Statistical and biological definitions of “anatomically modern” humans: Suggestions for a unified approach to modern morphology

Craniometric variation and the ancestry of modern humans

OBJECTIVES

Ancient and contemporary DNA provide information about geographic variation in the ancestry of present-day humans. All living populations have ancestry from early Homo sapiens originating in sub-Saharan Africa. Populations of Eurasian descent also have a small amount of Neandertal ancestry. This study examines whether craniometric distances between recent modern human samples reflect this geographic variation in ancestry. Among recent modern humans, Eurasians are expected to be more similar to Neandertals, whereas both sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians are expected to be equidistant from early H. sapiens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on 33 craniometric traits from 2524 recent modern humans were compared with data from the literature for Neandertals and early H. sapiens. Mahalanobis distances were computed for each modern specimen to both the Neandertal and early H. sapiens means. These distances were examined for differences between recent humans from sub-Saharan Africa (N = 373) and those of Eurasian descent (N = 2151).

RESULTS

Eurasians as a group are significantly closer than sub-Saharan Africans to Neandertals. There is no significant difference between the distances of sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians to early H. sapiens.

DISCUSSION

The differences between sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians for both Neandertals and early H. sapiens are as expected. Although there has been geographic differentiation among recent modern humans, including differences in Neandertal admixture, these differences have not affected overall similarity of recent modern sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians to the earliest samples of H. sapiens.

Evolution of Homo in the Middle and Late Pleistocene

The Middle and Late Pleistocene is arguably the most interesting period in human evolution. This broad period witnessed the evolution of our own lineage, as well as that of our sister taxon, the Neanderthals, and related Denisovans. It is exceptionally rich in both fossil and archaeological remains, and uniquely benefits from insights gained through molecular approaches, such as paleogenetics and paleoproteomics, that are currently not widely applicable in earlier contexts. This wealth of information paints a highly complex picture, often described as 'the Muddle in the Middle,' defying the common adage that 'more evidence is needed' to resolve it. Here we review competing phylogenetic scenarios and the historical and theoretical developments that shaped our approaches to the fossil record, as well as some of the many remaining open questions associated with this period. We propose that advancing our understanding of this critical time requires more than the addition of data and will necessitate a major shift in our conceptual and theoretical framework.

Variation in Middle Stone Age mandibular molar enamel-dentine junction topography at Klasies River Main Site assessed by diffeomorphic surface matching

The morphology and variability of the Middle Stone Age (MSA) hominin fossils from Klasies River Main Site have been the focus of investigation for more than four decades. The mandibular remains have figured prominently in discussions relating to robusticity, size dimorphism, and symphyseal morphology. Variation in corpus size between the robust SAM-AP 6223 and the diminutive SAM-AP 6225 mandibles is particularly impressive, and the difference between the buccolingual diameters of their M₂s significantly exceeds recent human sample variation. SAM-AP 6223 and SAM-AP 6225 are the only Klasies specimens with homologous teeth (M₂ and M₃) that permit comparisons of crown morphology. While the differences in dental trait expression at the outer enamel surfaces of these molars are slight, diffeomorphic surface analyses of their underlying enamel-dentine junction (EDJ) topographies reveal differences that are well beyond the means of pairwise differences among comparative samples of Later Stone Age (LSA) Khoesan and recent African homologues. The EDJs of both SAM-AP 6225 molars and the SAM-AP 6223 M₃ fall outside the envelopes that define the morphospace of these two samples. Although the radiocarbon dated LSA individuals examined here differ by a maximum of some 7000 years, and the two Klasies jaws may differ by perhaps as much as 18,000 years, it is difficult to ascribe their differences to time alone. With reference to the morphoscopic traits by which the SAM-AP 6223 and SAM-AP 6225 EDJs differ, the most striking is the expression of the protoconid cingulum. This is very weakly developed on the SAM-AP 6223 molars and distinct in SAM-AP 6225. As such, this diminutive fossil exhibits a more pronounced manifestation of what is likely a plesiomorphic feature, thus adding to the morphological mosaicism that is evident in the Klasies hominin assemblage. Several possible explanations for the variation and mosaicism in this MSA sample are discussed.

