Contents:
These individuals, the authors posit, were ancestral both to the first humans who inhabited the Americas the First Peoples and to a subsequent Siberian group the Ancient Palaeo-Siberians. East Asians also contributed genetic ancestry to these two groups. The Ancient Palaeo-Siberian population subsequently expanded throughout Siberia, whereas the First Peoples expanded into the Americas; the two groups are estimated to have diverged about 24, years ago.
After the LGM, major environmental and cultural changes occurred on both sides of the land bridge as they did elsewhere. In Siberia, archaeological evidence shows that a change in tool technologies occurred, coinciding with a scarcity of mammoth ivory 8. The Ancient Palaeo-Siberians were then replaced by, or admixed produced offspring with, a group called the Neo-Siberians, between 11, and 4, years ago.
More specifically, the authors examine the relationships between people from several archaeologically defined cultures, including the Palaeo-Eskimos, who spread across the American Arctic from about 5, years ago, and the Neo-Eskimos, whose population expanded and might have replaced the Palaeo-Eskimos from about years ago Fig. The researchers also study how these ancient peoples are related to modern populations who speak Eskimo-Aleut, Na-Dene and other languages. Figure 2 Migration of ancient peoples from northeastern Siberia and across the American Arctic.
Flegontov et al. They identify a group of ancient Siberians as the ancestors of the Palaeo-Eskimo people, who migrated from Siberia to the Americas and Greenland about 5, years ago. The authors find that the Palaeo-Eskimo people are among the ancestors of modern Na-Dene-speaking peoples, who inhabit the region shown in pink, and of the Eskimo-Aleut speakers, who now live in the area around the Na-Dene region.
Previous research 11 has led to debate about whether the Palaeo-Eskimo admixed with other groups. Both of the new papers present analyses and discussions of the Palaeo-Eskimo peoples: Sikora et al. Both papers also describe evidence of ancient people interacting across the Bering Strait, and of migration back to Siberia. One limitation of the two papers is that, although some of the DNA samples analysed by the two research groups came from the same archaeological sites, it is difficult to tell whether the same individuals were sampled — a problem that can arise in studies of archaeological material.
A general code of practice would be useful for this field, to encourage scientists to provide the identifiers used by the original excavators, thus enabling cross-study comparisons and validations. This would help to ensure that the destructive sampling of archaeological remains, which are non-renewable resources, is properly coordinated and minimized.
The code of practice could also ensure that descendants of ancient individuals are engaged in discussions about sampling as exemplified by Flegontov et al. However, we have no human genetic data from the roughly 20,year period after the initial occupation of the Yana site.
By contrast, many Native people rely more on oral tradition to inform their views of views of the past, especially with regard to the population of North America via the Bering Land Bridge. If your book order is heavy or oversized, we may contact you to let you know extra shipping is required. Although this is not the earliest evidence of burial ceremonies, it is one of the most obvious manifestations. Genes that can facilitate a range of different forms under different environments phenotypic plasticity can also help an organism adapt to changing conditions. Also, Paleo-Indians appear to have been nomadic in small groups, moving frequently to follow animal migrations, meet other Paleo-Indian groups for trade and social interaction, or harvest seasonal resources.
This is a huge gap, in archaeological terms. Further studies of Siberian and Beringian populations during this period are now needed to learn more about the genetic and cultural diversity of these groups. More work is also needed to understand where the refugia were in northeastern Siberia, and what environmental conditions were like in these regions.
In particular, what was the population structure in the Beringian refugium, and does this support the Beringian standstill hypothesis — which posits that the First Peoples became isolated during the LGM, before the southward expansion of the ice sheets 12? If so, then how does this tally with the idea that some Amazonian populations seem to share DNA 13 , 14 with people who speak Austronesian languages who live today in southeast Asia, Oceania and Madagascar? Did the populations in the Beringian refugium also have this ancestry? Lastly, how did environmental changes, human migrations and cultural and genetic adaptations interplay in northeastern Siberia and the far northern Americas?
