Theories of Modern Human Origins: The Paleontological Test

Abstract

N A FIELD OFTEN ACCUSED of being unable to settle controversies or resolve competing I hypotheses, the recent proposal based on interpretations of mitochondria1 DNA (mtDNA) allows for the unambiguous testing of two models about the origin of modern Homo sapiens. These are the total replacement ("Eve") and the continuity (multiregional evolution) models, both of which have clearly definable, completely different predictions about the pattern ofpast evolution, as well as different expectations about the distribution of certain grade (modernizing) and clade (regional, such as African, North Asian, etc.) features in the human fossil record. Since proponents of both views recognize that the fossil record is real, and the two competing interpretations of prehistory have non-overlapping predictions about the modern human origins, specific aspects of each model can be weighed against the fossil record for potential refutation. Here, fossils are not used to develop interpretations of the human evolutionary pattern, a thankless task whose success is very sensitive to the completeness of the fossil record. Instead, limited conflicting predictions of these two models can be addressed from a circumscribed data set, which the fossil record clearly provides. Unlike an earlier controversy between the genetic and fossil reconstruction of the past concerning the timing of the split between humans and chimpanzees, the current debate about the origin of modern Homo sapiens is represented by a much more extensive fossil record, spanning a reasonably well dated time period and supplemented by extensive archeological data.Using the prehistoric skeletal data of Australasia (Southeast Asia and Australia), North Asia, Europe, Africa, and the Levant, we test the conflicting predictions of these two models by evaluating evidence for the existence of transitional samples and the persistence of morphological and metric features over time and space. While many previous and some current models about the later aspects of human evolution are riddled with untestable or non-excluding hypotheses, the differences between the "Eve" and the multiregional evolution models are so profound it is impossible for both to be correct. These differences in theoretical expectations relate to the requirements of the Eve theory that a single source of all contemporary mtDNA variation exists and that this source is derived exclusively from a relatively recent African female (Eve). In this article we review the predictions of the Eve and the multiregional evolution models and test these against the human fossil record from the Old World. In addition, we will show that, while an extreme replacement interpretation is unsupportable, the rntDNA data can be reconciled with the fossil record within the context of multiregional evolution.American Anthropologist 95( 1): 14-50.

On the reliability of recent tests of the Out of Africa hypothesis for modern human origins

“…However, this prediction is misleading. As we have pointed out elsewhere (Stringer and Brä uer, 1994;Brä uer and Stringer, 1997;Stringer, 2002), the idea of complete replacement without any interbreeding is one variant of the Out of Africa hypothesis, often identified with a particular interpretation of the mitochondrial DNA data, dubbed the Eve theory (Frayer et al, 1993). Complete replacement does not feature in all versions of the Out of Africa hypothesis, and therefore we contend that it would not be falsified by demonstration of some modern-archaic human gene flow outside of Africa.…”

Population Structure and Modern Human Origins

“…With real data, this would require the impossible-averaging mismatch distributions from a series of parallel worlds [22]. 4 Since we have only one world to study, 4 One reviewer disagreed with this claim, so I will provide a proof: Let …”

“…The multiregional hypothesis of modern human origins [24,4] holds that our species evolved within a widespread population that has inhabited much of Europe, Africa, and Asia for the past million years. This hypothesis implies that the geographic structure of our species goes back at least a million years, originating well before the common mitochondrial ancestor.…”

Taxonomic Tapestries: The Threads of Evolutionary, Behavioural and Conservation Research

“…Santa Luca, 1980;Rightmire, 1990Rightmire, , 1991Anton et al, 2007) or even sometimes as 'archaic' Homo sapiens (e.g. Delson et al 1977;Bräuer 1992;Frayer et al, 1993), might instead be identified as a new species dubbed Homo soloensis. This species name was coined by Oppenoorth (1932) in his initial descriptions of the earliest hominin material excavated from Ngandong, and has since been reconsidered by more recent authors (e.g.…”