Origins of modern human ancestry

New finds in the palaeoanthropological and genomic records have changed our view of the origins of modern human ancestry. Here we review our current understanding of how the ancestry of modern humans around the globe can be traced into the deep past, and which ancestors it passes through during our journey back in time. We identify three key phases that are surrounded by major questions, and which will be at the frontiers of future research. The most recent phase comprises the worldwide expansion of modern humans between 40 and 60 thousand years ago (ka) and their last known contacts with archaic groups such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. The second phase is associated with a broadly construed African origin of modern human diversity between 60 and 300 ka. The oldest phase comprises the complex separation of modern human ancestors from archaic human groups from 0.3 to 1 million years ago. We argue that no specific point in time can currently be identified at which modern human ancestry was confined to a limited birthplace, and that patterns of the first appearance of anatomical or behavioural traits that are used to define Homo sapiens are consistent with a range of evolutionary histories.

Deciphering African late middle Pleistocene hominin diversity and the origin of our species

The origin of Homo sapiens remains a matter of debate. The extent and geographic patterning of morphological diversity among Late Middle Pleistocene (LMP) African hominins is largely unknown, thus precluding the definition of boundaries of variability in early H. sapiens and the interpretation of individual fossils. Here we use a phylogenetic modelling method to predict possible morphologies of a last common ancestor of all modern humans, which we compare to LMP African fossils (KNM-ES 11693, Florisbad, Irhoud 1, Omo II, and LH18). Our results support a complex process for the evolution of H. sapiens, with the recognition of different, geographically localised, populations and lineages in Africa - not all of which contributed to our species' origin. Based on the available fossils, H. sapiens appears to have originated from the coalescence of South and, possibly, East-African source populations, while North-African fossils may represent a population which introgressed into Neandertals during the LMP.

Clarifying distinct models of modern human origins in Africa

Accumulating genomic, fossil and archaeological data from Africa have led to a renewed interest in models of modern human origins. However, such discussions are often discipline-specific, with limited integration of evidence across the different fields. Further, geneticists typically require explicit specification of parameters to test competing demographic models, but these have been poorly outlined for some scenarios. Here, we describe four possible models for the origins of Homo sapiens in Africa based on published literature from paleoanthropology and human genetics. We briefly outline expectations for data patterns under each model, with a special focus on genetic data. Additionally, we present schematics for each model, doing our best to qualitatively describe demographic histories for which genetic parameters can be specifically attached. Finally, it is our hope that this perspective provides context for discussions of human origins in other manuscripts presented in this special issue.

The origin and evolution of Homo sapiens

If we restrict the use of Homo sapiens in the fossil record to specimens which share a significant number of derived features in the skeleton with extant H. sapiens, the origin of our species would be placed in the African late middle Pleistocene, based on fossils such as Omo Kibish 1, Herto 1 and 2, and the Levantine material from Skhul and Qafzeh. However, genetic data suggest that we and our sister species Homo neanderthalensis shared a last common ancestor in the middle Pleistocene approximately 400-700 ka, which is at least 200 000 years earlier than the species origin indicated from the fossils already mentioned. Thus, it is likely that the African fossil record will document early members of the sapiens lineage showing only some of the derived features of late members of the lineage. On that basis, I argue that human fossils such as those from Jebel Irhoud, Florisbad, Eliye Springs and Omo Kibish 2 do represent early members of the species, but variation across the African later middle Pleistocene/early Middle Stone Age fossils shows that there was not a simple linear progression towards later sapiens morphology, and there was chronological overlap between different 'archaic' and 'modern' morphs. Even in the late Pleistocene within and outside Africa, we find H. sapiens specimens which are clearly outside the range of Holocene members of the species, showing the complexity of recent human evolution. The impact on species recognition of late Pleistocene gene flow between the lineages of modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans is also discussed, and finally, I reconsider the nature of the middle Pleistocene ancestor of these lineages, based on recent morphological and genetic data.This article is part of the themed issue 'Major transitions in human evolution'.

