Comprehensive coverage

The story of the human journey - evolution is rewritten / Kate Wong

A flood of new insights is forcing scientists to redraw almost all the chapters in the story of human history

A skull of one of the hominids discovered in the RISING STAR cave in South Africa. Photo: the researchers
A skull of one of the hominids discovered in the RISING STAR cave in South Africa. Photo: the researchers

through the "mailbox" and up the "dragon's back", down the "slide" and on to the "riddle box". In the fall of 2013, the world followed, through tweets, blogs and videos, a team of scientists who navigated through these strangely named landmarks, located in the cave system called "Rising Star" on the outskirts of Johannesburg in South Africa. The narrow passages and steep shafts in the cave made the dangerous work difficult. And yet, the researchers set their sights on the big prize: the fossilized remains of an extinct member of the human family. Paleoanthropological fieldwork is usually done in secret. But this time the scientists published moving multimedia letters for all to see.

 

Cave explorers noticed the bones in September 2013 when they were surveying the lesser-known caves in this famous region of Israel, which has been named the "Cradle of the Human Race". The researchers were sure that the bones were important even before they knew their age and biological species (species), since most of the fossilized details of the human lineage contain skull fragments or bones from the neck down. This time bones of both types were discovered. The possibility of making a connection between a skull and the bones of a skeleton was enough to place this discovery in a prominent place in any textbook on the origin of man. But after the diggers began to uncover the bones, they realized that they had something even bigger in their hands. At the bottom of the cave were not the remains of a single individual, as they first thought, but the remains of many individuals - an entire population of ancient humans.

During two excavation expeditions, which lasted a total of four weeks, the team, led by paleoanthropologist Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, removed more than 1,500 bones and bone fragments from their resting place, 30 meters below the surface, and brought them up to the expedition's laboratory tent. There the researchers cataloged the fossils and filled vault after vault with the remains of our ancestors. And yet, they have only scratched the surface. An unbelievable hoard of bones awaited them in the cave room. At this rate, the "Rising Star" cave system is emerging as one of the richest sites in human fossils ever discovered.

The exact significance of the findings is still unknown. Although the team involved the public in the disclosure efforts, it kept the scientific details behind the scenes. It is possible that the bones represent a biological species new to science, which, like the fossils uncovered by Berger and his colleagues at the nearby Malpa site a few years ago, sheds new light on the obscure origins of our biological type (genus), Gay. [See: "Our first” by Kate Wong, Scientific American Israel, August-September 2012.] And perhaps, due to the large number of individuals on the site, some pattern will be revealed that will reveal the structure of their social groups. It is likely that a comparison between the human remains and the animal remains at the site will clarify how they ended their lives in the cave. The answers are already on the horizon: the discovery team is now preparing for publication the official description of the excavations and the analysis of the bones.

We, the onlookers, still do not know how these fossils will rewrite the story of the origins of man, but history teaches us that they will indeed rewrite it. The discovery in the "Rising Star" is only the latest in a stream of findings that have been discovered since 2000, findings that undermine the pillars of the study of human evolution. New fossils add branches to our family tree. Climate data reveals the conditions under which evolution led to the development of the traits that characterize our ancestors. Research in primates is increasingly clarifying the exact cognitive differences between us and our closest family members: the great apes. Decoding DNA sequences illuminates the interrelationships that prevailed between ancient populations and hints at how evolution continues to change us. This flood of fresh insights forced the scientists involved in the field to practically rewrite all the chapters in the story of human plots, from the dawn of the human race to the victory of the intelligent man, theHomo sapiens, about the Neanderthals and other ancient species. Never has the science of human origins been so vigorous. Never has our story been so fascinating.

To appreciate how far paleoanthropology has progressed in recent years, let's go back for a moment to the late 90s of the 20th century. At the time, scientists thought they had a pretty good understanding of our evolutionary story. The human fossil record was quite rich (especially compared to the almost nil record of our closest living animals, the great apes), and the genetic evidence, which was workable, seemed consistent with the fossil story. The popular opinion at the time was that the first hominins (a group that includes modern man and his extinct relatives) appeared in East Africa about 4.4 million years ago, and in their wake our species evolved, Gay, a little over two million years ago. Hominins didn't leave Africa until just over a million years ago, after which they began to infiltrate other areas of the Old World. After settling in these new places, new species of Gay, including the Neanderthals of Eurasia. These species thrived for hundreds of thousands of years until a new species emerged from Africa and began to spread around the world. Much wiser, equipped with advanced technology and gifted with the gift of speech, the lambHomo sapiens the world by storm, when on his way to the top he lays a kidney on the Neanderthals and other ancient human species. There was no intermixing of the sexes, no children of mixed hybrids to carry Neanderthal genes to future generations. The new guard soldiers simply replaced the previous guard. On his way out of Africa, theHomo sapiens In competition with the hominins he met, at best, or killed them at worst. About 30,000 years ago, we were the only hominin standing on our feet. That's how the story goes, anyway.

