2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.02.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Early and Middle Pleistocene Faunal and hominins dispersals through Southwestern Asia

Abstract: 12This review summarizes the paleoecology of the Early and Middle Pleistocene of 13 southwestern Asia, based on both flora and fauna, retrieved from a series of 'windows' 14 provided by the excavated sites. The incomplete chrono-stratigraphy of this vast region 15 does not allow to accept the direct chronological correlation between the available sites 16 and events of faunal and hominin dispersals from Africa. It also demonstrates that 17 hominins survived in a mixed landscape of open parkland with forested s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
36
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 123 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 109 publications
1
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the Middle Orontes there is again a well-developed terrace record, newly discovered to extend up the eastern valley side to ~120 m above the modern river, these higher levels (marked by calcreted gravels comparable with those in the Upper Orontes) perhaps representing the Pliocene . The biostratigraphical marker at Latamneh would now be assigned an age in the region of 1.2-0.9 Ma, largely based on small-mammal faunas, interpreted in comparison with the Israeli sites at Ubeidiya and Gesher Benot Yaaqov, which are regarded as older and younger, repectively, than Latamneh (Bar-Yosef and Belmaker, 2010;cf. von Koenigswald et al, 1992;Mein and Besançon, 1993;Goren-Inbar et al, 2000).…”
Section: Fig 8 Hereaboutsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the Middle Orontes there is again a well-developed terrace record, newly discovered to extend up the eastern valley side to ~120 m above the modern river, these higher levels (marked by calcreted gravels comparable with those in the Upper Orontes) perhaps representing the Pliocene . The biostratigraphical marker at Latamneh would now be assigned an age in the region of 1.2-0.9 Ma, largely based on small-mammal faunas, interpreted in comparison with the Israeli sites at Ubeidiya and Gesher Benot Yaaqov, which are regarded as older and younger, repectively, than Latamneh (Bar-Yosef and Belmaker, 2010;cf. von Koenigswald et al, 1992;Mein and Besançon, 1993;Goren-Inbar et al, 2000).…”
Section: Fig 8 Hereaboutsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First described by Blankenhorn (1897) based on shells from the Orontes, A. apameae is best known from the Jordan valley, where it has been used as an index fossil to define the 'upper freshwater series' or 'Viviparus Beds' of the Benot Ya'aqov Formation at Gesher Benot Ya'aqov (Picard, 1963;Tchernov, 1973;Goren-Inbar and Belitzky, 1989;Bar-Yosef and Belmaker, 2010), noted above as being somewhat more recent than the Latamneh deposits. As at Karkour, A. apameae is found in direct association with handaxes at Gesher Benot Ya'aqov (Goren-Inbar and Belitzky, 1989;Goren-Inbar et al, 1992).…”
Section: Palaeontology Of the Ghab Sedimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A wider range of exploitation methods emerges. For example, the late Acheulean / Acheuleo / Yabrudian lowland sites of Adlun (Roe, 1983), the lowest level G at Hayonim (Stiner, 2005), Misliya (Weinstein-Evron et al, 2003), Tabun (Bate, 1937), and Qesem (Stiner et al, 2004(Stiner et al, , 2009Bar-Yosef and Belmaker, 2011) are based on a different resource mixture with bovids, fallow deer and gazelle assuming major components of the diet in notably different environments. At the same time, late Acheulean sites in the Samarian and Judaean hills, for example Sahl el-Koussin (Roche, 1936) and Emek Refaim (Stekelis, 1948;Arensburg and Bar-Yosef, 1967), suggest that exploitation of the medium and smaller herbivores expanded into upland limestone areas.…”
Section: After the Elephantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The area is tectonically active, which results in the creation and rejuvenation of complex landscape features that have been shown to be particularly favourable for hominin occupation. It is also relatively rich in Palaeolithic remains and has been extensively studied, so that there is a database of observations on which synthetic research can draw (Bar-Yosef, 1995;Tchernov, 1999;Turner, 1999;Goren-Inbar et al, 2000, OÕRegan et al, 2005King and Bailey, 2006;Shea, 2008;Belmaker, 2010;Fleagle et al, 2010;Issar, 2010;Bar-Yosef and Belmaker, 2011;Winder et al, 2012). All of this makes the region an interesting regional ÔlaboratoryÕ for the examination of the various factors that may have promoted or constrained hominin occupation and dispersal.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%