The Omo-Kibish I pelvis

Omo-Kibish I (Omo I) from southern Ethiopia is the oldest anatomically modern Homo sapiens skeleton currently known (196 ± 5 ka). A partial hipbone (os coxae) of Omo I was recovered more than 30 years after the first portion of the skeleton was recovered, a find which is significant because human pelves can be informative about an individual's sex, age-at-death, body size, obstetrics and parturition, and trunk morphology. Recent human pelves are distinct from earlier Pleistocene Homo spp. pelves because they are mediolaterally narrower in bispinous breadth, have more vertically oriented ilia, lack a well-developed iliac pillar, and have distinct pubic morphology. The pelvis of Omo I provides an opportunity to test whether the earliest modern humans had the pelvic morphology characteristic of modern humans today and to shed light onto the paleobiology of the earliest humans. Here, we formally describe the preservation and morphology of the Omo I hipbone, and quantitatively and qualitatively compare the hipbone to recent humans and relevant fossil Homo. The Omo I hipbone is modern human in appearance, displaying a moderate iliac tubercle (suggesting a reduced iliac pillar) and an ilium that is not as laterally flaring as earlier Homo. Among those examined in this study, the Omo I ischium is most similar in shape to (but substantially larger than) that of recent Sudanese people. Omo I has features that suggest this skeleton belonged to a female. The stature estimates in this study were derived from multiple bones from the upper and lower part of the body, and suggest that there may be differences in the upper and lower limb proportions of the earliest modern humans compared to recent humans. The large size and robusticity of the Omo I pelvis is in agreement with other studies that have found that modern human reduction in postcranial robusticity occurred later in our evolutionary history.

Ontogenetic scaling of the human nose in a longitudinal sample: implications for genus Homo facial evolution

Researchers have hypothesized that nasal morphology, both in archaic Homo and in recent humans, is influenced by body mass and associated oxygen consumption demands required for tissue maintenance. Similarly, recent studies of the adult human nasal region have documented key differences in nasal form between males and females that are potentially linked to sexual dimorphism in body size, composition, and energetics. To better understand this potential developmental and functional dynamic, we first assessed sexual dimorphism in the nasal cavity in recent humans to determine when during ontogeny male-female differences in nasal cavity size appear. Next, we assessed whether there are significant differences in nasal/body size scaling relationships in males and females during ontogeny. Using a mixed longitudinal sample we collected cephalometric and anthropometric measurements from n = 20 males and n = 18 females from 3.0 to 20.0+ years of age totaling n = 290 observations. We found that males and females exhibit similar nasal size values early in ontogeny and that sexual dimorphism in nasal size appears during adolescence. Moreover, when scaled to body size, males exhibit greater positive allometry in nasal size compared to females. This differs from patterns of sexual dimorphism in overall facial size, which are already present in our earliest age groups. Sexually dimorphic differences in nasal development and scaling mirror patterns of ontogenetic variation in variables associated with oxygen consumption and tissue maintenance. This underscores the importance of considering broader systemic factors in craniofacial development and may have important implications for the study of patters craniofacial evolution in the genus Homo.

The great human expansion

Genetic and paleoanthropological evidence is in accord that today's human population is the result of a great demic (demographic and geographic) expansion that began approximately 45,000 to 60,000 y ago in Africa and rapidly resulted in human occupation of almost all of the Earth's habitable regions. Genomic data from contemporary humans suggest that this expansion was accompanied by a continuous loss of genetic diversity, a result of what is called the "serial founder effect." In addition to genomic data, the serial founder effect model is now supported by the genetics of human parasites, morphology, and linguistics. This particular population history gave rise to the two defining features of genetic variation in humans: genomes from the substructured populations of Africa retain an exceptional number of unique variants, and there is a dramatic reduction in genetic diversity within populations living outside of Africa. These two patterns are relevant for medical genetic studies mapping genotypes to phenotypes and for inferring the power of natural selection in human history. It should be appreciated that the initial expansion and subsequent serial founder effect were determined by demographic and sociocultural factors associated with hunter-gatherer populations. How do we reconcile this major demic expansion with the population stability that followed for thousands years until the inventions of agriculture? We review advances in understanding the genetic diversity within Africa and the great human expansion out of Africa and offer hypotheses that can help to establish a more synthetic view of modern human evolution.

