New developments in the genetic evidence for modern human origins

Inferring archaic introgression from hominin genetic data

Questions surrounding the timing, extent, and evolutionary consequences of archaic admixture into human populations have a long history in evolutionary anthropology. More recently, advances in human genetics, particularly in the field of ancient DNA, have shed new light on the question of whether or not Homo sapiens interbred with other hominin groups. By the late 1990s, published genetic work had largely concluded that archaic groups made no lasting genetic contribution to modern humans; less than a decade later, this conclusion was reversed following the successful DNA sequencing of an ancient Neanderthal. This reversal of consensus is noteworthy, but the reasoning behind it is not widely understood across all academic communities. There remains a communication gap between population geneticists and paleoanthropologists. In this review, we endeavor to bridge this gap by outlining how technological advancements, new statistical methods, and notable controversies ultimately led to the current consensus.

Selecting among Alternative Scenarios of Human Evolution by Simulated Genetic Gradients

Selecting among alternative scenarios of human evolution is nowadays a common methodology to investigate the history of our species. This strategy is usually based on computer simulations of genetic data under different evolutionary scenarios, followed by a fitting of the simulated data with the real data. A recent trend in the investigation of ancestral evolutionary processes of modern humans is the application of genetic gradients as a measure of fitting, since evolutionary processes such as range expansions, range contractions, and population admixture (among others) can lead to different genetic gradients. In addition, this strategy allows the analysis of the genetic causes of the observed genetic gradients. Here, we review recent findings on the selection among alternative scenarios of human evolution based on simulated genetic gradients, including pros and cons. First, we describe common methodologies to simulate genetic gradients and apply them to select among alternative scenarios of human evolution. Next, we review previous studies on the influence of range expansions, population admixture, last glacial period, and migration with long-distance dispersal on genetic gradients for some regions of the world. Finally, we discuss this analytical approach, including technical limitations, required improvements, and advice. Although here we focus on human evolution, this approach could be extended to study other species.

A craniometric perspective on the transition to agriculture in Europe

Debates surrounding the nature of the Neolithic demographic transition in Europe have historically centered on two opposing models: a "demic" diffusion model whereby incoming farmers from the Near East and Anatolia effectively replaced or completely assimilated indigenous Mesolithic foraging communities, and an "indigenist" model resting on the assumption that ideas relating to agriculture and animal domestication diffused from the Near East but with little or no gene flow. The extreme versions of these dichotomous models were heavily contested primarily on the basis of archeological and modern genetic data. However, in recent years a growing acceptance has arisen of the likelihood that both processes were ongoing throughout the Neolithic transition and that a more complex, regional approach is required to fully understand the change from a foraging to a primarily agricultural mode of subsistence in Europe. Craniometric data were particularly useful for testing these more complex scenarios, as they can reliably be employed as a proxy for the genetic relationships among Mesolithic and Neolithic populations. In contrast, modern genetic data assume that modern European populations accurately reflect the genetic structure of Europe at the time of the Neolithic transition, while ancient DNA data are still not geographically or temporally detailed enough to test continent-wide processes. Here, with particular emphasis on the role of craniometric analyses, we review the current state of knowledge regarding the cultural and biological nature of the Neolithic transition in Europe.

A population-genetic perspective on the similarities and differences among worldwide human populations

Recent studies have produced a variety of advances in the investigation of genetic similarities and differences among human populations. Here, I pose a series of questions about human population-genetic similarities and differences, and I then answer these questions by numerical computation with a single shared population-genetic data set. The collection of answers obtained provides an introductory perspective for understanding key results on the features of worldwide human genetic variation.

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.

The relative congruence of cranial and genetic estimates of hominoid taxon relationships: implications for the reconstruction of hominin phylogeny

