The shape of the human face helps identify our distant ancestors, and they were Eurasians!

A paper published in Nature by Lacruz, R.S., Stringer, C.B., Kimbel, W.H. et al. in 2019 (The evolutionary history of the human face. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 726–736 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0865-) — which can be read for free here suggests that our ancestry derives from Eurasian hominins, not African ones.

The authors discuss the last common ancestor (LCA) of modern humans and place it in the Mid Pleistocene (MP). They wonder which of the known MP hominins is our ancestor. They use the human face as a standard to define our LCA. The paper, published in an orthodox and renown journal like Nature can't go against the estsablished Out of Africa (OOA) dogma, so it has to somehow acknowledge the African origin of modern humans, but does it in a grudging, reluctant way. The paper states that "...the LCA should predate the appearance of a modern face, which begs the question: what is the earliest evidence of a modern human face? In considering the origins of the human face, we should take into account that mounting genetic and morphological data support the notion that H. sapiens first appeared in Africa. But these same data also imply that, while fully fledged H. sapiens likely had an African beginning, the evolutionary origins of traits that are characteristic of the modern face, represented by the LCA, may be found elsewhere." And elsewhere can only mean outside of Africa, in Eurasia.

After suggesting that Homo heidelbergensis, also found in Africa, as Homo rhodesiensis could be our LCA, the authors raise some questions about this idea (they seem to be too robust), and state that:

"This issue is further complicated by the apparent presence of a more H. sapiens-like midfacial morphology in Chinese fossils from the MP, such as Zhoukoudian, Nanjing (Fig. 3d), Dali and Jinniushan. This morphology is especially apparent in the newly announced (but not yet published scientifically) cranium, said to be from Harbin, North East China. These examples could perhaps be the result of gene flow or an independent evolutionary trajectory convergent on that of H. sapiens, raising the issue of whether these differences are phylogenetically informative. However, an alternative and plausible scenario implicates the morphology of the early European hominin species, Homo antecessor...
... In this scenario, a more ancient and taxonomically distinct LCA for the H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis lineages is based on the ‘modern’ maxillary conformation of the ATD6-69 H. antecessor face from Gran Dolina, Atapuerca, dated at ~850 ka...
The evidence instead suggests that the large and non-H. sapiens-like faces of Bodo and Broken Hill 1 (Fig. 3b,c) represent taxonomic diversity in the African MP record, which could exclude the large fossils assigned to H. heidelbergensis and H. rhodesiensis as representative of an ancestral morph for H. sapiens. Given other shared and more H. sapiens-like facial morphologies, ranging from the late lower Pleistocene of Europe to the MP of China and Africa, it begins to look more parsimonious to interpret a H. antecessor-like facial morphology as primitive for the clade containing H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis. This symplesiomorphic morphology was also present in at least some fossils assigned to Chinese H. erectus, in other archaic Chinese hominins and in the lineage of H. sapiens present in Africa from ~500 Ky, while it was apparently lost in the H. heidelbergensis/H. rhodesiensis and H. neanderthalensis lineages."

This suggestion is relevant, it somehow implies that non-African hominins, from China, and others from Eurasia, including Homo erectus, and also the Homo antecessor fossils from Spain are more human-like than fossils found in Africa older than 500,000 years ago. So, there is plenty of evidence of ancient human-like faces in Eurasia before it appeared in Africa! The authors, tacitly suggest that modern humans did not originate in Africa. They appeared in Eurasia and back-migrated there from Eurasia around 500 kya!

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

Denisovan may have split from Homo erectus

A recent research article (not peer-reviewed) published in BioRxiv (Scalable ARG-free Detection of Denisovan-mediated Superarchaic Introgression Reveals Heterogeneous Patterns across Populations. Noel McAllister, Sebastian Zöllner, Xinjun Zhang, bioRxiv 2026.06.25.734355; doi: https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.25.734355), used simulations based on a specific computing program to explore the sites in our genomes where superarchaic introgression may be found. Introgression that reached us via Denisovans.