Did a discrete event 200,000-100,000 years ago produce modern humans?

Scenarios for modern human origins are often predicated on the assumption that modern humans arose 200,000-100,000 years ago in Africa. This assumption implies that something 'special' happened at this point in time in Africa, such as the speciation that produced Homo sapiens, a severe bottleneck in human population size, or a combination of the two. The common thread is that after the divergence of the modern human and Neandertal evolutionary lineages ∼400,000 years ago, there was another discrete event near in time to the Middle-Late Pleistocene boundary that produced modern humans. Alternatively, modern human origins could have been a lengthy process that lasted from the divergence of the modern human and Neandertal evolutionary lineages to the expansion of modern humans out of Africa, and nothing out of the ordinary happened 200,000-100,000 years ago in Africa. Three pieces of biological (fossil morphology and DNA sequences) evidence are typically cited in support of discrete event models. First, living human mitochondrial DNA haplotypes coalesce ∼200,000 years ago. Second, fossil specimens that are usually classified as 'anatomically modern' seem to appear shortly afterward in the African fossil record. Third, it is argued that these anatomically modern fossils are morphologically quite different from the fossils that preceded them. Here I use theory from population and quantitative genetics to show that lengthy process models are also consistent with current biological evidence. That this class of models is a viable option has implications for how modern human origins is conceptualized.

A uniquely modern human pattern of endocranial development. Insights from a new cranial reconstruction of the Neandertal newborn from Mezmaiskaya

The globular braincase of modern humans is distinct from all fossil human species, including our closest extinct relatives, the Neandertals. Such adult shape differences must ultimately be rooted in different developmental patterns, but it is unclear at which point during ontogeny these group characteristics emerge. Here we compared internal shape changes of the braincase from birth to adulthood in Neandertals (N = 10), modern humans (N = 62), and chimpanzees (N = 62). Incomplete fossil specimens, including the two Neandertal newborns from Le Moustier 2 and Mezmaiskaya, were reconstructed using reference-based estimation methods. We used 3D geometric morphometrics to statistically compare shapes of virtual endocasts extracted from computed-tomographic scans. Throughout the analysis, we kept track of possible uncertainties due to the missing data values and small fossil sample sizes. We find that some aspects of endocranial development are shared by the three species. However, in the first year of life, modern humans depart from this presumably ancestral pattern of development. Newborn Neandertals and newborn modern humans have elongated braincases, and similar endocranial volumes. During a 'globularization-phase' modern human endocasts change to the globular shape that is characteristic for Homo sapiens. This phase of early development is unique to modern humans, and absent from chimpanzees and Neandertals. Our results support the notion that Neandertals and modern humans reach comparable adult brain sizes via different developmental pathways. The differences between these two human groups are most prominent directly after birth, a critical phase for cognitive development.

Nasal septal and premaxillary developmental integration: implications for facial reduction in Homo

