Sentences with phrase «archaic homo»

Among our probable ancestors, there is Homo antecessor in the Iberian peninsula and Homo erectus in Asia and Africa — but a variety of variants are starting to appear, some of which later led to archaic Homo sapiens and Neandertals.

The presence and variability of browridges in archaic Homo species and their absence in ourselves have led to debate concerning their morphogenesis and function, with two main hypotheses being put forward: that browridge morphology is the result of the spatial relationship between the orbits and the brain case; and that browridge morphology is significantly impacted by biting mechanics.

All fossil specimens of Homo erectus and archaic Homo sapiens (including Neanderthals),... should be reclassified into a single species, Homo sapiens, that is, subdivided only into races.»

«Interbreeding between several archaic Homo sapiens populations certainly occurred in Africa,» said Christopher Bae of the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

This fossil is a partial skull with very thick bones thought to be an archaic Homo sapiens (sometimes classified as Homo heidelbergensis), and about 200,000 to 300,000 years old.

The fossils, which was labeled «archaic Homo,» share combined features of Neanderthals, earlier eastern Eurasian humans and modern humans.

If you are a Replacementist, like me, you will restrict the concept «archaic Homo sapiens», or whatever you want to call it, to the ones that are very likely our ancestors, and the others (the Chinese and Indonesian fossils, mainly) will be a separate clade, Homo erectus.

In a paper published this week in Science, a Chinese - U.S. team presents 105,000 - to 125,000 - year - old fossils they call «archaic Homo.»

It's possible, he believes, that a population of hominins — Neanderthals, Denisovans or even archaic Homo sapiens — followed the animals.

Do we deal with the species «homo», archaic homo sapiens in their many varieties (including Neanderthals), or just with homo sapiens sapiens?

Not exact matches

Trinkaus and colleagues, describing the partial skulls in March in Science, won't speculate on whether they belonged to Homo sapiens transitioning from archaic to modern, the elusive Denisovans or an as - yet - unidentifi ed hominin species.

Intermixing does not surprise paleoanthropologists who have long argued on the basis of fossils that archaic humans, such as the Neandertals in Eurasia and Homo erectus in East Asia, mated with early moderns and can be counted among our ancestors — the so - called multiregional evolution theory of modern human origins.

Still, additional genetic analyses have typically led researchers to conclude that Homo sapiens arose in Africa and replaced the archaic humans it encountered as it spread out from its birthplace without mingling with them.

After the first Homo sapiens arose in Africa, several bands walked out of the continent about 60,000 years ago and into the arms of Neandertals and other archaic humans.

As archaic bands of Homo sapiens left Africa and spread over the world's continents, their DNA evolved.

Even the archaic humans that might have been present then, like Homo erectus or the mysterious Denisovans, left such flakes.

The recent dates suggest that like the 60,000 - to 100,000 - year - old fossils of tiny H. floresiensis (the «Hobbit») in Indonesia, H. naledi was a «twig off the mainstream of Homo — some little relic of a relatively archaic population,» Kimbel says.

Bailey notes recent discoveries of far more complete fossil humans from South Africa, representing previously unknown members of the human family — Australopithecus sediba and Homo naledi — show evolution mixed and matched modern and archaic traits in unexpected ways in the past.

The DNA data suggest not one but at least two instances of interbreeding between archaic and modern humans, raising the question of whether Homo sapiens at that point was a distinct species (see sidebar).

It belonged to a species of archaic hominin — Homo heidelbergensis, who lived between 600,000 and 200,000 years ago.

Most later Homo groups (archaic European and north African Homo, and fossil and recent Homo sapiens) possess absolutely and relatively thick enamel across the entire dentition.

A 400,000 - year - old skull belonging to an archaic member of the genus Homo was found in the Aroeira cave in Portugal.

Homo naledi was very different from archaic humans that lived around the same time.

It's also possible that the little humans «evolved before the earliest Homo habilis, which would make it very archaic indeed.»

It is true that, for unknown reasons, Neandertal culture does not display all the refinements of the Cro - Magnons, but the same is true of many early modern humans and archaic forms of Homo sapiens.

No one knows when or how these humans disappeared but, according to Professor Paabo, it is very likely something to do with modern people because all the «archaic» humans, like Denisovans and Neanderthals disappeared sometime after Homo sapiens sapiens appeared on the scene.

«If this were the case, Homo floresiensis would have evolved before the earliest Homo habilis, which would make it very archaic indeed.»

Homo naledi was likely there too, along with possibly still other archaic human species.

«40 On the same page Flood acknowledges that all of these robust or «primitive» people are definitely Homo sapiens, despite their possession of so many archaic features.

It belonged to a species of archaic hominin - Homo heidelbergensis, who lived between 600,000 and 200,000 years ago.