It looks into the genome of modern populations and finds that HLA/MHC loci have higher introgression scores than other sites. This, according to the authors, "...is consistent with previous evidence that immune-related loci retain archaic variants. At the same time, HLA/MHC is among the most polymorphic regions of the human genome and has been shaped by pathogen-mediated and balancing selection, both of which can preserve deeply divergent haplotypes and generate unusually deep local genealogies..." However, they caution that these high scores may not only be due to archaic introgression: " ...HLA/MHC is also one of the clearest examples of long-term balancing selection, which also preserves deeply diverged haplotypes without recent introgression... We therefore interpret the HLA/MHC signal cautiously. It should not be treated as definitive evidence for superarchaic ancestry by itself. Nonetheless, its repeated elevation across all three populations is notable and suggests that immune-related regions may be especially informative targets for future local haplotype, ARG-based, and functional analyses."

It makes sense that alleles linked to immunity, received from superarchaics, if they provide a benefit, will be preserved across generations.

The paper then discusses Denisovans and mentions an interesting fact, that Denisovans could have evolved from Homo erectus: "Our results also intersect with the recent paleoproteomic evidence suggesting that some Denisovan superarchaic ancestry may ultimately derive from populations related to H. erectus."

It also notes that population structure can be mistaken for introgression: "A further limitation is that deep population structure and introgression remain intrinsically difficult to separate. Structured ancestral populations can generate old coalescent times and divergent haplotypes, and some recent models have shown that deep structure may explain signals previously interpreted as archaic or ghost admixture."

It presents a scenario that I had not read about before: "Hominin evolution may have involved both long-lived structured populations and episodic admixture among deeply diverged groups." Which is very plausible, we can imagine, especially in Africa this scenario, with archaic populations and ancestral modern humans living in isolated, deeply structured populations admixing sporadically, and adding diversity to the Homo sapiens group.

The other branches of the human tree also followed that pattern, with Neanderthals in western Eurasia and Denisovans in the Eastern part of Asia. Mixing with modern humans as our ancestors met them.

Homo erectus has been shown to have admixed with Denisovans (see this post), but, this article suggests that Denisovans evolved from Homo erectus, which is a very reasonable assumption. I recently posted about Denisovans and Homo heidelbergensis being related (also Neanderthals), it is possible that the common ancestor for these groups evolved from erectus (via Homo antecessor) in Eurasia.

Evidence seems to be building a stronger case for an Eurasian origin for hominins.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

Homo antecessor the base of the human tree (in Spain)

Today's post will continue exploring the subject of yesterday's post, about the Eurasian origin of Homo sapiens, from a basal population that lived 900 to 700 thousand years ago in Atapuerca, Spain, the Homo antecessor, that originated Neanderthals, Denisovans, and our species, in Europe.

Martinón-Torres et al., 2019 analyzed the teet of the Atapuerca fossils, and concluded that Homo antecessor is the common ancestor of Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans: (highlight is mine) "Overall, the data presented here support the taxonomic validity of Homo antecessor, since this species presents a unique mosaic of traits. Homo antecessor displays several primitive features for the genus Homo as well as some traits exclusively shared with Early and Middle Pleistocene Eurasian hominins. Some of these Eurasian traits were retained by the Middle Pleistocene hominins of Europe, and subsequently became the typical condition of the Neanderthal lineage. Although other skeletal parts present resemblances with Homo sapiens, TD6.2 teeth do not show any synapomorphy with modern humans. In addition, TD6.2 teeth can be well differentiated from those of Asian Homo erectus. The dental evidence is compatible with previous hypothesis about H. antecessor belonging to the basal population from which H. sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis, and Denisovans emerged."

This conclusion was ratified by Welker et al., 2020, who analyzed the proteins found in the teeth of the Atapuerca fossils, and compared them to the ones extracted from the Dmanisi, Georgia hominins (believed to be Homo erectus). See the full article for free here.

