No scientific evidence that Homo naledi buried their dead and produced rock art

Hominin cognition: The null hypothesis

The target article explores material culture datasets from three African forager groups. After demonstrating that these modern, contemporary human populations would leave scant evidence of symbolic behaviour or material complexity, it cautioned against using material culture as a barometer for human cognition in the deep past. Twenty-one commentaries broadly support or expand these conclusions. A minority offer targeted demurrals, highlighting (1) the soundness of reasoning from absence; and questioning (2) the "cognitively modern" null; (3) the role of hunter-gatherer ethnography; and (4) the pertinence of the inferential issues identified in the target article. In synthesising these discussions, this reply addresses all four points of demurral in turn, and concludes that there is much to be gained from shifting our null assumptions and reconsidering the probabilistic inferential links between past material culture and cognition.

What we know and do not know after the first decade of Homo naledi

It has been just over 10 years since the first fossils attributed to Homo naledi were recovered from the Rising Star Cave system in South Africa's Cradle of Humankind. The hominin fossil evidence for H. naledi displays a distinctive combination of primitive and derived morphology, yet for a time-averaged fossil sample it is remarkable for its relatively low level of variation. Thus-unusually for palaeoanthropology-there has been little pushback against the decision to recognize a single novel taxon for all of the material recovered from the Rising Star Cave system. However, almost everything else claimed about H. naledi-its age, burial context and behaviour-has been controversial. Here we examine the strength of the evidence for these claims.

Sex-biased sampling may influence Homo naledi tooth size variation

A frequent source of debate in paleoanthropology concerns the taxonomic unity of fossil assemblages, with many hominin samples exhibiting elevated levels of variation that can be interpreted as indicating the presence of multiple species. By contrast, the large assemblage of hominin fossils from the Rising Star cave system, assigned to Homo naledi, exhibits a remarkably low degree of variation for most skeletal elements. Many factors can contribute to low sample variation, including genetic drift, strong natural selection, biased sex ratios, and sampling of closely related individuals. In this study, we tested for potential sex-biased sampling in the Rising Star dental sample. We compared coefficients of variation for the H. naledi teeth to those for eight extant hominoid samples. We used a resampling procedure that generated samples from the extant taxa that matched the sample size of the fossil sample for each possible Rising Star dental sex ratio. We found that variation at four H. naledi tooth positions-I2, M1, P4, M1-is so low that the possibility that one sex is represented by few or no individuals in the sample cannot be excluded. Additional evidence is needed to corroborate this inference, such as ancient DNA or enamel proteome data, and our study design does not address other potential factors that would account for low sample variation. Nevertheless, our results highlight the importance of considering the taphonomic history of a hominin assemblage and suggest that sex-biased sampling is a plausible explanation for the low level of phenotypic variation found in some aspects of the current H. naledi assemblage.