Previous analyses of extant catarrhine craniodental morphology have often failed to recover their molecular relationships, casting doubt on the accuracy of hominin phylogenies based on anatomical data. However, on the basis of genetic, morphometric and environmental affinity patterns, a growing body of literature has demonstrated that particular aspects of cranial morphology are remarkably reliable proxies for neutral modern human population history. Hence, it is important to test whether these intra-specific patterns can be extrapolated to a broader primate taxon level such that inference rules for understanding the morphological evolution of the extinct hominins may be devised. Here, we use a matrix of molecular distances between 15 hominoid taxa to test the genetic congruence of 14 craniomandibular regions, defined and morphometrically delineated on the basis of previous modern human analyses. This methodology allowed us to test directly whether the cranial regions found to be reliable indicators of population history were also more reliable proxies for hominoid genetic relationships. Cranial regions were defined on the basis of three criteria: developmental-functional units, individual bones, and regions differentially affected by masticatory stress. The results found that all regions tested were significantly and strongly correlated with the molecular matrix. However, the modern human predictions regarding the relative congruence of particular regions did not hold true, as the face was statistically the most reliable indicator of hominoid genetic distances, as opposed to the vault or basicranium. Moreover, when modern humans were removed from the analysis, all cranial regions improved in their genetic congruence, suggesting that it is the inclusion of morphologically-derived humans that has the largest effect on incongruence between morphological and molecular estimates of hominoid relationships. Therefore, it may be necessary to focus on smaller intra-generic taxonomic levels to more fully understand the effects of neutral and selective evolutionary processes in generating morphological diversity patterns.

The computer program STRUCTURE does not reliably identify the main genetic clusters within species: simulations and implications for human population structure

One of the primary goals of population genetics is to succinctly describe genetic relationships among populations, and the computer program STRUCTURE is one of the most frequently used tools for doing so. The mathematical model used by STRUCTURE was designed to sort individuals into Hardy-Weinberg populations, but the program is also frequently used to group individuals from a large number of populations into a small number of clusters that are supposed to represent the main genetic divisions within species. In this study, I used computer simulations to examine how well STRUCTURE accomplishes this latter task. Simulations of populations that had a simple hierarchical history of fragmentation showed that when there were relatively long divergence times within evolutionary lineages, the clusters created by STRUCTURE were frequently not consistent with the evolutionary history of the populations. These difficulties can be attributed to forcing STRUCTURE to place individuals into too few clusters. Simulations also showed that the clusters produced by STRUCTURE can be strongly influenced by variation in sample size. In some circumstances, STRUCTURE simply put all of the individuals from the largest sample in the same cluster. A reanalysis of human population structure suggests that the problems I identified with STRUCTURE in simulations may have obscured relationships among human populations-particularly genetic similarity between Europeans and some African populations.

Out of Africa: modern human origins special feature: explaining worldwide patterns of human genetic variation using a coalescent-based serial founder model of migration outward from Africa

Studies of worldwide human variation have discovered three trends in summary statistics as a function of increasing geographic distance from East Africa: a decrease in heterozygosity, an increase in linkage disequilibrium (LD), and a decrease in the slope of the ancestral allele frequency spectrum. Forward simulations of unlinked loci have shown that the decline in heterozygosity can be described by a serial founder model, in which populations migrate outward from Africa through a process where each of a series of populations is formed from a subset of the previous population in the outward expansion. Here, we extend this approach by developing a retrospective coalescent-based serial founder model that incorporates linked loci. Our model both recovers the observed decline in heterozygosity with increasing distance from Africa and produces the patterns observed in LD and the ancestral allele frequency spectrum. Surprisingly, although migration between neighboring populations and limited admixture between modern and archaic humans can be accommodated in the model while continuing to explain the three trends, a competing model in which a wave of outward modern human migration expands into a series of preexisting archaic populations produces nearly opposite patterns to those observed in the data. We conclude by developing a simpler model to illustrate that the feature that permits the serial founder model but not the archaic persistence model to explain the three trends observed with increasing distance from Africa is its incorporation of a cumulative effect of genetic drift as humans colonized the world.

Early modern human diversity suggests subdivided population structure and a complex out-of-Africa scenario

The interpretation of genetic evidence regarding modern human origins depends, among other things, on assessments of the structure and the variation of ancient populations. Because we lack genetic data from the time when the first anatomically modern humans appeared, between 200,000 and 60,000 years ago, instead we exploit the phenotype of neurocranial geometry to compare the variation in early modern human fossils with that in other groups of fossil Homo and recent modern humans. Variation is assessed as the mean-squared Procrustes distance from the group average shape in a representation based on several hundred neurocranial landmarks and semilandmarks. We find that the early modern group has more shape variation than any other group in our sample, which covers 1.8 million years, and that they are morphologically similar to recent modern humans of diverse geographically dispersed populations but not to archaic groups. Of the currently competing models of modern human origins, some are inconsistent with these findings. Rather than a single out-of-Africa dispersal scenario, we suggest that early modern humans were already divided into different populations in Pleistocene Africa, after which there followed a complex migration pattern. Our conclusions bear implications for the inference of ancient human demography from genetic models and emphasize the importance of focusing research on those early modern humans, in particular, in Africa.