Weker's team says its findings "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."

Interestingly, Huguet, et al., 2025 published a paper in Nature about The earliest human face of Western Europe and assigned it to an Homo erectus. It was found in Spain in the Sierra de Atapuerca, at the Sima del Elefante site (TE7 level). This is 1.1 to 1.4 million years old, and predates the later Homo antecessor found in the same region.

The midface bones uncovered at Sima del Elefante "... are primitive for the Homo clade and they do not display the modern-like aspect exhibited by Homo antecessor found at the neighbouring Gran Dolina site... Furthermore, ATE7-1 is more derived in the nasoalveolar region than the Dmanisi and other roughly contemporaneous hominins" These differences between erectus in Spain and Georgia, with the former being less primitive (more derived), shows that erectus were evolving in Western Eurasia but had not yet acquired the modern appearance of the antecessor people.

A surprising fact is that the people living at Atapuerca one million years ago were cannibals according to Carbonell et al., 2010; it wasn't symbolic cannibalism, it had a nutritional purpose: " In conclusion, about 1 million years ago, the hominids of level TD6 added cannibalism to their set of survival strategies as a way of competing with other human groups for available resources. This practice, accepted and included in their social system, is the oldest example of cultural cannibalism known to date."

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

The common ancestor of Denisovans, Neanderthals and Humans

A paper published in February of this year, in Nature, by Hublin et al., analyzed the shape of jaws and teeth of several fossils collected in Morocco and compared them to those of Neanderthals, the older Homo antecessor, modern humans, and Homo erectus to try to unravel how our Homo sapiens species evolved in North Africa, the site where the oldest human remains have been found (300,000 years old).

The paper mentions that the common ancestor of modern humans, Neanderthals, and Asian Denisovans lived between 765 and 550 thousand years ago (ka), but where it lived is still a mystery. Some studies have proposed that the Homo antecessor, whose remains were uncovered in the Gran Dolina site, Atapuerca, Spain (950-770 ka) is the candidate for this last common ancestor of the later homo genus.

The Homo antecessor fossils are named in the paper as TD6, after the layer where they were found. If antecessor is the ancestor, it means we had a European origin. However, all of the oldest Homo sapiens remains older than 90,000 years, have been found either in North Africa or in the Levant, taken by the proponents of the Out of Africa (OOA) theory as an indication of an African origin for modern humans, and Africa as the site of the last common ancestor of Denisovans, Neanderthals, and us.

This paper compares remains found in a site close to Casablanca, Morocco, in northwest Africa, known as the Grotte à Hominidés (which we name here as ThI-GH). These remains are in the right time period to be ancestral to all groups (773 ka).

The conclusions of Hublin et al., are quoted below, I have highlighted some relevant parts:

"In North Africa, the ThI-GH hominins are the only specimens unearthed within an indisputable stratigraphic context and securely dated to the MBT at a nominal age of 773 ±4 ka. These hominins cannot be directly compared with later specimens, such as the Kabwe or Bodo skulls, which have been tentatively assigned to H. heidelbergensis. Not only do these specimens differ substantially in age, but they also lack preservation of comparable anatomical parts. Our analysis suggests that the ThI-GH hominins probably belong to an evolved form of H. erectus sensu lato in North Africa, much as H. antecessor does in Europe. However, the ThI-GH hominins offer an interesting contrast to both the Spanish fossils and the considerably older fossils from Tighennif (Algeria), which are likely to date to at least 1,000 ka. The fossil mandibles from Tighennif appear more primitive, larger and more robust than both the European H. antecessor and the northwest African ThI-GH fossils. The Spanish and Moroccan fossils share several features in their teeth and mandibles. Both groups display a combination of archaic and derived features reminiscent of later hominins (Supplementary Table 25). These similarities revive the question of possible exchanges across the Strait of Gibraltar during the EP. Nevertheless, the ThI-GH hominins are different from the TD6 hominins. The pattern of these differences suggests that regional differentiation between Europe and North Africa was already present by the late EP. Apparent Neanderthal-like features on the larger ThI-GH-1 mandible could reflect primitive retentions, allometric effects or convergent evolution but, when more phylogenetically informative dental characters are considered, the Spanish specimens appear more derived towards the Neanderthal morphology that later emerged in western Eurasia.
The origin of H. sapiens, and the precise timing of the divergence of its ancestral populations from the Neanderthal–Denisovan clade, remain subjects of debate. Anatomical evidence has at times been used to argue for a split predating 800 ka and even for an alternative Asian ancestry of our species. In this context, the Maghreb fossils are key to understanding the diversification of MP hominins. The morphology of the ThI-GH hominins places them close to the split between the African and Eurasian lineages. Our findings not only align with the phylogenetic structure inferred from palaeogenetic data but also highlight the Maghreb as a pivotal region for understanding the emergence of our species, reinforcing the case for an African rather than a Eurasian ancestry of H. sapiens."

Comments

The closing phrase about an African origin of modern humans is expected as the authors don't want to go against the established dogma. However, the point about intercontinental exchange via Gibraltar during the Early Pleistocene is extremely interesting. It is very likely that our common ancestor, even H. erectus had the ability to cross such a narrow body of water in boats. The similarity of Atapuerca specimens with Neanderthals is also relevant, as Neanderthals are Eurasian, not African. The differences between H. heidelbergensis specimens within Africa and the Moroccan fossils hints at a separate stem of hominins in North Africa vs. central and southern Africa. Furthermore, the authors suggest that it was Homo erectuswho evolved into the Moroccan specimens, and that the erectus present in Africa were more primitive and robust than the European lineage.

Taken together, this suggests, in my opinion, That the erectus line, after evolving in Eurasia, moved into Northern Africa via Gibraltar, and had already settled in Western Europe, and evolved in this region (Spain-Morocco) into the common ancestor of Neanderthals-Denisovans and Humans, in Europe.

How can we account for the absence of Denisovans and Neanderthals in Africa? But, assume that modern humans originated there? This is a serious flaw in the African origin theory.

An answer to those questions is that the "common ancestor" migrated east into Eurasia and the Levant, diverging there into Neanderthals and Denisovans who, respectively, colonized Western and Eastern Eurasia. From this common root, modern humans split, entering Africa via Sinai or maybe Bab el Mandeb, while spreading eastwards across Eurasia.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

Hominins that predate the Human-Denisovan-Neanderthal split , from Morocco

A paper published yesterday (January 7, 2026) in Nature investigated some fossil remains found in a site (Grotte à Hominidés) at a quarry in Morocco, not far from the city of Casablanca. They belong to hominds who appear to be "basal" to modern H. sapiens, Neanderthals, and Denisovans. The authors date them to around 773,000 years ago and state that these remains reinforce "the case for an African rather than a Eurasian ancestry of H. sapiens."

This is the paper: Hublin, JJ., Lef&egravE;vre, D., Perini, S. et al. Early hominins from Morocco basal to the Homo sapiens lineage. Nature (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09914-y

This date is very close to the date when modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans split and went different ways, which is believed to have taken place between 550 and 765 thousand years ago.

The paper also suggests that they may be related to the Homo antecessor (TD6) whose remains have been found in Atapuerca, Spain, and whose remains have been dated to 950-770 ka. Though the Morccan remains and the Atapuerca fossils are similar, they also differ.

The Morocco fossils, named ThI-GH (from Thomas Quarry I, Grotte à Hominidés) combine modern and primitive traits. The site, excavated between 1994 and 2015 has produced Acheulean tools (typical of H. erectus), more primitive than the stone knapping techniques developed later by the Neanderthals.

