Hominid Questions

[Piscivore]

These may be dumb questions, but here goes:

Did our earliest sapient ancestors co-exist with another species of hominid that was almost-but-not-quite sapient? Would those two species or whatever have been able to produce viable offspring if they mated?

How about us and say an australiopithecine? Or us and a Neanderthal?

[Cosmic Roy]

I think that the idea of sapient versus non-sapient isn't a good one, since I perceive it to be a vague continuum. I think if you placed modern humans at the 'sapient' end of a spectrum, with - perhaps - bacteria (or rocks!) at the other end, you'd have a hard time assigning positions to other species. That said, there almost certainly has been overlap between our existence and the existence of other hominids. Anatomically modern humans shared Europe with Neanderthals for thousands of years, and a fossil found in Lagar Velho (Portugal), which is 24-25,000 years old, may actually be a hybrid!

Edited to add: But I don't think you could legitimately call Neanderthals non-sapient or 'almost-but-not-quite sapient'. After all, their average brain size was greater than ours (not that that means anything necessarily).

[Correa Neto]

DNA data available to date shows no interbreeding between H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis (someone please add a linkyethingie here- too lazy tonight).

Now, regarding australopithecines and early homo, well, its just a guess, but based on the anatomic differences, I would say possibly no interbreeding at all. Maybe sterile offspring.

Between primitive species of homo, such as habilis and erectus, maybe so, maybe no, who knows?

[Cosmic Roy]

DNA data available to date shows no interbreeding between H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis

That's true. And maybe, if there was interbreeding, the offspring where sterile. But it's also the case that the hybrid offspring could have been fertile and still not left any genetic markers in the present population after so many generations.

[Soapy Sam]

How far back you want to go , Piscivore?
Around 5 million years ago there may have been several hominid species coexisting.
Were they "sapient"? No idea.
But right up till (maybe) as late as 25,000 years ago there were still 2 types of human.
As a genus, we are nearly extinct- only a single species left.

[Piscivore]

How far back you want to go , Piscivore?

Well, honestly, the incest thread got me thinking about a brother and sister of fully aware early humans with nothing to screw but each other or a bunch of damn dirty apes. :)

[JJM]

Well, honestly, the incest thread got me thinking about a brother and sister of fully aware early humans with nothing to screw but each other or a bunch of damn dirty apes. :)That is not contemplated. The modern line is thought to trace back to a clan. It slowly evolved into moderns (sapiens); with progeny, at each step, which were essentially indistinguishable from their parents. As has been suggested for the definition of sentient (above), if we descend from H. habilis and H. erectus it would be nigh impossible to distinguish the oldest erectus from the most recent habilis and the most recent erectus would be identical to the oldest sapiens.

We do speak, poetically, of a "mitochondrial original female" (Eve); but she was not the lone human in her day. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is passed along by women. Thus, when a woman has no female offspring, her mtDNA is lost. Population statistics tells us that, as we go further back in time, there were more mtDNA lines than there are today. The same holds for male (Y-chromosome) DNA.

One more thing- when the number of individuals in a species is reduced to a small number (as in the, extreme, brother-sister example), the species is prone to go extinct in the long run. I don't understand that; but my friends in biology assure me it is true. We can safely accept that there was never an original pair of modern humans.

[HansMustermann]

Supposedly in some caves H. Sapiens and Neanderthals lived together for quite some time. TBH, I would be surprised if none of them ever tried to mate with the other species.

I mean, some humans have sex with goats, sheep, cows, and who knows what else. A short and stocky female with sloped forehead? There would probably be a lucrative niche in that kind of porn, if one was around. Not to mention that the "venus figurines" that early humans sculpted were really fat anyway.

Personally I find it more likely that they just couldn't produce viable or fertile offspring.

Which, in the end, is part of how we divide the world into species, so it's not entirely unexpected. If they were perfectly compatible with H. Sapiens for mating and producing fertile offspring, they'd be a differen _race_ not a different species.

[TX50]

That's true. And maybe, if there was interbreeding, the offspring where sterile. But it's also the case that the hybrid offspring could have been fertile and still not left any genetic markers in the present population after so many generations.

I don't think the DNA evidence is held by researchers to absolutely rule out
interbreeding. Wasn't the comparison only made between modern Europeans
and European Neanderthals (or maybe I'm behind with all this now)? There
was certainly what appears to be a fair bit of cultural exchange, as is
suggested by artifacts of allegedly Homo sapiens design in Homo
neanderthalensis contexts. But whether that was by trade or theft,
plunder or plagiarism is not (and I suppose won't ever be) known for sure.

[JJM]

Supposedly in some caves H. Sapiens and Neanderthals lived together for quite some time. {snip}Shrieve, "The Neandertal Enigma" or books by Ian Tattersall: there is no evidence they shared quarters; the evidence is that they alternately occupied the same places.

[JJM]

I don't think the DNA evidence is held by researchers to absolutely rule out interbreeding. {snip} There was certainly what appears to be a fair bit of cultural exchange, as is suggested by artifacts of allegedly Homo sapiens design in Homo neanderthalensis contexts. But whether that was by trade or theft, plunder or plagiarism is not (and I suppose won't ever be) known for sure.I think you are correct on both suggestions.