However, the fossil evidence and the genetic evidence that has accumulated since then have undermined all the foundations of this summary, or even completely contradicted them. For example, seven-million-year-old fossils, found in the Jurab Desert in Chad, stretched the human fossil record by more than two million years and raised the possibility that hominins did not emerge in East Africa, but rather in the West. And the fossils from Malpa in South Africa, which are about two million years old, hint that the species Gay He himself began his journey in this part of the continent and not in the east.

Fossils from the Damanisi site in the Republic of Georgia (Georgia), dated as 1.78 million years old, prove that hominins began to leave Africa hundreds of thousands of years earlier than previously thought [see "A stranger in a foreign land", Kate Wong, Scientific American Israel, August-September 2004]. This therefore happened a long time before thatGay During its evolution it developed long legs, a large brain and a sophisticated "tool box", features that were previously believed to be the features that pushed its spread in the world. Another amazing discovery, of a species of tiny hominins that lived on the island of Flores in Indonesia until about 17,000 years ago, raised the possibility that our ancestors began to spread in the world outside of Africa even before the time that the fossils from Manisi teach [see “the smallest personKate Wong, Scientific American Israel, June-July 2005; "A new look at the hobbits of Indonesia", Kate Wong, Scientific American Israel, February-March 2010]. ToHomo fluoresiensis, as the remains from Indonesia are called, had an unusually small body and brain, traits it may have inherited from an Australopithecus-like ancestor that made its way out of Africa two million years or more ago.

But perhaps there is no chapter in the story of the past human journey that is written so dramatically as the plots of his rise to greatness Homo sapiens. The fossil evidence shows that our species was very far from being an evolutionary safe bet, a species destined to rule the world from the start. On the other hand, they paint a picture of a species that almost became extinct immediately after its formation due to climate change. Also the cognitive gap between Homo sapiens And among other ancient species was not as distinct as some researchers have imagined. Discoveries of sophisticated tools, such as leather polishing tools made from animal bones, reveal the fact that the Neanderthals were much more technologically advanced than we previously thought. And evidence that they decorated their bodies with paint, jewelry, and feathers confirms that Neanderthal societies were steeped in rich symbolic traditions that were once thought to be unique toHomo sapiens. The idea that the Neanderthals were dumb cavemen is therefore a myth.

And in keeping with the shared anatomy of the two species, genetic studies have shown that modern humans shared descendants with the Neanderthals. They did this frequently enough to result in the fact that today about 3% of the genome of non-African people is Neanderthal genome. Moreover, since different people carry different segments of Neanderthal DNA, the sum of all Neanderthal genetic material that has survived to this day reaches a much higher rate: at least 20%, according to recent calculations.

Neanderthals weren't the only ancient humans to squat Homo sapiens. The Denisovans, a group recently discovered after analyzing DNA extracted from a mysterious 40,000-year-old finger bone discovered in a cave in Siberia, also mated with our ancestors. Moreover, intercourse with early hominin species appears to have benefited theHomo sapiens, who in this way acquired genes that helped him survive: genes originating from Neanderthals, for example, improved the immune system. A certain genetic variant that came from the Denisovans helps Tibetans live at high altitudes.

But despite everything that links us to our evolutionary relatives, we have some features that set us apart. In this special issue of Scientific American Israel we explore the evolution of some of these characteristics that make us human: from our upright posture to our unique ability to cooperate. Our story has three chapters. The first examines our tangled genealogy and the factors that led to our branch surviving and in its way displacing all others. The second chapter reviews the differences between us and other primates and examines how these traits might have helped us thrive. And the third chapter looks into the future of human evolution in a world that offers plenty of repair options for almost everything, from loneliness to disease.

We hope you enjoy the story, produced over seven million years. This is not the last word, of course. Just as human evolution is accelerating, so too is the pace of paleoanthropological discoveries. But that's the only way to tell it.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

on the notebook

Kate Wong is a senior editor at Scientific American. She edited the special issue from which we bring you, in this Hebrew issue, the articles on human evolution.

 

The article was published with the permission of Scientific American Israel

 

20 תגובות

  1. For the sake of good order, it should be clarified that:
    The first reaction: "A good list ……." is mine,
    Later, the person who identifies himself as "Asaf" is (?) ...

  2. For the sake of good order, it should be clarified that:
    The first reaction: "A good list ……." is mine,
    Later, the person who identifies himself as "Asaf" is (?) ...

  3. free radical
    A pairing between a lion and a tiger is not necessarily sterile, and there are known cases where the offspring have multiplied.

  4. With a bear from a hundred thousand years ago, would a right-hand man define a bear as a bear? It seems that the two bears would not recognize a difference between a modern man and an Andertal.

  5. The genetic change + living conditions change rapidly. Even if a person is a descendant of a Neanderthal lineage, he could not be considered a Neanderthal. Such changes are too great. For example, the Japanese of today are 20 centimeters taller than the Japanese of the XNUMXs. In the tens of thousands of years, man slept diversify his diet radically.