The age of the remains

The authors analyzed the sediments in which the fossils were found, employing magnetostratigraphic tecniques that compare the sediments with the record of polarity reversals of the Earth's magnetic field, and found that "our analysis indicates hominin ages younger than 990 ka (top of Jaramillo) and close to the MBT at a nominal age of 773 ± 4 ka."

However, other tests find a younger age: "Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating, performed in unit SU4 on cemented sands provided age estimates of 420 ± 34 ka and 391 ± 32 ka, of the same order as the ages obtained from OH2 to OH5. OSL ages appear to be inconsistent with the evidence that these formations belong to at least three glacioeustatic cycles and, for this reason, can be disputed. Combined electron-spin resonance (ESR) and U-series dating methods applied directly to an isolated hominin tooth from SU4 resulted in an estimated age of 501 ka +94 ka/−76 ka. The same method yielded ages ranging from 591 ± 103 ka to 538 ± 52 ka on three well-preserved herbivore teeth from SU4...

Below I quote the paper's relevant parts with my comments in brackets.

"These hominins cannot be directly compared with later specimens, such as the Kabwe or Bodo skulls, which have been tentatively assigned to H. heidelbergensis. Not only do these specimens differ substantially in age, but they also lack preservation of comparable anatomical parts. Our analysis suggests that the ThI-GH hominins probably belong to an evolved form of H. erectus sensu lato in North Africa, much as H. antecessor does in Europe.
[These hominins appear to be "evolved" Homo erectus - Homo antecessor group!]
However, the ThI-GH hominins offer an interesting contrast to both the Spanish fossils and the considerably older fossils from Tighennif (Algeria), which are likely to date to at least 1,000 ka. The fossil mandibles from Tighennif appear more primitive, larger and more robust than both the European H. antecessor and the northwest African ThI-GH fossils. The Spanish and Moroccan fossils share several features in their teeth and mandibles. Both groups display a combination of archaic and derived features reminiscent of later hominins. These similarities revive the question of possible exchanges across the Strait of Gibraltar during the EP. Nevertheless, the ThI-GH hominins are different from the TD6 hominins.
[Since the Strait of Gibraltar was breached by the sea during the Zanclean Flood about 5.33 million years ago (that eliminated the dry-land bridge between Europe and Africa as the Mediterranean basin filled up with water from the Atlantic, the "exchanges across the Strait of Gibraltar during the EP" or Early Pleistocene means that these people built watercraft to navigate the Strait of Gibraltar!]
The origin of H. sapiens, and the precise timing of the divergence of its ancestral populations from the Neanderthal–Denisovan clade, remain subjects of debate. Anatomical evidence has at times been used to argue for a split predating 800 ka and even for an alternative Asian ancestry of our species. In this context, the Maghreb fossils are key to understanding the diversification of MP [Mid Pleistocene] hominins. The morphology of the ThI-GH hominins places them close to the split between the African and Eurasian lineages. Our findings not only align with the phylogenetic structure inferred from palaeogenetic data but also highlight the Maghreb as a pivotal region for understanding the emergence of our species, reinforcing the case for an African rather than a Eurasian ancestry of H. sapiens."

The exchange across Gibraltar could be considered as an Out of Africa, for Homo erectus who entered Europe and evolved into Homo antecessor there, or probably a route into Africa from early hominins who (like those found in Dmanisi and the Caucasus) peopled Europe and returned via Spain to Africa across Gibraltar.

The authors seem intent on proving an African origin for "our species" and mention this twice in their paper. I am not so certain this paper suggestss an African origin for modern humans, it only describes hominins with an archaic-modern mossaic of features similar to those of H. erectus and H. antecessor, both of which are Eurasian!

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

An Eurasian origin for Homo Sapiens (2021 paper)

I found an interesting paper published four years ago (Árnason, Ú. The unidirectional phylogeny of Homo sapiens anchors the origin of modern humans in Eurasia. Hereditas 158, 36 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41065-021-00197-7) that provides an analysis showing that Homo sapiens sapiens or modern humans originated in Eurasia!!