The two latest studies will help us to get our bearings as we work to understand the ancient humans who lived around the Bering Strait. PLoS Biol. Pitulko, V. Hoffecker, J. Flegontov, P. Nature , — Science , — Hu, A. Nature Geosci. World Archaeol. Fagundes, N. Goebel, T. Raghavan, M. Science , Tamm, E.
PloS ONE 2 , e Science , aab Reconstructions of the ancient habitat of Ardipithecus ramidus at two different Ethiopian sites suggest that this species occupied both wooded areas the Aramis site and wooded grasslands in which grazing animals predominated the Gona site. Australopithecus anamensis has been found at Kanapoi and Allia Bay, Kenya, in association with another type of mosaic — an open savanna with low trees and shrubs, but with both grasslands and gallery forests nearby.
At Kanapoi, research by Dr. Jonathan Wynn on paleosols and pedogenic carbonates demonstrates the presence of these varied habitats at the time when Australopithecus anamensis inhabited the area.
Other members of Au. The fossil animals represent several different habitats including open floodplains, gallery forests, and dry bushlands. Isotopic studies done by Dr. Margaret Schoeninger and her colleagues indicate that most of the Allia Bay vegetation consisted of woody plants such as trees and shrubs known as C 3 vegetation. Australopithecus anamensis at Allia Bay was thus associated with a mosaic environment, including woodlands near the ancestral Omo River and open savanna further away.
Two different types of environment — dense woodlands and open bushland — occurred in the same areas of East Africa during the period of human evolution. Climate fluctuation altered the proportion of these habitats, and thus led to repeated changes only in population density and variable conditions of natural selection. Australopithecus afarensis, "Lucy", reconstructed skeleton. By about 4 million years ago, the genus Australopithecus had evolved a skeletal form that enabled adjustment to changes in moisture and vegetation.
The best current example of adaptability in Australopithecus is apparent in the skeleton known as Lucy, which represents Au. This combination of features, which appears to have characterized Australopithecus for nearly 2 million years and possibly older hominins, afforded an ability to move around in diverse habitats by changing the degree of reliance on terrestrial walking and arboreal climbing. This flexibility may also have characterized earlier hominins such as Ardipithecus ramidus.
The first known stone tools date to around 2.
Making and using stone tools also conferred versatility in how hominin toolmakers interacted with and adjusted to their surroundings. Simple toolmaking by stone-on-stone fracturing of rock conferred a selective advantage in that these hominin toolmakers possessed sharp flakes for cutting and hammerstones that were useful in pounding and crushing foods. Basic stone tools thus greatly enhanced the functions of teeth in a way that allowed access to an enormous variety of foods.
These foods included meat from large animals, which was sliced from carcasses using sharp edges of flakes. Bones were broken open using stones to access the marrow inside. Other tools could be used to grind plants or to sharpen sticks to dig for tubers. Tool use would have made it easier for hominins to obtain food from a variety of different sources. Tool use would have widened the diet of hominins. Meat, in particular, is a food that was obtainable in equivalent ways, with similar nutritional value, in virtually any type of habitat that early humans encountered. Although making simple toolmaking may have developed originally in one type of environment, the carrying of stone tools over considerable distances — and becoming reliant on stone technology — may have arisen due to the benefits of altering the diet as environments changed.
The oldest known stone technology — called Oldowan toolmaking — involved carrying rock over several kilometers and is found associated with a variety of ancient habitats. Redistributing stone and other resources, such as parts of animal carcasses, by transporting them may have helped hominins cope with variable habitats.
As predicted by the variability selection hypothesis, hominins were not found solely in one kind of habitat, but rather in a variety. A major signal of the ability to tolerate different environments was the dispersal of the genus early Homo beyond Africa into Asian environments. After 1. Early evidence of the diversity of Homo erectus environments in Asia includes the following sites:. In these locations, hominin groups encountered distinctly different environments, different plants and animals and foods, and different climatic conditions — a very wide range of temperature and strong variations in aridity and monsoonal rains.
Environmental instability may have been a factor not only in shaping adaptations but also in contributing to the extinction of some lineages.