  6. Assaf, if for the sake of the example we will say that the Neanderthal is a person with a color of 100% purple. And today there are no purple people. But all the people who live in the land of Oz have a certain percentage of purple.

  7. The thing about the 3% Neanderthal genome being the same as humans doesn't add up. After all, humans and Neanderthals are very close species, so our genes are 99.7% identical. A person whose 3% of the rest of the human genome is Neadretal is 100% Neadretal.

  8. The human race is very young. The crocodile, for example, has existed since the days of the dinosaurs. Since the chance of a crocodile reaching maturity (in the wild) is slim. And a crocodile that does grow is "nailed" to its ancient genetics. In the event that there is a high natural reproduction, different archetypes appear - mutations. And this is where it begins Evolution to speed up. For example, a young species of cattle - can breed and produce fertile offspring. For example, the domestic cow if a bison, or the American bison with a European bison. He will not give fertile offspring. The human race is young and has a huge distribution, almost impossible to follow.

  9. Miracles

    I think A was actually his original and SA was the second

    א

    Do you want to have another discussion about why these made up numbers mean nothing of what you claim they do or do you want to run away again right now?

  10. These games with negative powers 10^-28 in probability are not exact. Self-organizing systems work to reduce entropy (=lack of order), and accelerate order processes. No one has performed such a simple probability calculation of combinations in such systems.

  11. I have no interest in entering into a debate against their creation. To me evolution is one of the most brilliant theories ever practiced.
    If you ingest antibiotics then of course you believe in evolution because bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics
    And the doctor changes it for you from time to time - the type. If there was no evolution, the antibiotics from 1947 would be suitable for you today.
    I also believe in the Creator, but also in the need to keep up to date with conventions defined by 4,000 years of knowledge.
    I have no way of proving or denying the existence of a creator.
    I think there is a possibility to prove the correctness of the theory of evolution.

  12. Joseph-

    The problem with evolution is that it does not meet the definition of a scientific theory at all. for no finding can disprove it. Scientists, for example, have found identical genes in distant species that do not exist in the species between them. Which is not supposed to be invented by evolution. They of course solve this by transferring genes between the creatures. The problem is that while gene transfer is recorded in bacteria, it is not recorded in real time in bacteria. So the solution of the supporters of evolution is a faith solution that it was possible in the past. It also has many serious problems. For example: assuming that a mutation that creates a new component appears one in a billion (9^10), and assuming that only 3 components are required to create a new system (pregnancy system for example), then approximately 28^10 mutations are required to create a new system. Which of course does not agree with the geological time that the evolution of mammals talks about. The only way to solve this is to argue that a complex system can evolve by adding a component or two. But this idea is technically impossible. As a car engine cannot function on the purity of one or two components.

    Regarding the blind watchmaker - the argument against the clock argument is that clocks, unlike the clock, do not reproduce and change and are not subject to natural selection. However, this claim is itself disproven. For if we were to find a clock capable of replicating and even containing DNA. It would still be evidence of design rather than a natural process. Hence Dawkins' argument is itself disproven.

  13. Good and interesting list! but…
    At first I thought that the writers/translators of "Scientific American Israel"
    managed to overcome the recurring confusion in their articles between the eight different classifications and classifications
    And then came the next sentence: "…..and following them, the members of our species evolved, homo……,"
    And then: "……implies that the gay species itself began ……",
    Repeated confusion since gay is a genus (not a species),
    Later it is written: "... tools for polishing leather made from bones..." (?)
    With the help of bones, the skin is scraped and cleaned, in order to "shine" it, chemicals are needed...
    It is very important that in such an important monthly there should not be such basic mistakes.
    But again, with the exception of the mistakes that probably result from careless translation
    The article is good.

  14. The article is interesting. In my humble opinion, the title does a disservice to evolution in the eyes of creationists. If evolution is a theory that is not closed on itself, what do we do because we will complain about the skeptical creationists. There is a Turkish author named Haron who wrote a book at a very high level against evolution, so don't underestimate them as if they were all burned out. In my opinion only, something like: "significant new discoveries on the subject of the evolution of primates and the human species" should have been written down. I skimmed through Heron's book by the way, and one can find flaws in his method. In order to prevent ricochets, I also read: The Blind Watchmaker, Is There God?, and other books by Dawkins, and "Almost Like a Whale" and about 4 other books on popular genetics.

    The fundamental principles of evolution as conceived by Darwin are correct. Many details are being updated.
    For example, the fact that 3% of our gene is shared with the Neanderthals is a completion of knowledge specific to the human species and not an undermining of the foundations of the theory of evolution. Here, too, I would clarify, but I am not sure that it is not spiteful and vindictive on my part. We have 97.2% in common with chimpanzees and neanderthals (1.8% difference from chimpanzees). A distinct 3% of the Neanderthals are shared by the Sapiens and the Neanderthals.

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.