The author summarizes his "Out of Eurasia" findings as follows: He identified "potentially four translocations of modern humans from Eurasia into Africa, the earliest taking place ≈ 250,000 years before present, YBP. The results were in accordance with the postulates behind OOEH [Out of Eurasia Hypothesis] at the same time ... they lent no support to the OOAH [Out of Africa Hypothesis].

The paper places Homo erectus at the base of the nuclear DNA tree: "Homo erectus, He, has been placed at the root of the tree consistent with He entering Eurasia from Africa > 2 million years ago". The following image appears with the caption that is given below.

Fig. 1 in Arnason (2021). Source

Fig. 1. Captioned: "The nuDNA phylogeny leading to Hss, Homo sapiens sapiens. Blue: Eurasian lineages. Red: African lineages. H. erectus has been placed at the root of the tree in accordance with the artefact sequence related to the Eurasian existence of He 2,12 MYBP. The divergence between Hs, H. sapiens, and Ha, H. antecessor, has been dated to ≈ 850,000 YBP, that between Hss and Hsn, H. s. neanderthalensis, to ≈ 800,000 YBP and that between Lund and Mbuti/San to ≈ 250,000 YBP. Hsn divides into Hsnn, Neanderthals proper, and Hsnd, Denisova, with Hsnn dividing further into SH-Hsnn (Hsnn at Sima de los Huesos) and Hsnn*, a branch arising as the result of the mtDNA introgression that took place from Hss into Hsnn* ≈ 500,000 YBP". Where Hsn is Neanderthal, HSnd, Denisovan.

Fig. 2 in Arnason (2021). Source

Fig. 2's Caption reads: "The mtDNA relationships of Hs demonstrating the paraphyly of the African Hss populations as resolved by PPA. Blue: non-African taxa; red: African taxa. Hsnn*: Hsnn other than SH-Hsnn. The arrowheads signify the mtDNA introgression that gave rise to Hsnn*. The limitation of Hsnn to Eurasia places the mtDNA introgression in this continent, reversing the direction of Hss evolution behind OOAH. The Hss part of the tree underlines the phylogenetic continuity among non-African populations and the paraphyly of the African populations including the two Yoruba [1]. AuAb: Australian aborigines; PNG: Papua New Guinean; Han: Chinese; Lund: The first described non-chimaeric human mtDNA molecule [19]; French: A European, as representing previous genomic findings"

An interesting hypothesis that has surely been torn apart by those who support the OOA theory. Nevertheless, since 2021, findings in China have provided some additional support to the notion that there were evolved humans in Asia at least 200,000 years ago besides the Denisovans.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025by Austin Whittall © 

On why modern humans succeeded in their Final Out of Africa migration

A paper published in Nature (Hallett, E.Y., Leonardi, M., Cerasoni, J.N. et al. Major expansion in the human niche preceded out of Africa dispersal. Nature 644, 115–121 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09154-0) on June 18, 2025, explains why the final Out Of Africa event, 50,000 years ago, was the successful one.

The premise of the paper is that human beings in Africa adapted to living in different environments within the continent (deserts, savannas, grasslands, and jungles) expanding their niche. They could face the weather, and survive in different habitats. It was this flexibility, not tools or special genes that allowed them to expand and move out of Africa. In the authors words:

"The expansion of the human niche beginning around 70 ka in Africa is driven by a gradual increase in human preference for forest and desert biomes, allowing them to expand into regions that were previously rarely populated: (1) forests of West Africa, (2) forests of Central Africa and, eventually, (3) arid Saharan regions and semi-arid Sahelian regions of North Africa. This increased ability to adapt to new habitats, ranging from the extremes of equatorial forests to arid deserts, would have allowed these populations of humans the ecological flexibility to tackle a range of new environmental conditions encountered during the expansion out of Africa, allowing them to succeed where earlier migrations out of Africa had previously faltered. The expansion of the human niche in Africa starting around 70 ka, therefore, offers an explanation for the successful worldwide expansion of human populations about 50 ka"

The previous Out of Africa migrants that survived

I disagree with this point of view.

