...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Kinky/curly hair evolved at least 200,000 years ago?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Kinky/curly hair evolved at least 200,000 years ago?
Itoli
Junior Member
Member # 22743

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Itoli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

"The oldest known human hair belonged to a 9,000-year-old mummy disinterred from an ancient Chilean cemetery.

Until now. A recent discovery pushes the record back some 200,000 years. (And the newly discovered strands received a rather less dignified burial.)

While excavating in Gladysvale Cave, near Johannesburg, South Africa, a team of researchers from the University of the Witwatersrand discovered an ancient brown-hyena latrine. Upon inspection, hyena coprolites — fossilized dung — appeared to contain uncannily hair-like structures.

Lucinda Backwell, a paleontologist in the group, took a sediment block containing several coprolites back to the lab for a closer look. She and a colleague carefully removed forty of the "hairs apparent" from one of the coprolites and subjected half to scanning-electron microscopy. Sure enough, fossilized hairs they were, and five showed remarkably preserved surface scales.

Comparing the scales to those of a variety of animals — an admittedly tricky undertaking — Backwell's team concluded that human hairs were the best match.

Dating of the cave's limestone layers showed that the dung had been deposited sometime between 257,000 and 195,000 years ago. During that period, both early Homo sapiens and a relation, H. heidelbergensis, roamed the South African landscape.

A couple of chilling explanations spring to mind as to how human hairs might have become lodged in hyena dung. Backwell thinks it most likely that a brown hyena scavenged an ancestral human's remains.

The finding was detailed in the Journal of Archaeological Science.

https://www.livescience.com/3577-oldest-human-hairs-hyena-dung-fossil.html

Posts: 6 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Itoli
Junior Member
Member # 22743

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Itoli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This report is old but I'm surprsied no one caught this. Look at the cross sections of the hair. The first and third are characteristic of kinky hair and the others are characteristic of curly hair.

 -

Wouldn't this mean that human hair texture diversity was present in Africa prior to OOA?

Posts: 6 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Itoli:
Dating of the cave's limestone layers showed that the dung had been deposited sometime between 257,000 and 195,000 years ago. During that period, both early Homo sapiens and a relation, H. heidelbergensis, roamed the South African landscape.

A couple of chilling explanations spring to mind as to how human hairs might have become lodged in hyena dung. Backwell thinks it most likely that a brown hyena scavenged an ancestral human's remains.

The finding was detailed in the Journal of Archaeological Science.

https://www.livescience.com/3577-oldest-human-hairs-hyena-dung-fossil.html [/QB]

I was going to say they're forgetting Homo naledi, but the article dates to 2009 (so it's no surprise).

Based on what I can tell with my own eyes, only 2/4 hairs are tightly coiled hairs.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_GkQ08Dsvo30/SreaxX69K7I/AAAAAAAAAR4/JWe8PtwWci4/s1600/ellipse.png

EDIT:
I see you already beat me to it with that cross section comparison.

Posts: 7520 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Itoli
Junior Member
Member # 22743

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Itoli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Itoli:
Dating of the cave's limestone layers showed that the dung had been deposited sometime between 257,000 and 195,000 years ago. During that period, both early Homo sapiens and a relation, H. heidelbergensis, roamed the South African landscape.

A couple of chilling explanations spring to mind as to how human hairs might have become lodged in hyena dung. Backwell thinks it most likely that a brown hyena scavenged an ancestral human's remains.

The finding was detailed in the Journal of Archaeological Science.

https://www.livescience.com/3577-oldest-human-hairs-hyena-dung-fossil.html

I was going to say they're forgetting Homo naledi, but the article dates to 2009 (so it's no surprise).

Based on what I can tell with my own eyes, only 2/4 hairs are tightly coiled hairs.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_GkQ08Dsvo30/SreaxX69K7I/AAAAAAAAAR4/JWe8PtwWci4/s1600/ellipse.png

EDIT:
I see you already beat me to it with that cross section comparison. [/QB]

I think the most likely contenders would be early humans seeing the date and the cave it was discovered in but What do you think the implications for modern humans would be if it's from Homo naledi?
Posts: 6 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Itoli:
I think the most likely contenders would be early humans seeing the date and the cave it was discovered in but What do you think the implications for modern humans would be if it's from Homo naledi?

There were a lot of early offshoots (branches) of the human tree, that were roaming around in Africa and Eurasia. Except for possible mixture between branches, we belong to only one of those offshoots. (I would even say that we are the tree, and that they are all offshoots off 'our' tree, but that's a view I came to on my own [palaeontologists are largely Darwinists, so they would never say that]).

Anyway, the more human offshoot branches we're familiar with, the better we can link tools, bones, and even hairs to 'them' or specifically to 'us'. 'Modern human', as used in the literature, doesn't differentiate between all of them and us. For instance, tools of the same general type that were widespread in Africa during the time of Gladysvale hairs, have been found all the way in Pakistan and beyond. They are early offshoots, not us. So, if you're interested in whether those hairs belong to 'us' and not the naledis and others, knowing who was around is key. And this includes looking critically at various humans that have been called modern humans, that are not our ancestors.

Posts: 7520 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Itoli
Junior Member
Member # 22743

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Itoli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Itoli:
I think the most likely contenders would be early humans seeing the date and the cave it was discovered in but What do you think the implications for modern humans would be if it's from Homo naledi?

There were a lot of early offshoots (branches) of the human tree, that were roaming around in Africa and Eurasia. Except for possible mixture between branches, we belong to only one of those offshoots. (I would even say that we are the tree, and that they are all offshoots off 'our' tree, but that's a view I came to on my own [palaeontologists are largely Darwinists, so they would never say that]).

Anyway, the more human offshoot branches we're familiar with, the better we can link tools, bones, and even hairs to 'them' or specifically to 'us'. 'Modern human', as used in the literature, doesn't differentiate between all of them and us. For instance, tools of the same general type that were widespread in Africa during the time of Gladysvale hairs, have been found all the way in Pakistan and beyond. They are early offshoots, not us. So, if you're interested in whether those hairs belong to 'us' and not the naledis and others, knowing who was around is key. And this includes looking critically at various humans that have been called modern humans, that are not our ancestors.

I'm thinking moreso on the evolutionary side. Would it be a case of convergent evolution if that were the case? Or does it go back to a common ancestors? If it is convergent evolution, what would be the selective pressure? Does this represent straight hair evolving into kinky hair or kinky hair evolving into straight hair? There's a lot of interesting questions that need answering.
Posts: 6 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't think we can answer those questions yet. There is no good data to work with in the fossil record. There are no archaic and AMH fossils that have preserved both the humans and their hair. Something like Otzi (who was preserved in ice along with some of his hair) would help. But there is too little data to work with.

Direct selection on various hair types is one way to explain modern day diversity in hair texture. But it's not the only way. For instance:

Pleiotropy
Spandrels
Genetic hitchhiking

See wikipedia's entries on these topics. (I tried to post the links, but my post got blocked).

Posts: 7520 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3