Mezmaiskaya Cave: A Neanderthal Occupation in the Northern Caucasus

Golovanova, Liubov V.; Hoffecker, John F.; Харитонов, В. М.; Romanova, Galina P.

doi:10.1086/515805

Cited by 115 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, the clavicles of Mezmaiskaya 1 and Le Moustier 2 are too fragmentary to reliably estimate the length, but the somewhat older Amud 7 Neandertal seems to already have a clavicle that is long relative to humerus length (14). Consistent with our results, Golovanova et al (40) concluded that Mezmaiskaya 1 had relatively short distal limb segments and relatively large ends of the radius and femur in comparison with a recent human infant of similar dental age; and Ponce de León et al (11) found that Mezmaiskaya 1 had absolutely large distal ends of the humerus and femur, absolutely long ilium and pubis, and a relatively short tibia in comparison with the means of measurements collected by Fazekas and Kósa (41) on a recent Hungarian fetal skeletal sample.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…S1 and S2). Detailed stratigraphic assessments clearly indicate that the Mezmaiskaya 1 skeleton and level 3 were deposited at the same time, both dating to very close to or greater than the effective measurement limit of radiocarbon (∼50 ka) and likely to 70-60 ka based on electron spin resonance mean early and late uptake model determinations for level 3 (11,40,61,62).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neonatal postcrania from Mezmaiskaya, Russia, and Le Moustier, France, and the development of Neandertal body form

Weaver

Coqueugniot

Golovanova³

et al. 2016

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neandertal and modern human adults differ in skeletal features of the cranium and postcranium, and it is clear that many of the cranial differences-although not all of them-are already present at the time of birth. We know less, however, about the developmental origins of the postcranial differences. Here, we address this deficiency with morphometric analyses of the postcrania of the two most complete Neandertal neonates-Mezmaiskaya 1 (from Russia) and Le Moustier 2 (from France)-and a recent human sample. We find that neonatal Neandertals already appear to possess the wide body, long pubis, and robust long bones of adult Neandertals. Taken together, current evidence indicates that skeletal differences between Neandertals and modern humans are largely established by the time of birth. body proportions | climatic adaptation | Homo neanderthalensis | infracranial | ontogeny

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Neonatal postcrania from Mezmaiskaya, Russia, and Le Moustier, France, and the development of Neandertal body form

Weaver

Coqueugniot

Golovanova³

et al. 2016

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of particular interest are the features present on 2 well-preserved neonatal skeletons from Mezmaiskaya, Russian Federation and Le Moustier, France. The Neandertal features found on the Mezmaiskaya specimen include an overall cranial shape similar to that of other Neandertals, an elongated foramen magnum, a projecting midface, an inferiorly positioned posterior semicircular canal, and an inferiorly positioned mandibular condyle (39,40). Those on Le Moustier 2 include the absence of an infraorbital concavity and nasal bones shaped like those of adult Neandertals (41).…”

Section: Neandertal Cranial Morphologymentioning

confidence: 77%

The meaning of Neandertal skeletal morphology

Weaver

2009

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

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A procedure is outlined for distinguishing among competing hypotheses for fossil morphology and then used to evaluate current views on the meaning of Neandertal skeletal morphology. Three explanations have dominated debates about the meaning of Neandertal cranial features: climatic adaptation, anterior dental loading, and genetic drift. Neither climatic adaptation nor anterior dental loading are well supported, but genetic drift is consistent with the available evidence. Climatic adaptation and activity patterns are the most discussed explanations for Neandertal postcranial features. Robust empirical relationships between climate and body form in extant humans and other endotherms currently make climatic adaptation the most plausible explanation for the wide bodies and relatively short limbs of Neandertals, and many additional postcranial features are likely secondary consequences of these overall skeletal proportions. Activity patterns may explain certain Neandertal postcranial features, but unlike the situation for climate, relationships in extant humans between morphology and activities are typically not well established. For both the cranium and the postcranium, changes in diet or activity patterns may underlie why Neandertals and Pleistocene modern humans tend to be more robust than Holocene humans.cranium ͉ human evolution ͉ modern human origins ͉ postcranium

show abstract

“…No se observan, p. ej., tales evidencias indicativas de un cambio en la cultura neandertal en la cueva de Mezmaiskaya (Rusia) (Golovanova et al 1999), a pesar de que el ejemplar que vivió allí hace entre 60 y 70 ka posee una constitución genética sustancialmente idéntica a los más modernos encontrados en localizaciones más distantes: dos de los tres ejemplares de Vindija (Croacia) datan de hace 38.310 ± 2.130 y 44.450 ± 550 años; el de El Sidrón (Asturias, España), de hace ~49.000 años; y el del valle de Neander (Alemania), de hace ~42.000 años (Green et al 2010: 711, 713). En particular, su tasa de divergencia con relación al genoma de referencia humano es muy semejante a la que manifiestan dichos ejemplares (en torno al 12,7%) (Green et al 2010: 713; tabs.…”

Section: Sobre La Posible Introgresión De Adn De Los Ham No Africanosunclassified

¿Es el lenguaje (complejo) el resultado de una transferencia genética entre neandertales y humanos modernos?

Benítez‐Burraco¹

2012

Trab. prehist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMENLa reciente constatación de ADN neandertal en determinadas poblaciones humanas modernas sugiere un cruce limitado entre ambas especies. Esta transferencia genética pudo haber afectado a las capacidades cognitivas de los neandertales y justificar, en particular, que hubiesen tenido lenguaje moderno. Tal posibilidad se examina a la luz de las propias evidencias genéticas, pero también de las de tipo paleoantropológico y arqueológico utilizadas habitualmente para tratar de inferir la presencia de lenguaje en otras especies de homínidos. En conjunto, dichas evidencias parecen sugerir que el lenguaje complejo habría sido una adquisición exclusiva de los humanos modernos. Ello es compatible, no obstante, con una continuidad evolutiva de los diversos mecanismos bioló-gicos y cognitivos implicados en el procesamiento lingüístico y en último término, con la presencia de algún tipo de lenguaje, computacionalmente más simple, en los neandertales. ABSTRACT

show abstract

Mezmaiskaya Cave: A Neanderthal Occupation in the Northern Caucasus

Cited by 115 publications

References 25 publications

Neonatal postcrania from Mezmaiskaya, Russia, and Le Moustier, France, and the development of Neandertal body form

Neonatal postcrania from Mezmaiskaya, Russia, and Le Moustier, France, and the development of Neandertal body form

The meaning of Neandertal skeletal morphology

¿Es el lenguaje (complejo) el resultado de una transferencia genética entre neandertales y humanos modernos?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About