It is clear that a first wave of Homo sapiens didn't survive. They left Africa 100 ky ago.

But, we have the Denisovan and Neanderthals thriving for hundreds of thousands of years in freezing Eurasia, from Tibet to Spain. In a climate that never existed in Africa (glacial ice and extremely low temperatures). Yet, they were extremely well adapted to their niche, with tools, social structures, and flexibility to hunt and survive.

They had been preceded by the Homo erectus, and probably Homo habilis by at least 1 million years in their migration into Eurasia. And H. erectus lived there, and prospered for hundreds of thousands of years adapting to tropical climes in Indonesia and freezing winters in Northern China.

Luck and Chance

Perhaps the demise of these other groups was not dictated by modern human "flexibility" adapting to African ecological niches, which gave them tools to survive. We were lucky. It was just chance and good fortune that allowed small groups of hominins to survive the deadly environment (drought, wild beasts, volcanic eruptions, disease, infections, lack of food, etc.)

Human Beings almost became extinct 900 ky ago

See these articles published in Sept. 2023: "Did our ancestors nearly die out?" (Nick Ashton, Chris Stringer, Science 381,947-948 023).DOI:10.1126/science.adj9484) commenting "Genomic inference of a severe human bottleneck during the Early to Middle Pleistocene transition" (Wangjie Hu et al., Science 381, 979-984 (2023).DOI:10.1126/science.abq7487). Hu et al point out that:

"Results showed that human ancestors went through a severe population bottleneck with about 1280 breeding individuals between around 930,000 and 813,000 years ago. The bottleneck lasted for about 117,000 years and brought human ancestors close to extinction"

Our ancestors were reduced from almost 100,000 individuals to a mere 1,280 individuals some 900,000 years ago, and this went on for 117,000 years. It was touch and go. This dreop in population was caused by climate change with glaciations becoming long-term events, cooling the oceans and provoking drought which in turn affected the animals in Africa, Europe and Asia.

Then, population recovered and a speciation event took place, and the ancestor of modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans appared, around 750 to 550 ky ago.

Ashton and Stringer add that " Europe was probably completely depopulated after a previously unrecognized cold phase about 1,100,000 years ago" (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adf4445) this event eliminated the first hominins to people Europe 1.5 Ma, the the Sima del Elefante people, perhaps descended from the Dmanisi hominins from Georgia (1.8 MA). "these extreme conditions led to the depopulation of Europe, perhaps lasting for several successive glacial-interglacial cycles." It was only later (1 Ma - 900 ky) that Europe was repopulated "by Homo antecessor, which may have been a more resilient species with evolutionary or behavioral changes that allowed survival under the increasing intensity of glacial conditions."

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall © 

Homo antecessor and its relationship with Neandethals, Denisovans and Humans

Covid-19 is disrupting the lives across the world with its path of sickness and death spreading globally. But science continues. Today I post about an article published in Nature this week: Welker, F., Ramos-Madrigal, J., Gutenbrunner, P. et al. The dental proteome of Homo antecessor Nature (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2153-8.

The authors studied proteins from the teeth enamel -which degrade slower than DNA. These proteins came from a specimen of Homo antecessor, a hominin that lived in Spain (Atapuerca) 800 kya, and Dmanisi Homo erectus (1.77 My old). They compared them to those of Modern Humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans.

Their abstract highlights the following (quote):

• "H. antecessor is a close sister lineage to subsequent Middle and Late Pleistocene hominins, including modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans."
• "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."

The trees built by the authors show that both Dmanisi and Antecessor are part of our tree, but both lie on branches that do not lead to us. We branched from them. More evidence is needed to find these homins who cover the gap between us and them.

