Scientists Discover Evidence of New Group of Large-Headed Humans

[Judi Lynn]

By Luis Mendoza
December 3, 2024

A new paper published in the journal Nature Communications suggests the existence of an entirely new group of large-headed humans that lived alongside Homo sapiens in eastern Asia more than 100,000 years ago.

The study, put forward by Paleoanthropologist Xiujie Wu from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and anthropologist Christopher Bae from the University of Hawai’i, says these extinct humans had much larger brains than us, and any of the human species at the time.

Scientists had historically attributed Juluren fossils to the Denisovans, an ancient group of humans closely related to the Neanderthals. Some even mated with some modern humans in parts of Asia. Wu and Bae have proposed an alternate theory. They say that some of the fossils found in China do not match that of modern or prehistoric humans.

The pair have suggested that large-headed humans may have existed through mixed ancestry
In their study, Wu and Bae concluded that the fossils represented a previously undiscovered group of large-headed humans. A new paper published in the journal Nature Communications suggests the existence of an entirely new group of large-headed humans that lived alongside Homo sapiens in eastern Asia more than 100,000 years ago.

The study, put forward by Paleoanthropologist Xiujie Wu from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and anthropologist Christopher Bae from the University of Hawai’i, says these extinct humans had much larger brains than us, and any of the human species at the time.

More:
https://greekreporter.com/2024/12/03/large-headed-humans/

[Tanuki]

1. I wonder if large heads made birthing difficult,

which could have been a factor in their extinction.

[samnsara]

11. exactly what went thru my mind..

[Judi Lynn]

2. Meet Homo juluensis: a potential new human species

Scientists have identified evidence of a new ancient human species, Homo juluensis, from fossils in East Asia.

Tibi PuiubyTibi Puiu
December 6, 2024

Today, there is only one hominid left roaming the world: our species, Homo sapiens. At, one point, however, we shared this planet with several other hominin species, including Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis), Homo floresiensis (also known as the “Hobbits”), Homo luzonensis, Homo naledi, and the long-lived Homo erectus. Now, a new study may add a new member to this roster: a species distinct from anything previously known, called Homo juluensis.

The story of Homo juluensis began in the 1970s when archaeologists discovered cranial and dental remains in Xujiayao, northern China. Initially, these fossils — dated to 200,000–160,000 years ago, and featuring a mosaic of human traits — were considered part of the broader human evolutionary puzzle but were not classified into a unique species. Decades later, a detailed analysis led by Christopher Bae from the University of Hawaiʻi and Xiujie Wu from the Chinese Academy of Sciences puts forth arguments for a re-classification as a distinct, novel human species.

, , ,

More than 300,000 years ago, on the sprawling plains and forests of East Asia, Homo juluensis hunted wild horses and likely crafted stone tools. They lived in small, tight-knit groups, eking out a life in a challenging environment. Some evidence even suggests they processed animal hides — a resourceful adaptation for survival.

However, they vanished by around 50,000 years ago, leaving only tantalizing clues behind. Among these are fossilized jaws and teeth scattered across China, Korea, Japan, and Southeast Asia. Yet, these remnants resisted easy classification — until now.

More:
https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/meet-homo-juluensis-a-potential-new-human-species/

[stopdiggin]

3. what does 'mixed ancestry' mean here

and how does that comport with claims for a new (separate) species?

[wnylib]

4. The "new" species existed at the same time

as other species and they probably all intermixed, just like Neanderthal, Denisovan, and early Sapiens intermixed. The large headed species is "new" only in the sense that we did not know about it until recently.

We probably should call them sub species instead of species since they were capable of inter mating.

[stopdiggin]

5. I think you're dead on

Last edited Thu Dec 26, 2024, 11:37 PM - Edit history (1)

and the article just has a really poorly put together sentence - that would tend to lead in a different direction.

Other hand - this article really doesn't address any sort of direct evidence (or lingering genetic markers) remaining from some imagined (suspected) cross breeding with this new example. (whereas we have quite definitive evidence of such with the Denisovans and Neanderthals) (not sure about florensis ?)

And, yeah - species, sub-species - all becomes a bit muddled. Come to find out inter-species crosses are not nearly as impossible (or even seemingly as rare?) as my old science teacher would have like to have drummed in. Nor, quite evidently, are such crosses (as was also hard and fast rule) inevitably sterile ...

