Neanderthal-like features in 450,000-year-old fossil teeth from the Italian Peninsula

EurekAlert! ^ | October 3, 2018 | PLOS

[SunkenCiv]

Zanolli and colleagues examined dental remains from the sites of Fontana Fanuccio, located 50km southeast of Rome, and Visogliano, located 18km northwest of Trieste. At around 450,000 years old, these teeth join a very short list of fossil human remains from Middle Pleistocene Europe. Using micro-CT scanning and detailed morphological analyses, the authors examined the shape and arrangement of tooth tissues and compared them with teeth of other human species. They found that the teeth of both sites share similarities with Neanderthals and are distinct from modern humans.

There has been much debate over the identities and relationships of Middle Pleistocene ancient humans in Eurasia. The discovery of Neanderthal-like teeth so early in the record adds support to the suggestion of an early divergence of the Neanderthal lineage from our own, around the Early-Middle Pleistocene transition. The teeth are also notably different from other teeth known from this time in Eurasia, suggesting that there may have been multiple human lineages populating the region at this time, adding to a growing list of evidence that the Middle Pleistocene was a time of more complex human evolution than previously recognized.

Zanolli adds: "The remains from Fontana Ranuccio and Visogliano represent among the oldest human fossil remains testifying to a peopling phase of the Italian Peninsula. Our analyses of the tooth internal structural organization reveal a Neanderthal-like signature, also resembling the condition shown by the contemporary assemblage from Atapuerca Sima de los Huesos, indicating that an overall Neanderthal morphological dental template was preconfigured in Western Europe at least 430 to 450 ka ago."

[ZULU]

Aren’t shovel incisors an East Asian trait?

[Original Lurker]

Interesting.

If you watched Robert’s video the big-ticket takeaway is the “out of Africa” is something I’ve believed most (all?) of my life in that it’s just a bunch of crap.

Pure non-sense that’s a deliberate lie.

[gleeaikin]

I think the main argument for “out of Africa” is that the early hominid fossils much more than a million years old have not been found outside of Africa. If I remember correctly, Homo Habilis is the first hominid fossil found outside of Africa. Also I don’t think that the Heidelburg and Neanderthal types have been found in Africa. Any different info?

[Original Lurker]

My understanding is that Heidelburgensis *has* been found in Europe, Asia and Africa.

[SunkenCiv]

The main argument for "out of Africa" is "Darwin said it, I believe it, that settles it." The family tree is not entirely based on morphology, it is largely based on the "out of Africa" and replacement (master race) biases.

When the mtDNA stuff started to hit about 20 years ago, there was a prof at Stanford who pushed it to beat hell, even pissing off other scientists with stupid remarks such as calling Neandertal a speechless "village idiot" and claiming it was impossible to discuss anything with those coming from the anthropological / morphological approach.

One positive outgrowth has been that Neandertal is now known to be ancestral to a big chunk of humanity, and all the morphological trees are speculative until DNA samples can be recovered from more fossils and analyzed. At that time a lot of heads will roll, figuratively.

[gleeaikin]

I guess the big question then is the relative age of Heidelburg remains in Europe and Africa. If the African remains are significantly younger, then they could have come from Europe or the Middle East, and don’t forget that the Mediterranean has been dry at times or much smaller.

[SunkenCiv]

It has to do with whether fossils from outside Africa are considered part of the family tree, rather than being an unrelated or extinct line -- that where the "out of Africa" bias comes in. See?