[HansMustermann]

I don't think the DNA evidence is held by researchers to absolutely rule out
interbreeding. Wasn't the comparison only made between modern Europeans
and European Neanderthals (or maybe I'm behind with all this now)?

Well, IIRC it was even less than that, it was mitochondrial DNA. So what it really proves is that there is no Neanderthal female among our ancestors, but it says nothing about the opposite kind of pairing. Still, it would be very unusual if one combination was viable and the other non-viable.

And again, if such interbreeding was possible and happened, we'd have to re-classify them as a race, not as a different species.

IIRC they have been working on the proper cell DNA recently, but I'm not aware of any conclusions yet.

There
was certainly what appears to be a fair bit of cultural exchange, as is
suggested by artifacts of allegedly Homo sapiens design in Homo
neanderthalensis contexts. But whether that was by trade or theft,
plunder or plagiarism is not (and I suppose won't ever be) known for sure.

Cultural exchange and sharing designs isn't very surprising, given two sentient species who largely did the same things. Both seemed to have some kind of religion (ritual burial and stuff), both used tools at about the same technology level, both decorated themselves with paints and crude jewellery, etc. Whatever H. Sapiens invented, a Neanderthal could at least understand how to use or reproduce, and viceversa.

[HansMustermann]

Shrieve, "The Neandertal Enigma" or books by Ian Tattersall: there is no evidence they shared quarters; the evidence is that they alternately occupied the same places.

Hmm, that's interesting. Thanks for the correction.

Still, I think for a long time they were near enough to each other for someone to go basically, "mmm, short stocky women, I want one."

[JoeTheJuggler]

I think that the idea of sapient versus non-sapient isn't a good one, since I perceive it to be a vague continuum. I think if you placed modern humans at the 'sapient' end of a spectrum, with - perhaps - bacteria (or rocks!) at the other end, you'd have a hard time assigning positions to other species.

Well said. Thinking in terms of "sapient" and "not-sapient" really isn't accurate.

Is there any reason to rule out modern chimpanzees as not-quite-sapient hominids? (They're in the family Hominidae.) If so, what are the criteria for distinguishing "sapient" from "not-quite sapient"?

ETA: All the markers of sapience that I can think of culture, tool use, language, self-awareness, etc. exist at least in some diminished form in chimps. There are only differences of degree, some of which have dramatic results. I think the big difference is that humans have extra somatic memory (writing) which allowed us to accumulate knowledge. I don't think that's been offered as a criterion for sapience, because then you'd have to label early, prehistoric humans as "not-sapient".

[Piscivore]

If so, what are the criteria for distinguishing "sapient" from "not-quite sapient"?

Speech? Firemaking?

[godless dave]

Without a brain to study, it's not possible to determine which hominids were capable of language.

[Correa Neto]

Well, not necessarily.

Throat bones can do the trick. Sure, they are delicate and have low preservation odds. Impressions of the brain within the braincase could be of some help as well as tomographic scans of skulls.

[blutoski]

Well, not necessarily.

Throat bones can do the trick. Sure, they are delicate and have low preservation odds. Impressions of the brain within the braincase could be of some help as well as tomographic scans of skulls.

Specifically, skeletons have been obtained with hyoid bones that are extremly similar to modern H. sap sap. It's not proof, but with the accumulation of evidence like this, there's no reason to doubt that neandertals were capable of language. The burden of proof seems to have shifted more toward explaining why they didn't our couldn't speak.

[Taffer]

Specifically, skeletons have been obtained with hyoid bones that are extremly similar to modern H. sap sap. It's not proof, but with the accumulation of evidence like this, there's no reason to doubt that neandertals were capable of language. The burden of proof seems to have shifted more toward explaining why they didn't our couldn't speak.

Even more then that, but both Neanderthals and modern humans share a key mutation in the FOXP2 gene. This gene is thought to have a key role in language development, and it is thought that the particular allele that humans have is an important mutation in the development of language ability.

[Eos of the Eons]

Nearer to the end there were more overlaps. Of course, there are none now.


You have to click the picture 5-6 times before you can read it though. Google "hominid timeline" for more depictions.

[jimbob]

The neanderthals buried their dead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanidar_1#Shanidar_4.2C_the_.22flower_burial.22):

[UnrepentantSinner]

These may be dumb questions, but here goes:

Did our earliest sapient ancestors co-exist with another species of hominid that was almost-but-not-quite sapient? Would those two species or whatever have been able to produce viable offspring if they mated?

How about us and say an australiopithecine? Or us and a Neanderthal?

Did someone watch Quest for Fire last night and get all hot an bothered by Rae Dawn Chong?

(interesting OP, but everyone else had serious answers so I went for the joke. :D)

[ectoplasm]

Did someone watch Quest for Fire last night and get all hot an bothered by Rae Dawn Chong?

(interesting OP, but everyone else had serious answers so I went for the joke. :D)

I saw that movie many moons ago and I still get all hot and bothered by Rae Dawn Chong.

[UnrepentantSinner]

I saw that movie many moons ago and I still get all hot and bothered by Rae Dawn Chong.

Me too! Just don't steal my thunder from giving Pisci crap man! ;)

[Skwinty]

I saw that movie many moons ago and I still get all hot and bothered by Rae Dawn Chong.

Me too, grunt grunt moan moan.:D