: the mere presence of torus does not define Salkhit to be an archaic specimen. A supraorbital torus is not exceptional nor unusual to be found among extant, recent humans, such as Mladeč (Frayer et al, 2006), Willandra Lake Hominid 50 and several from the Coobool Creek sample (Thorne and Wolpoff, 1981) being only a few of many examples. M-shaped supraorbitals are also found in specimens from Middle and Late Pleistocene, and also in Australians as recent as WLH 50 (Durband and Westaway, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…On each side of the sagittal suture in Salkhit, there is a raised ridge that runs parallel to the sagittal suture, and the ridges follow the suture, diverging as they swerve posterior and inferior. This feature is seen in ZKD XII and UC 101, not present in Dali, and also present in European Late Pleistocene specimens such as Mladeč 5 (Frayer et al, 2006).…”

Section: Parietalsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Homo erectus in Salkhit, Mongolia?

Lee

2015

HOMO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2006, a skullcap was discovered in Salkhit, Mongolia. The Salkhit skullcap has a mostly complete frontal, two partially complete parietals, and nasals. No chronometric dating has been published yet, and suggested dates range from early Middle Pleistocene to terminal Late Pleistocene. While no chronometric date has been published, the presence of archaic features has led to a potential affiliation with archaic hominin species. If it is indeed Homo erectus or archaic Homo sapiens, Salkhit implies a much earlier spread of hominins farther north and inland Asia than previously thought. In this paper, the nature of the archaic features in Salkhit is investigated. The Salkhit skullcap morphology and metrics were compared with Middle and Late Pleistocene hominin fossils from northeast Asia: Zhoukoudian Locality 1, Dali, and Zhoukoudian Upper Cave. Results show an interesting pattern: on one hand, the archaic features that Salkhit shares with the Zhoukoudian Locality 1 sample also are shared with other later hominins; on the other hand, Salkhit is different from the Middle Pleistocene materials in the same way later hominins differ from the Middle Pleistocene sample, in having a broader frontal and thinner supraorbital region. This may reflect encephalization and gracilization, a modernization trend found in many places. It is concluded that the archaic features observed in Salkhit are regionally predominant features rather than diagnostic features of an archaic species.

show abstract

“…Even though partial mixed (deciduous and permanent) dentitions exist for a number of early modern humans and Middle and Upper Paleolithic associated modern human individuals contemporaneous with or close in time to the Neandertals, many of these mixed dentitions are incomplete and analyses have relied on macroscopic radiographic assessments of relative dental development and structure (1,(12)(13)(14). At the same time, it has become apparent that there were significant changes in craniofacial and postcranial morphology between the Middle Paleolithic and earlier Upper Paleolithic modern human populations of western Eurasia and that of the terminal Pleistocene and Holocene inhabitants of the same region (15)(16)(17)(18).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental maturational sequence and dental tissue proportions in the early Upper Paleolithic child from Abrigo do Lagar Velho, Portugal

Bayle

Macchiarelli

Trinkaus

et al. 2010

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neandertals differ from recent and terminal Pleistocene human populations in their patterns of dental development, endostructural (internal structure) organization, and relative tissue proportions. Although significant changes in craniofacial and postcranial morphology have been found between the Middle Paleolithic and earlier Upper Paleolithic modern humans of western Eurasia and the terminal Pleistocene and Holocene inhabitants of the same region, most studies of dental maturation and structural morphology have compared Neandertals only to later Holocene humans. To assess whether earlier modern humans contrasted with later modern populations and possibly approached the Neandertal pattern, we used high-resolution microtomography to analyze the remarkably complete mixed dentition of the early Upper Paleolithic (Gravettian) child from Abrigo do Lagar Velho, Portugal, and compared it to a Neandertal sample, the late Upper Paleolithic (Magdalenian) child of La Madeleine, and a worldwide extant human sample. Some aspects of the dental maturational pattern and tooth endostructural organization of Lagar Velho 1 are absent from extant populations and the Magdalenian specimen and are currently documented only among Neandertals. Therefore, a simple Neandertal versus modern human dichotomy is inadequate to accommodate the morphostructural and developmental variation represented by Middle Paleolithic and earlier Upper Paleolithic populations. These data reinforce the complex nature of Neandertal-modern human similarities and differences, and document ongoing human evolution after the global establishment of modern human morphology.

show abstract

Aurignacian Male Crania, Jaws and Teeth from the Mladeč Caves, Moravia, Czech Republic

Cited by 39 publications

References 53 publications

Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people

Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people

Homo erectus in Salkhit, Mongolia?

Dental maturational sequence and dental tissue proportions in the early Upper Paleolithic child from Abrigo do Lagar Velho, Portugal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About