The influence of the chondrocranium in craniofacial development and its role in the reduction of facial size and projection in the genus Homo is incompletely understood. As one component of the chondrocranium, the nasal septum has been argued to play a significant role in human midfacial growth, particularly with respect to its interaction with the premaxilla during prenatal and early postnatal development. Thus, understanding the precise role of nasal septal growth on the facial skeleton is potentially informative with respect to the evolutionary change in craniofacial form. In this study, we assessed the integrative effects of the nasal septum and premaxilla by experimentally reducing facial length in Sus scrofa via circummaxillary suture fixation. Following from the nasal septal-traction model, we tested the following hypotheses: (1) facial growth restriction produces no change in nasal septum length; and (2) restriction of facial length produces compensatory premaxillary growth due to continued nasal septal growth. With respect to hypothesis 1, we found no significant differences in septum length (using the vomer as a proxy) in our experimental (n = 10), control (n = 9) and surgical sham (n = 9) trial groups. With respect to hypothesis 2, the experimental group exhibited a significant increase in premaxilla length. Our hypotheses were further supported by multivariate geometric morphometric analysis and support an integrative relationship between the nasal septum and premaxilla. Thus, continued assessment of the growth and integration of the nasal septum and premaxilla is potentially informative regarding the complex developmental mechanisms that underlie facial reduction in genus Homo evolution.

The Pleistocene archaeology and environments of the Wasiriya Beds, Rusinga Island, Kenya

Western Kenya is well known for abundant early Miocene hominoid fossils. However, the Wasiriya Beds of Rusinga Island, Kenya, preserve a Pleistocene sedimentary archive with radiocarbon age estimates of >33-45 ka that contains Middle Stone Age artifacts and abundant, well-preserved fossil fauna: a co-occurrence rare in eastern Africa, particularly in the region bounding Lake Victoria. Artifacts and fossils are associated with distal volcanic ash deposits that occur at multiple localities in the Wasiriya Beds, correlated on the basis of geochemical composition as determined by electron probe microanalysis. Sediment lithology and the fossil ungulates suggest a local fluvial system and associated riparian wooded habitat within a predominantly arid grassland setting that differs substantially from the modern environment, where local climate is strongly affected by moisture availability from Lake Victoria. In particular, the presence of oryx (Oryx gazella) and Grevy's zebra (Equus grevyi) suggest a pre-Last Glacial Maximum expansion of arid grasslands, an environmental reconstruction further supported by the presence of several extinct specialized grazers (Pelorovis antiquus, Megalotragus sp., and a small alcelaphine) that are unknown from Holocene deposits in eastern Africa. The combination of artifacts, a rich fossil fauna, and volcaniclastic sediments makes the Wasiriya Beds a key site for examining the Lake Victoria basin, a biogeographically important area for understanding the diversification and dispersal of Homo sapiens from Africa, whose pre-Last Glacial Maximum history remains poorly understood.

A bivariate approach to the widening of the frontal lobes in the genus Homo

Within the genus Homo, the most encephalized taxa (Neandertals and modern humans) show relatively wider frontal lobes than either Homo erectus or australopithecines. The present analysis considers whether these changes are associated with a single size-based or allometric pattern (positive allometry of the width of the anterior endocranial fossa) or with a more specific and non-allometric pattern. The relationship between hemispheric length, maximum endocranial width, and frontal width at Broca's area was investigated in extant and extinct humans. Our results do not support positive allometry for the frontal lobe's width in relation to the main endocranial diameters within modern humans (Homo sapiens). Also, the correlation between frontal width and hemispheric length is lower than the correlation between frontal width and parieto-temporal width. When compared with the australopithecines, the genus Homo could have experienced a non-allometric widening of the brain at the temporo-parietal areas, which is most evident in Neandertals. Modern humans and Neandertals also display a non-allometric widening of the anterior endocranial fossa at the Broca's cap when compared with early hominids, again more prominent in the latter group. Taking into account the contrast between the intra-specific patterns and the between-species differences, the relative widening of the anterior fossa can be interpreted as a definite evolutionary character instead of a passive consequence of brain size increase. This expansion is most likely associated with correspondent increments of the underlying neural mass, or at least with a geometrical reallocation of the frontal cortical volumes. Although different structural changes of the cranial architecture can be related to such variations, the widening of the frontal areas is nonetheless particularly interesting when some neural functions (like language or working memory, decision processing, etc.) and related fronto-parietal cortico-cortical connections are taken into account.

