The Experts below are selected from a list of 2154 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Frido Welker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The dental proteome of Homo antecessor
Nature, 2020Co-Authors: Frido Welker, Jazmín Ramos-madrigal, Petra Gutenbrunner, Meaghan Mackie, Shivani Tiwary, Rosa Rakownikow Jersie-christensen, Cristina Chiva, Marc R. Dickinson, Martin Kuhlwilm, Marc ManuelAbstract:Analyses of the proteomes of dental enamel from Homo antecessor and Homo erectus demonstrate that the Early Pleistocene H. antecessor is a close sister lineage of later Homo sapiens , Neanderthal and Denisovan populations in Eurasia. The phylogenetic relationships between hominins of the Early Pleistocene Epoch in Eurasia, such as Homo antecessor , and hominins that appear later in the fossil record during the Middle Pleistocene Epoch, such as Homo sapiens , are highly debated^ 1 – 5 . For the oldest remains, the molecular study of these relationships is hindered by the degradation of ancient DNA. However, recent research has demonstrated that the analysis of ancient proteins can address this challenge^ 6 – 8 . Here we present the dental enamel proteomes of H. antecessor from Atapuerca (Spain)^ 9 , 10 and Homo erectus from Dmanisi (Georgia)^ 1 , two key fossil assemblages that have a central role in models of Pleistocene hominin morphology, dispersal and divergence. We provide evidence that H. antecessor is a close sister lineage to subsequent Middle and Late Pleistocene hominins, including modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans. This placement implies that the modern-like face of H. antecessor —that is, similar to that of modern humans—may have a considerably deep ancestry in the genus Homo , and that the cranial morphology of Neanderthals represents a derived form. By recovering AMELY-specific peptide sequences, we also conclude that the H. antecessor molar fragment from Atapuerca that we analysed belonged to a male individual. Finally, these H. antecessor and H. erectus fossils preserve evidence of enamel proteome phosphorylation and proteolytic digestion that occurred in vivo during tooth formation. Our results provide important insights into the evolutionary relationships between H. antecessor and other hominin groups, and pave the way for future studies using enamel proteomes to investigate hominin biology across the existence of the genus Homo .
-
early Pleistocene enamel proteome from dmanisi resolves stephanorhinus phylogeny
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Enrico Cappellini, Frido Welker, Luca Pandolfi, Jazmin Ramosmadrigal, Diana Samodova, Patrick Ruther, Anna K Fotakis, David Lyon, Victor J MorenomayarAbstract:The sequencing of ancient DNA has enabled the reconstruction of speciation, migration and admixture events for extinct taxa1. However, the irreversible post-mortem degradation2 of ancient DNA has so far limited its recovery—outside permafrost areas—to specimens that are not older than approximately 0.5 million years (Myr)3. By contrast, tandem mass spectrometry has enabled the sequencing of approximately 1.5-Myr-old collagen type I4, and suggested the presence of protein residues in fossils of the Cretaceous period5—although with limited phylogenetic use6. In the absence of molecular evidence, the speciation of several extinct species of the Early and Middle Pleistocene Epoch remains contentious. Here we address the phylogenetic relationships of the Eurasian Rhinocerotidae of the Pleistocene Epoch7–9, using the proteome of dental enamel from a Stephanorhinus tooth that is approximately 1.77-Myr old, recovered from the archaeological site of Dmanisi (South Caucasus, Georgia)10. Molecular phylogenetic analyses place this Stephanorhinus as a sister group to the clade formed by the woolly rhinoceros (Coelodonta antiquitatis) and Merck’s rhinoceros (Stephanorhinus kirchbergensis). We show that Coelodonta evolved from an early Stephanorhinus lineage, and that this latter genus includes at least two distinct evolutionary lines. The genus Stephanorhinus is therefore currently paraphyletic, and its systematic revision is needed. We demonstrate that sequencing the proteome of Early Pleistocene dental enamel overcomes the limitations of phylogenetic inference based on ancient collagen or DNA. Our approach also provides additional information about the sex and taxonomic assignment of other specimens from Dmanisi. Our findings reveal that proteomic investigation of ancient dental enamel—which is the hardest tissue in vertebrates11, and is highly abundant in the fossil record—can push the reconstruction of molecular evolution further back into the Early Pleistocene Epoch, beyond the currently known limits of ancient DNA preservation. Palaeoproteomic analysis of dental enamel from an Early Pleistocene Stephanorhinus resolves the phylogeny of Eurasian Rhinocerotidae, by enabling the reconstruction of molecular evolution beyond the limits of ancient DNA preservation.