Note that the protein from the Dmanisi erectus was too damaged to provide useful information.

Keep safe, wash your hands, wear a mask and practice social distancing.

Written in an Argentina in isolation and lockdown.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2014 by Austin Whittall © 

Were Denisovans the last Homo erectus?

My previous post mentioned the new findings regarding Denisova admixture in Homo sapiens, and the two theories proposed to explain how Denisovan DNA spread between Austronesians and East Asians - Native Americans.

I believe that sooner or later we will find out that the elusive Denisovans are no others than Homo erectus. And I base my suspicions on two facts:

Erectus were alive in South East Asia about 40 kya. This was proved by Yokoyama Y, Falguères C, Sémah F, Jacob T and Grün R, in their paper (2008) Gamma-ray spectrometric dating of late Homo erectus skulls from Ngandong and Sambungmacan, Central Java, Indonesia. J Hum Evol. 2008 Aug;55(2):274-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.01.006. Epub 2008 May 14., the team concluded that: "we establish[ed] minimum age estimates of around 40ka, with an upper age limit of around 60 to 70ka. This means that the Homo erectus of Java very likely survived the Toba eruption and may have been contemporaneous with the earliest Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia and Australasia..

The 400 ky Sima de los Huesos remains from Spain also hint at this. The mtDNA of the remains from this Spanish site was sequenced and found to be closer to Denisovan mtDNA than to Neanderthal ⁄ Human mtDNA. This is quite hard to explain: how did Denisovans get more of this mtDNA than the Neanderthals did considering that Denisovans are located in Altai while Neandertals are located in between Spain and Altai? The authors offer 4 explanations, and I believe that their fourth is correct: bold font is mine [1]

A fourth possible scenario is that gene flow from another hominin population brought the Denisova-like mtDNA into the Sima de los Huesos population or its ancestors. Such a hominin group might have also contributed mtDNA to the Densiovans in Asia. Based on the fossil record, more than one evolutionary lineage may have existed in Europe during the Middle Pleistocene. Several fossils have been found in Europe as well as in Africa and Asia that are close in time to Sima de los Huesos but do not exhibit clear Neanderthal traits. These fossils are often grouped into H. heidelbergensis, a taxon that is difficult to define, particularly with regard to whether the Sima de los Huesos hominins should be included. Furthermore, there may have been relict populations of still earlier hominins, notably those classified as Homo antecessor, which share some morphological traits with Asian Homo erectus and have been found just a few hundred metres away from Sima de los Huesos in Gran Dolina.

[1]

Home erectus left Africa (or maybe even originated out of Africa, in Asia from H. Habilis who had migrated earlier, and some of them returned to Africa later, generating the African erectus.) 1.8 Mya. They had plenty of time to move across Eurasia, fromm Indonesia to China to, why not?, Spain. Surely they originated more "modern" versions as time passed, the Homo antecessor and later H. heidelbergensis could be some of them. As well as Denisovans.

Maybe they even marched all the way to the New World.

Later, when modern H. sapiens moved into their territories they admixed, in varying degrees. This admixture must depend on the population ratios of migrants and residents. We have therefore a high content of Denisovan gene flow in Austronesia, and also in East Asia and the New World. But they may have been the result of separate admixture events.

Orthodoxy requires that the Humans marching into America be the result of a split that took place in Asia. And if these future Amerindians were the only ones to enter America, then they had to admix with Denisovans in Asia. But neat theories are not the way Nature works. The history of our genetic makeup is much more complex. And it may involve admixture in the New World, both with Neandertals and Denisovans

Sources

[1] Matthias Meyer, Qiaomei Fu, ,et al., A mitochondrial genome sequence of a hominin from Sima de los Huesos, Nature 505, 403–406 (16 January 2014) doi:10.1038/nature12788

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2015 by Austin Whittall ©