How Neandertals inform human variation

Since their first discovery, Neandertals have served as an out-group for interpreting human variation. Their out-group role has changed over the years because in spite of the fact that Neandertals are the most abundant of all fossil remains (or perhaps because of this) their interpretation is the most controversial of all human fossils. Many believe them to be a different, albeit human-like species, but recent genetic evidence supports anatomical interpretations indicating that interbreeding with other humans was an important aspect of human evolution. The combination of anatomical difference and restricted gene flow between populations suggests the possibility that Neandertals may have been a true human race.

Out of Africa: modern human origins special feature: middle and later Pleistocene hominins in Africa and Southwest Asia

Approximately 700,000 years ago, Homo erectus in Africa was giving way to populations with larger brains accompanied by structural adjustments to the vault, cranial base, and face. Such early Middle Pleistocene hominins were not anatomically modern. Their skulls display strong supraorbital tori above projecting faces, flattened frontals, and less parietal expansion than is the case for Homo sapiens. Postcranial remains seem also to have archaic features. Subsequently, some groups evolved advanced skeletal morphology, and by ca. 200,000 years ago, individuals more similar to recent humans are present in the African record. These fossils are associated with Middle Stone Age lithic assemblages and, in some cases, Acheulean tools. Crania from Herto in Ethiopia carry defleshing cutmarks and superficial scoring that may be indicative of mortuary practices. Despite these signs of behavioral innovation, neither the Herto hominins, nor others from Late Pleistocene sites such as Klasies River in southern Africa and Skhūl/Qafzeh in Israel, can be matched in living populations. Skulls are quite robust, and it is only after approximately 35,000 years ago that people with more gracile, fully modern morphology make their appearance. Not surprisingly, many questions concerning this evolutionary history have been raised. Attention has centered on systematics of the mid-Pleistocene hominins, their paleobiology, and the timing of dispersals that spread H. sapiens out of Africa and across the Old World. In this report, I discuss structural changes characterizing the skulls from different time periods, possible regional differences in morphology, and the bearing of this evidence on recognizing distinct species.

Allometric scaling of infraorbital surface topography in Homo

Infraorbital morphology is often included in phylogenetic and functional analyses of Homo. The inclusion of distinct infraorbital configurations, such as the "canine fossa" in Homo sapiens or the "inflated" maxilla in Neandertals, is generally based on either descriptive or qualitative assessments of this morphology, or simple linear chord and subtense measurements. However, the complex curvilinear surface of the infraorbital region has proven difficult to quantify through these traditional methods. In this study, we assess infraorbital shape and its potential allometric scaling in fossil Homo (n=18) and recent humans (n=110) with a geometric morphometric method well-suited for quantifying complex surface topographies. Our results indicate that important aspects of infraorbital shape are correlated with overall infraorbital size across Homo. Specifically, individuals with larger infraorbital areas tend to exhibit relatively flatter infraorbital surface topographies, taller and narrower infraorbital areas, sloped inferior orbital rims, anteroinferiorly oriented maxillary body facies, posteroinferiorly oriented maxillary processes of the zygomatic, and non-everted lateral nasal margins. In contrast, individuals with smaller infraorbital regions generally exhibit relatively depressed surface topographies, shorter and wider infraorbital areas, projecting inferior orbital rims, posteroinferiorly oriented maxillary body facies, anteroinferiorly oriented maxillary processes, and everted lateral nasal margins. These contrasts form a continuum and only appear dichotomized at the ends of the infraorbital size spectrum. In light of these results, we question the utility of incorporating traditionally polarized infraorbital morphologies in phylogenetic and functional analyses without due consideration of continuous infraorbital and facial size variation in Homo. We conclude that the essentially flat infraorbital surface topography of Neandertals is not unique and can be explained, in part, as a function of possessing large infraorbital regions, the ancestral condition for Homo. Furthermore, it appears likely that the diminutive infraorbital region of anatomically modern Homo sapiens is a primary derived trait, with related features such as depressed infraorbital surface topography expressed as correlated secondary characters.