ShareThis Page
Chinese fossil sheds light on mysterious Neanderthal kin | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Chinese fossil sheds light on mysterious Neanderthal kin

Associated Press
1098827_web1_1098827-6caa65c8c1f54fc999a1639aa91ef443
AP
This combination of images provided by the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig shows two views of a virtual reconstruction of the Xiahe mandible. At right, the simulated parts are in gray. According to a report released on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, the bone is at least 160,000 years old, and recovered proteins led scientists to conclude the jaw came from a Denisovan, a relative of Neanderthals.
1098827_web1_1098827-ba4a8e5fe54346e2ae52f8b3e14b9c7e
AP
This undated photo made available by Dr. Dongju Zhang of Lanzhou University in April 2019 shows the right half of the Xiahe mandible, found in 1980 in the Baishiya Karst Cave in the Gansu province of China. According to a report released on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, it is at least 160,000 years old, and recovered proteins led scientists to conclude the jaw came from a Denisovan, a relative of Neanderthals.
1098827_web1_1098827-ea3bb6dae46a41e8b9671eb6d98d633f
AP
This undated photo made available by Dr. Dongju Zhang of Lanzhou University in April 2019 shows the Baishiya Karst Cave above the Jiangla riverbed in the Gansu province of China. It is both a locally famous Buddhist cave and a tourist site. According to a report released on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, a jawbone fragment found in the cave is least 160,000 years old, and recovered proteins led scientists to conclude it came from a Denisovan, a relative of Neanderthals.
1098827_web1_1098827-6d2067938b7b46868191b2bca1390d26
AP
This undated photo made available by Dr. Dongju Zhang of Lanzhou University in April 2019 shows Jiangla Valley in the Gansu province of China. According to a report released on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, a jawbone fragment found in the area is least 160,000 years old, and recovered proteins led scientists to conclude it came from a Denisovan, a relative of Neanderthals.

NEW YORK — Nearly 40 years after it was found by a monk in a Chinese cave, a fossilized chunk of jawbone has been revealed as coming from a mysterious relative of the Neanderthals.

Until now, the only known remains of these Denisovans were a few scraps of bone and teeth recovered in a Siberian cave. DNA from those Siberian fossils showed kinship with Neanderthals. But the remains disclosed little else.

The new discovery was made roughly 1,400 miles (2,300 kilometers) to the southeast in Gansu province of China. The right half of a jawbone with teeth is at least 160,000 years old, scientists reported Wednesday in the journal Nature. No DNA could be found, but scientists recovered protein fragments that they compared to the Siberian DNA. That showed the fossil came from a Denisovan.

The find addresses several mysteries. One was why the Siberian DNA indicated Denisovans were adapted to living at high altitudes when the Siberian cave is relatively close to sea level. The Chinese cave, by contrast, is on the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau, about 10,800 feet (3,280 meters) high.

“Now we have an explanation,” said Jean-Jacques Hublin of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, one of the paper’s authors.

In fact, “it’s a big surprise” that any human relative could live in the cold climate and thin air of the plateau at that time, more than 100,000 years before our own species showed up there, he told reporters.

Previous research had indicated that Denisovans must have lived somewhere other than Siberia, because traces of their DNA can be found in several present-day populations of Asia and Australia whose ancestors probably didn’t pass through that region. The new finding expands their known range, although Hublin said it’s still not clear where Denisovans first appeared. They are named for Siberia’s Denisova cave, where the remains were found.

The new work was a long time in coming. The monk who found the fossil in 1980 gave it to a Buddhist leader, who passed it along to Lanzhou University in China. Study of it began in 2010.

The discovery also provides new anatomical details that can be compared to other fossils from China, some of which are “good candidates for being Chinese Denisovans,” Hublin said.

Experts unconnected to the research agreed the fossil could help identify other remains as Denisovan.

“We always assumed … that Denisovans were distributed all across Asia,” said Bence Viola of the University of Toronto.

The Nature paper points out similarities to a fossil jaw reported in 2015 that had been dredged by a fishing net off the coast of Taiwan. So maybe the Denisovan range can be extended that far south, he said.

Such linking of fossils might eventually reveal Denisovan body shape and size, he said. From the scant known remains “I assume they were large guys, but it’s kind of hard to prove,” Viola said.

In addition to the anatomy, the study’s approach of using protein from the bone or teeth could also be used on fossils to look for evidence of Denisovan identity, said Eric Delson of Lehman College in New York. Even if a fossil is found not to be Denisovan, the analysis could reveal details of how it fits on the evolutionary tree, he said.

“The method potentially tells us a whole new way of looking at fossils,” he said.

Katerina Harvati of the University of Tuebingen in Germany said the ability of Denisovans to adapt to the inhospitable climate of the Tibetan Plateau is remarkable. It adds to growing evidence that our ancient relatives were more capable than scientists had thought, she said.

Categories: News | Top Stories | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.