-
a late middle Pleistocene denisovan mandible from the tibetan plateau
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Fahu Chen, Frido Welker, Chuanchou Shen, Shara E Bailey, Inga Bergmann, Simon J DavisAbstract:Denisovans are members of a hominin group who are currently only known directly from fragmentary fossils, the genomes of which have been studied from a single site, Denisova Cave1–3 in Siberia. They are also known indirectly from their genetic legacy through gene flow into several low-altitude East Asian populations4,5 and high-altitude modern Tibetans6. The lack of morphologically informative Denisovan fossils hinders our ability to connect geographically and temporally dispersed fossil hominins from Asia and to understand in a coherent manner their relation to recent Asian populations. This includes understanding the genetic adaptation of humans to the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau7,8, which was inherited from the Denisovans. Here we report a Denisovan mandible, identified by ancient protein analysis9,10, found on the Tibetan Plateau in Baishiya Karst Cave, Xiahe, Gansu, China. We determine the mandible to be at least 160 thousand years old through U-series dating of an adhering carbonate matrix. The Xiahe specimen provides direct evidence of the Denisovans outside the Altai Mountains and its analysis unique insights into Denisovan mandibular and dental morphology. Our results indicate that archaic hominins occupied the Tibetan Plateau in the Middle Pleistocene Epoch and successfully adapted to high-altitude hypoxic environments long before the regional arrival of modern Homo sapiens. Fossil evidence indicates that Denisovans occupied the Tibetan Plateau in the Middle Pleistocene Epoch and successfully adapted to this high-altitude hypoxic environments long before the regional arrival of modern Homo sapiens.
Ben Marwick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
late middle Pleistocene levallois stone tool technology in southwest china
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Yue Hu, Ben Marwick, Jiafu Zhang, Wenrong Chen, Weiwen Huang, Bo LiAbstract:Levallois approaches are one of the best known variants of prepared-core technologies, and are an important hallmark of stone technologies developed around 300,000 years ago in Africa and west Eurasia1,2. Existing archaeological evidence suggests that the stone technology of east Asian hominins lacked a Levallois component during the late Middle Pleistocene Epoch and it is not until the Late Pleistocene (around 40,000–30,000 years ago) that this technology spread into east Asia in association with a dispersal of modern humans. Here we present evidence of Levallois technology from the lithic assemblage of the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China, dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago. To our knowledge, this is the earliest evidence of Levallois technology in east Asia. Our findings thus challenge the existing model of the origin and spread of Levallois technologies in east Asia and its links to a Late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans.
-
late middle Pleistocene levallois stone tool technology in southwest china
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Ben Marwick, Jiafu Zhang, Wenrong Chen, Xue Rui, Yamei Hou, Jianping Yue, Weiwen HuangAbstract:Levallois approaches are one of the best known variants of prepared-core technologies, and are an important hallmark of stone technologies developed around 300,000 years ago in Africa and west Eurasia1,2. Existing archaeological evidence suggests that the stone technology of east Asian hominins lacked a Levallois component during the late Middle Pleistocene Epoch and it is not until the Late Pleistocene (around 40,000–30,000 years ago) that this technology spread into east Asia in association with a dispersal of modern humans. Here we present evidence of Levallois technology from the lithic assemblage of the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China, dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago. To our knowledge, this is the earliest evidence of Levallois technology in east Asia. Our findings thus challenge the existing model of the origin and spread of Levallois technologies in east Asia and its links to a Late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans. Levallois stone-tool technology found at the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China was dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago, which is much earlier than previously thought.