Other other hand - sometimes these crosses are existing between animals with sufficiently different morphology (and lineage ?), as to be clearly and identifiably distinct and separate ... Wolves, dogs, coyotes ... Various kind of equine .. swine .. feline ..

Edit: Wait a second!!
This study is actually proposing to establish juluensis and Denisovan as the same line. In which case - the 'mixed ancestry' has already been thoroughly established.

new study makes the bold claim that fossils from Xujiayao and Xuchang in northern China, alongside those from Denisova Cave and the Xiahe jawbone, may represent Homo juluensis. In other words, the Denisovans and Homo juluensis were one and the same. This grouping is based on shared morphological traits, particularly dentognathic (dental and jaw) characteristics.

[wnylib]

6. Wolves, dogs, and coyotes are all closely related

as clades of the same biological Family in the Animal Kingdom classifications. Dogs are descended from wolves. So inter breeding between them is not so unusual. They have not been separated long enough, with enough mutations, to make it impossible for them to mate with each other. However, some dog breeds are more capable of inter breeding with wolves than others. I could see a German shepherd or Alaskan Malamute mating with a wolf, but not a Chihauhua.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canidae

From what you picked up from the article, it looks like there are differing views about whether the "new" species is actually a separate species. Or, perhaps they are a subset, or clade of Denisovan.

Maybe there is still a trace of large headed Denisovans among us, modified by intermating and evolution. Some modern people whose bodies are proportional in every other way have larger than average heads.

Extinct species in our ancestry are extinct as a separately identifiable species today, but are still with us in the traits that they contributed which remain. We are still upright and bipedal, like Homo Erectus, but standing straighter. We don't have the occipital bun of Neanderthal, but some modern people still have a noticeable brow ridge and deep set eyes. We also have genetic mutations from Neanderthal that influence allergies and viral infections. We still have a lot in common with chimp DNA and even in some behavioral traits that we share with them.

[stopdiggin]

7. again, dead on

wolves and (domestic) dogs - probably splitting off about 15 thousand ago, at most - which is a relative blip on the screen as far as breeding and genetics go. Likewise the 40-70 that separate us from Neanderthal. Other hand - coyotes and other species of wolves and wild canine, are probably much more distinct and distant ... And yet still capable interbreeding.

And I find all of this stuff (but particularly the anthro end of it) endlessly fascinating.
(from a thoroughly amateur vantage point)

[wnylib]

8. I'm an amateur, too, but with a lifelong interest.

Even as a child, I read about other cultures and languages because I was exposed to one language besides English at home, and a couple different cultures in my extended family, plus another language and culture in my neighborhood.

My older brothers got me interested in natural history and fossils from what they learned in Boy Scouts. We had a lot of opportunities to explore nature even though we grew up in a city. My grandfather had a farm and most of my father's siblings lived in rural areas.

I minored in anthropology in college and try to keep up with developments in evolution since then.

[stopdiggin]

9. and 'keeping up' is key phrase

Anthropology (and really all of biological science) has literally exploded - with the advent of really good DNA, genetics, and computing. Anthropology has been turned on it's head!

[wnylib]

10. I was very fortunate to get a basic foundation

Last edited Sat Dec 28, 2024, 07:55 AM - Edit history (1)

in DNA and RNA in a high school human biology class. It was in the 1960s. A now extinct national magazine, Life, devoted an entire issue on the double helix, chromosomes, genes, DNA, RNA, and basic cell structure..

Our teacher bought up enough copies to use in class as texts, if we shared. She replaced the standard curriculum and text with lessons from the magazine for an entire 6 week unit.

A LOT of knowledge about DNA, heredity, genes, and human evolution has been developed since then. But that basic foundation made it possible to keep up with new info as it became available, not only in evolution, but in the sequencing of the human genome, in disease devopments, viral mutations, how the mRNA vaccines work, genealogy, and forensic science.

When I don't understand some of the technical terms and the testing steps and test substances used when reading a scientific abstract, I can still get the general gist of the abstract articles (especially from the summaries). There are also science magazines for laypersons that explain details in non technical language, and some good, online documentaries.

When I don't understand an important term, I can look it up.

That basic high school foundation gave me a framework for comprehending many (though not all, for sure) later developments.