Weiwen Huang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
late middle Pleistocene levallois stone tool technology in southwest china
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Yue Hu, Ben Marwick, Jiafu Zhang, Wenrong Chen, Weiwen Huang, Bo LiAbstract:Levallois approaches are one of the best known variants of prepared-core technologies, and are an important hallmark of stone technologies developed around 300,000 years ago in Africa and west Eurasia1,2. Existing archaeological evidence suggests that the stone technology of east Asian hominins lacked a Levallois component during the late Middle Pleistocene Epoch and it is not until the Late Pleistocene (around 40,000–30,000 years ago) that this technology spread into east Asia in association with a dispersal of modern humans. Here we present evidence of Levallois technology from the lithic assemblage of the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China, dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago. To our knowledge, this is the earliest evidence of Levallois technology in east Asia. Our findings thus challenge the existing model of the origin and spread of Levallois technologies in east Asia and its links to a Late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans.
-
late middle Pleistocene levallois stone tool technology in southwest china
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Ben Marwick, Jiafu Zhang, Wenrong Chen, Xue Rui, Yamei Hou, Jianping Yue, Weiwen HuangAbstract:Levallois approaches are one of the best known variants of prepared-core technologies, and are an important hallmark of stone technologies developed around 300,000 years ago in Africa and west Eurasia1,2. Existing archaeological evidence suggests that the stone technology of east Asian hominins lacked a Levallois component during the late Middle Pleistocene Epoch and it is not until the Late Pleistocene (around 40,000–30,000 years ago) that this technology spread into east Asia in association with a dispersal of modern humans. Here we present evidence of Levallois technology from the lithic assemblage of the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China, dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago. To our knowledge, this is the earliest evidence of Levallois technology in east Asia. Our findings thus challenge the existing model of the origin and spread of Levallois technologies in east Asia and its links to a Late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans. Levallois stone-tool technology found at the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China was dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago, which is much earlier than previously thought.
Fahu Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a late middle Pleistocene denisovan mandible from the tibetan plateau
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Fahu Chen, Frido Welker, Chuanchou Shen, Shara E Bailey, Inga Bergmann, Simon J DavisAbstract:Denisovans are members of a hominin group who are currently only known directly from fragmentary fossils, the genomes of which have been studied from a single site, Denisova Cave1–3 in Siberia. They are also known indirectly from their genetic legacy through gene flow into several low-altitude East Asian populations4,5 and high-altitude modern Tibetans6. The lack of morphologically informative Denisovan fossils hinders our ability to connect geographically and temporally dispersed fossil hominins from Asia and to understand in a coherent manner their relation to recent Asian populations. This includes understanding the genetic adaptation of humans to the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau7,8, which was inherited from the Denisovans. Here we report a Denisovan mandible, identified by ancient protein analysis9,10, found on the Tibetan Plateau in Baishiya Karst Cave, Xiahe, Gansu, China. We determine the mandible to be at least 160 thousand years old through U-series dating of an adhering carbonate matrix. The Xiahe specimen provides direct evidence of the Denisovans outside the Altai Mountains and its analysis unique insights into Denisovan mandibular and dental morphology. Our results indicate that archaic hominins occupied the Tibetan Plateau in the Middle Pleistocene Epoch and successfully adapted to high-altitude hypoxic environments long before the regional arrival of modern Homo sapiens. Fossil evidence indicates that Denisovans occupied the Tibetan Plateau in the Middle Pleistocene Epoch and successfully adapted to this high-altitude hypoxic environments long before the regional arrival of modern Homo sapiens.
Bo Li - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
late middle Pleistocene levallois stone tool technology in southwest china
Nature, 2019Co-Authors: Yue Hu, Ben Marwick, Jiafu Zhang, Wenrong Chen, Weiwen Huang, Bo LiAbstract:Levallois approaches are one of the best known variants of prepared-core technologies, and are an important hallmark of stone technologies developed around 300,000 years ago in Africa and west Eurasia1,2. Existing archaeological evidence suggests that the stone technology of east Asian hominins lacked a Levallois component during the late Middle Pleistocene Epoch and it is not until the Late Pleistocene (around 40,000–30,000 years ago) that this technology spread into east Asia in association with a dispersal of modern humans. Here we present evidence of Levallois technology from the lithic assemblage of the Guanyindong Cave site in southwest China, dated to approximately 170,000–80,000 years ago. To our knowledge, this is the earliest evidence of Levallois technology in east Asia. Our findings thus challenge the existing model of the origin and spread of Levallois technologies in east Asia and its links to a Late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans.