MOSCOW, September 22 - RIA Novosti. Brains of Neanderthal children for a long time continued to increase in size, which is completely uncharacteristic of modern humans, paleontologists found out who published an article in the journal Science.
Neanderthals used chamomile and yarrow for self-medicationNeanderthals who lived in the El Sidron cave in northern Spain had primitive healing knowledge and knew about the healing properties of chamomile and yarrow, as indicated by traces of plant sugars in the fossilized plaque on their teeth, paleontologists say in a paper published in the journal Naturwissenschaften."We wondered a simple question- Did humans and Neanderthals grow up the same way? "We found that the brains of Neanderthal children continued to increase in size even at seven years of age, and that overall they grew more slowly than Cro-Magnon children - at the same seven years, a small Neanderthal looked like a five or six-year-old human child," said Antonio Rosas. Rosas) from the National Science Museum of Spain in Madrid.
Rosas and his colleagues made the discovery during excavations at the El Sidrón cave in northern Spain, home to some of the last populations of Neanderthals on Earth about 50,000 years ago.
This cave attracted the attention of archaeologists, paleontologists and the public in 1994, when the remains of 13 Neanderthals were found in it, who lived there, according to various estimates, approximately 47-50 thousand years ago.
The absence of animal bones in the cave leads scientists to believe that either it served as a cemetery for the ancient aborigines of Europe, or its inhabitants were cannibals who deliberately hunted their own kind.
In the cave, as Rosas notes, the remains of not only adult Neanderthals were discovered, but also children, which allowed scientists to study how quickly they grew by comparing differences in the thickness and structure of bones, the volume of the skull and other anatomical features in children of different ages.
In general, as scientists note, differences in anatomy and growth rate between Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals were minimal. This once again confirms that Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis descend from one common ancestor who lived on Earth relatively recently.
On the other hand, such differences still existed, and they were most pronounced in growth rates and in the development of the brain and cranium. As measurements by Rosas and his team showed, the cranium of a seven-year-old Neanderthal child was noticeably smaller than that of an adult - 1300 versus 1550 cubic centimeters. This suggests that the Neanderthal brain continued to grow until at least seven years of age.
This is completely uncharacteristic for humans - brain development, as a rule, is completed by the second year of life, and subsequently its volume does not increase. Moreover, all nerve cells are already present in a child's brain at the time of birth and their number does not increase in subsequent years. Only the number of connections between them and the volume of the so-called glial tissue, protecting neurons from damage.
What could be the reason for this difference between Neanderthals and humans? Scientists believe that it arose due to the fact that the first inhabitants of Europe lived in much harsher conditions than the ancestors of the Cro-Magnons. Brain growth in the womb or early years of life requires enormous resources, and its relatively slow development in Neanderthal children may have helped them and their parents survive. A similar slowdown, according to scientists, occurred during the growth of Neanderthal bones.
For this reason, the Neanderthal boy, whose remains were found at El Sidron, by the eighth year of his life weighed only 26 kilograms with a height of 111 centimeters - that is, he was about two years behind human children in development. In addition, scientists found traces that he suffered from malnutrition and lack of microelements.
It is not yet clear whether the slow maturation of Neanderthal children was one of the reasons for their extinction, but scientists plan to test whether Neanderthals were indeed slow to mature by studying the remains of other Neanderthal children from the southern corners of Asia, where the climate was more favorable than in northern Spain during the Ice Age .
There is no movement, said the bearded sage.
The other fell silent and began to walk in front of him.
He could not have objected more strongly;
Everyone praised the intricate answer.
But, gentlemen, this is a funny case
Another example comes to mind:
After all, every day the sun walks before us,
However, stubborn Galileo is right.
(A.S. Pushkin)
Who is right, gentlemen? Our stubborn Galileo, who knows (sic!) that Neanderthals “were not human”?
The problem is that many people actually think this way. More precisely, they believe in it. There is no point in arguing; I will give only a few facts.
1. Classic Neanderthals lived in Europe and Western Asia for about 40 thousand years (period 80-35 thousand years ago). Climatic conditions were harsher than now.
0. Modern man has existed for only 15 thousand more years (will he last 40?)
1. The brain volume of classical Neanderthals was about 1500-1800 cc.
0. The average brain volume of a modern person is about 1400 cubic meters. cm (Australoids 1200, Caucasoids and Mongoloids up to 1600).
Next, I combined reconstructions of Neanderthals with portraits of modern people.
And here are the brave sages (yes, you are not looking at the mind, but at the middle floor of the face!)
It turns out that I’m not the only one who notes Norris’s resemblance to Neanderthals (.) .
About a hundred years ago, ancient man had to look like this.
Modern patterns of mass culture are not far removed from the image of the “ape-man.” In order for the mass audience to recognize the “cave dweller”, it is necessary to make him look homeless: shaggy, dirty and making a face!
It is advisable to widen your eyes: “It’s terrible how I’m afraid of these skulls of mine!”
.jpg)
And there is no need to be afraid of skulls. They need to be looked at more closely. Here, from left to right: Neanderthal - modern man (Cro-Magnonoid or Eastern Paleo-European) - modern man (Australoid) - modern man (Northern Caucasian). The Neanderthal skull stands out from this series, but not too much. Only a trained eye will notice the differences from the Australoid.
Then there will be no need to do such “dioxin” reconstructions...
(NB: we have no politics - just Gestalt anthropology)
Here is a map of Neanderthal finds. It can be seen that they lived in Europe and Western Asia, in mountainous regions with a rather harsh climate.
In the Holocene, in our time, the mountainous regions of Europe are no longer inhabited by Neanderthals, but by people of the Paleo-European and Balkan-Caucasian race. Are they very different? Judge for yourself. On the left is a reconstruction of a Neanderthal man, on the right is a young Pakistani man.
On the left is a representative of the Caucasian type, on the right - Paleo-European.
On the left is a modern inhabitant of Western Asia, on the right is the Neanderthal period. And what bandanas they have!
On the sides are modern inhabitants of Western Asia, in the center is a classic Neanderthal (museum reconstruction).
I had to modify this reconstruction of the Neanderthal a little. However, he turned out to be an unimportant “citizen boss” - clearly a disguised proletarian... Still, high positions in our country are more often occupied by northern Europeans or graceful Mediterraneans.
.jpg)
The Neanderthal skull (on the right) is more beautiful than that of the Australoid, but it is more archaic: the maxillae are more massive, the chin is sloping, the forehead is low (the back of the head and the base have their own differences).
The situation with Australoids is unusual. Their anthropological indicators (bone thickness, width of the dental arch, height of the cranial vault, etc.) are more “sapient” than Neanderthal ones. The absence of genetic hiatus makes them undoubtedly Homo sapiens recens.
However, the species of Australoids is even more ancient than that of Neanderthals - their gestalt is closer to Homo erectus. As is the volume of the brain, which is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than the Neanderthal (by about 30%).
Personally, I treat Neanderthals with respect (albeit without love). And I have my own, secret idea about them.
My intuition (based on education and environmental extrapolations) tells me that Neanderthals were quite extraordinary creatures - Europeans, after all! In their way of life they are similar to the Arctic aborigines (who in pre-civilized times were almost the most advanced group in their race). Neanderthals had a developed instrumental and magical culture with the presence of burials.
Classic Neanderthals are a strong branch of the human continuum, which went through their own, rather intense evolution along parallel channels. During which Neanderthals adopted new refreshing genes and underwent selection. They did not die out at all, but still live today - and not bad: where the climate and soils are perhaps the best on the planet. And the northern Europeans have been trying to conquer at least an inch of these territories from them for thousands of years. They organize campaigns, shoot, bomb. So far in vain!
The human brain - the principles of its operation, capabilities, limits of physiological and mental stress - continue to remain one big mystery for researchers. Despite all the successes in its study, scientists are not yet able to explain how we think or understand the mechanisms of consciousness and self-awareness. The accumulated knowledge about the functioning of the brain, however, is enough to refute some common myths about it. That's what the scientists did.
Were ancient people smarter than us?
The average brain volume of a modern person is about 1400 cubic centimeters, which is quite large for our body size. Man grew a large brain during evolution - anthropogenesis. Our ape-like ancestors, who did not have large claws and teeth, descended from the trees and moved on to life in open spaces, began to develop a brain. Although this development did not immediately proceed quickly - in Australopithecines, the brain volume (about 500 cubic centimeters) remained practically unchanged for six million years. The jump in its increase occurred two and a half million years ago. In early Homo sapiens, the brain had already grown significantly - in Homo erectus (Homo erectus) its volume ranged from 900 to 1200 cubic centimeters (this overlaps the range of the modern human brain). Neanderthals had a very large brain - 1400-1740 cubic centimeters. which is on average more than ours. The early Homo sapiens in Europe - the Cro-Magnons - simply put us in our belts with their brain: 1600-1800 cubic centimeters (although the Cro-Magnons were tall - 180-190 centimeters, and anthropologists find a direct connection between brain size and height).
In human evolution, the brain not only increased in size, but also changed in ratio different parts. Paleoanthropologists examine the brains of fossil hominids by looking at a skull casting called an endocrane, which shows the relative size of the lobes. The frontal lobe developed the fastest, which is associated with thinking, consciousness, and the appearance of speech (Broca's area). The development of the parietal lobe was accompanied by improved sensitivity, synthesis of information from different sensory organs and fine motor skills of the fingers. The temporal lobe supported the development of hearing, which provides sound speech (Wernicke's area). For example, in erectus, the brain grew in width, the occipital lobe and cerebellum increased, but the frontal lobe remained low and narrow.
And in Neanderthals, in their very large brains, the frontal and parietal lobes were relatively poorly developed (compared to the occipital lobe). In Cro-Magnons, the brain became significantly taller (due to an increase in the frontal and parietal lobes) and acquired a spherical shape.
So, the brain of our ancestors grew and grew, but, paradoxically, about 20 thousand years ago a reverse trend began: the brain began to gradually shrink. So modern humans have a smaller average brain size than Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons. What is the reason?
WHO IS SMARTER? OPINION OF AN ANTHROPOLOGIST
Anthropologist Stanislav Drobyshevsky (Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, Moscow State University) answers: “There are two answers to this question: one everyone likes, the other is correct. The first is that brain size is not directly related to intelligence, and the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons had a simpler structure than ours, but the technical inadequacy was compensated by larger sizes, and even then supposedly not completely. In reality, we know absolutely nothing about the neural structure of the brain of ancient people, so this answer is complete speculation, comforting the conceit of modern people. The second answer is more realistic: ancient people were smarter. They had to solve a bunch of survival problems, and think very quickly, unlike us, for whom everything is presented on a silver platter, and even in a chewed form, and there is no need to rush anywhere. Ancient people were generalists - everyone stored in their heads a complete set of information necessary for survival in all situations, plus there had to be the ability to think reactively in unforeseen situations. We have a specialization: everyone knows a tiny piece of their information, and if something happens, “contact a specialist.”
The Neanderthal brain differs from ours in just one phase of development.
Findings of Neanderthal children provide an opportunity to trace how their large brains developed. Scientists from the Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig of the Max Planck Society, together with French colleagues, reconstructed the comparative development of the brain of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. First, scientists performed CT scans of the skulls of 58 modern humans. And then they did the same thing, putting the skulls of nine Neanderthals of different ages into the tomograph.
Although the Neanderthal skull is no smaller in size than ours, they differ significantly in shape. But in newborns of both species, the braincase is almost the same in shape - in a Neanderthal baby it is just a little more elongated. And then the paths of development diverge. In modern humans, during the period from the absence of teeth to an incomplete set of incisors, not only the size, but also the shape of the braincase changes - it becomes more spherical. And then it increases only in size, but remains almost unchanged in shape. Biologists decided that this is a key process of brain formation that is absent in Neanderthals. The shape of the skull of their newborns, adolescents and adults is almost the same. The total difference is in one critical stage immediately after birth. Probably, scientists believe, such a noticeable change in shape is accompanied by a transformation internal structure brain and the development of the neural network, which creates conditions for the development of intelligence. Scientists published an article on the development of the brain of different human species in the journal Current Biology.
Who's smarter? Neuroscientist's opinion
Sergey Savelyev, head of the development laboratory, shared his opinion nervous system Institute of Human Morphology of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences: “This is due to the fact that artificial selection operates in the human population, aimed at reducing individual variability and deliberately selecting highly socialized mediocrities. And destroy overly intelligent and antisocial individuals. Such a community is more manageable and consists of more predictable people, which is always beneficial. At all times, society has sacrificed the inciters of peace in favor of non-conflict and stability. Previously, they were simply eaten, and later they were expelled from the community. It was because of this, from my point of view, because of the migration of the smartest outcasts, that the resettlement of humanity began. And in sedentary, conservative and more socialized groups, there was a hidden selection to consolidate certain behavioral properties that were most convenient and favorable for maintaining the community. Selection for behavior led to brain shrinkage"
Myth 1
THE BIGGER THE BRAIN, THE SMARTER IT IS
Brain sizes vary quite a bit among modern humans as well. Thus, it is known that Ivan Turgenev’s brain weighed 2012 grams, and Anatole France’s was almost a whole kilogram less - 1017 grams. But this does not mean at all that Turgenev was twice as smart as Anatole France. Moreover, it was recorded that the owner of the heaviest brain - 2900 grams - was mentally retarded.
Since the most important part of the brain is the nerve cells, or neurons (they form the gray matter), it can be assumed that the larger the brain, the more neurons it contains. And the more neurons, the better they work. But the brain contains not only
neurons, but also glial cells(they perform a support function, direct the migration of neurons, supply them with nutrients, and according to the latest data
- and participate in information processes). In addition, part of the brain mass is formed by white matter, which consists of conducting fibers. That is, there is a connection between brain size and the number of neurons, but not a direct one. And there is obviously no connection at all between brain size and intelligence.
You can pump up your brain on a treadmill
A study conducted by an international team of scientists and published in the journal PNAS found that aerobic exercise (running on a treadmill) in old age grows the hippocampus, an area of the brain that is very important for memory and spatial learning. Its volume was determined in a magnetic resonance imaging scanner. It is believed that as we age, the hippocampus shrinks at a rate of 1-2% per year. Experts believe that this hippocampal atrophy is directly related to age-related memory loss. So, in elderly subjects who exercised on a treadmill for a year, the volume of the hippocampus not only did not decrease, but even increased, and spatial memory also improved compared to the control group. The reason is again to stimulate the formation of new neurons.
Myth 2
NERVE CELLS DO NOT RECOVER
Since neurons do not divide, it was long believed that the formation of new nerve cells occurs only during embryonic development. Scientists discovered that this is not the case several years ago. It turned out that in the brains of adult laboratory rats and mice there are zones in which the birth of new neurons occurs - neurogenesis. Their source is stem cells of nervous tissue (neural stem cells). Later it was found that humans also have such zones. Research has shown that new neurons are actively growing contacts with other cells and are involved in learning and memory processes. Let us repeat: in adult animals and people.
Next, scientists began to study what external factors could influence the birth of neurons. And it turned out that neurogenesis increases with intensive training, with enriched environmental conditions and with physical activity. And the strongest factor inhibiting neurogenesis turned out to be stress. Well, with age this process still slows down. What is true for laboratory animals, in this case, can be completely transferred to humans. Moreover, observations and studies on people confirm this. That is, in order to enhance the formation of new nerve cells, you need to train your brain, learn new skills, remember more information, diversify your life with new experiences and lead a physically active lifestyle.
In old age, this leads to the same effect as in younger years. But stress is detrimental to the birth of new neurons.
GYM FOR MICE
Neuroscientists from Taiwan (National Cheng Kung University Medical College) worked with mice of different ages - young (3 months), adults (7 months), early middle age (9 months), middle age (13 months) and old (24 months). The animals received daily physical activity through wheel training, for an hour every day. After five weeks of training, scientists studied what changes occurred in their brains compared to “non-athletic” rodents who just sat in cages all this time. Using special staining, the number of dividing cells, maturing neuronal cells and mature neurons in the hippocampus was counted. Firstly. The researchers found that neurogenesis decreased with age. The number of newly formed nerve cells in middle-aged mice was only about 5% of the number of new neurons in young mice. But five weeks of intense physical exercise played a role: the rate of formation of new neurons in middle-aged “athletic” mice doubled compared to “non-athletic” mice. Understanding the mechanisms, scientists found that exercise increased the content of protein - a neurotrophic factor that stimulates the division and differentiation of neural cells. What is true for mice is also true for humans in this case, say the authors of the article in Nature. So physical activity in middle and old age gives a good chance to keep the brain healthy for a long time.
STRESS DAMAGES THE BRAIN, AN INTERESTING LIFE RESTORES
Stress in childhood is especially harmful to the brain. Its consequences affect the psyche, behavior and intellectual abilities of an adult. But there is a way to compensate for the damaging effects of early stress. As Israeli scientists showed on laboratory rats, you can help if you enrich the victim’s habitat. Stress destroys the brain through hormones, which include corticosteroids produced in the adrenal glands, as well as hormones from the pituitary gland and thyroid gland. Their increased level causes changes in dendrites - short processes of neurons, reduces synaptic plasticity, especially in the hippocampus, slows down the formation of new nerve cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, etc. Such disturbances during the development of the brain do not go away without leaving a trace.
Specialists from the Institute for the Study of the Neurobiology of Emotions (Institute for the Study of Affective Neuroscience) from the University of Haifa divided laboratory rats into three groups. One was subjected to three days of stress at a young age, the second was placed in an enriched environment after the stress, and the third was left as a control. Rats that had the chance to live in an enriched environment were moved into a large cage containing a variety of interesting objects: plastic boxes, cylinders, tunnels, platforms and running wheels.
When tested, rats from the stress group showed increased fear and decreased curiosity and learned worse. They had reduced motivation to explore new environments, which can be compared to the loss of interest in life that often occurs in a depressed person. But being in an enriched environment compensated for all stress-induced behavior disorders.
Scientists suggest that environmental enrichment protects the brain from stress for several reasons: it stimulates the production of proteins called nerve growth factors, activates neurotransmitter systems, and promotes the formation of new nerve cells. They published the results in the journal PLoS ONE. These results are most directly related to orphans whose early childhood was spent in an orphanage. Only an interesting and rich life that their adoptive parents will try to create for them. will help smooth out difficult life experiences.
Myth 3
THE HUMAN BRAIN WORKS AT 10/6/5/2%
This idea was very common until recently. It was usually cited to justify the idea that the brain has hidden potential, which we don't use. But modern research methods do not confirm this thesis. “It arose because when we learned to record the electrical activity of individual neurons, it turned out that of all the neurons at the measurement point, very few are active at any given time,” says Olga Svarnik, head of the Laboratory of Systems Neurophysiology and Neural Interfaces at the NBIC Center of the Russian Research Center Kurchatovsky institute." There are about 1012 neurons in the brain (the number is being clarified all the time), and they are very specialized: some are electrically active during walking, others during solving a mathematical problem, others during a love date, etc. It is difficult to imagine what would happen if they suddenly they decide to earn money at the same time! “Just as we are not able to realize all our experience at the same time, that is, we cannot simultaneously drive a car, jump rope, read, etc.,” explains Olga Svarnik, “the same is true for all our nerve cells.” cannot and should not be active at the same time. But that doesn’t mean we don’t use our brains one hundred percent.”
“This was invented by those psychologists who themselves use two percent of the brain,” Sergei Savelyev categorically states. - The brain can only be used completely; nothing in it can be turned off. According to physiological laws, the brain cannot work at less than half capacity, since even when we are not thinking, a constant metabolism is maintained in the neurons. And when a person begins to work intensively with his head, to solve some problems, the brain begins to consume almost twice as much energy. Everything else is fiction. And no brain can be trained in such a way as to intensify its work tenfold.”
THE BRAIN IS A VERY ENERGY-INTENDING ORGAN
Scientists have long calculated: an intensively working human brain consumes a quarter of the resources of the entire body. And at rest - 10% of the body's energy. Moreover, the brain mass makes up only 2% of the body mass.
Myth 4
EACH ACTION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS OWN PART OF THE BRAIN
Indeed, in the human cerebral cortex, neuroscientists identify zones associated with all senses: vision, hearing, smell, touch, taste, as well as associative zones where information is processed and synthesized.
And magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) records the activity of certain areas during different types of activity. But the map of the brain is not absolute, and there is growing evidence that things are much more complex. For example, not only the well-known Broca's area and Wernicke's area are involved in the speech process, but also other parts of the brain. And the cerebellum, which has always been associated with the coordination of movements, is involved in the most different types brain activity. With the question of whether there is specialization in the brain, we turned to Olga Svarnik: “There is specialization in the brain at the level of neurons, and it is quite constant,” the specialist answered. - But it is more difficult to identify specialization at the structural level, because completely different neurons can lie nearby. You can talk about a cluster of neurons, such as columns, you can talk about segments of neurons that are activated at the same moment, but it is impossible to really identify any large areas that are usually distinguished. MRI reflects the activity of the bloodstream, but not the functioning of individual neurons. Probably, from the images obtained from MRI, we can tell where certain specializations of neurons are more or less likely to be found. But it seems wrong to me to say that some zone is responsible for something.”
NEURON JENNIFER ANISTON
“The specialization of neurons,” says Olga Svarnik, “can be illustrated by an interesting example known as the “Jennifer Aniston neuron phenomenon.” Since a person, naturally, cannot have electrodes inserted into the brain for experimental purposes, this information was obtained from patients with epilepsy, in whom electrodes were implanted into the brain to localize the lesion. So, in such a patient’s brain, among other neurons, they found a neuron that responded with an electrical discharge at the moment when a photograph of actress Jennifer Aniston appeared on the monitor. These could be completely different photographs of the actress - the neuron always “recognized” her. In another experiment, they found a neuron that responded only to a demonstration of The Simpsons. And so on.”
Myth 5
THE BRAIN IS A COMPUTER
According to Olga Svarnik, comparing the brain with a computer is nothing more than a metaphor: “We can fantasize that the brain has certain algorithms, that a person has heard information and does something. But to say that this is how our brain works would be wrong. Unlike a computer, there are no functional blocks in the brain. For example, the hippocampus is believed to be a structure responsible for memory and spatial orientation. But hippocampal neurons behave differently, they have different specializations, they do not function as a single unit.”
And here is what biologist and popularizer of science Alexander Markov (Institute of Paleontology of the Russian Academy of Sciences) thinks on the same issue: “In a computer, all the signals that are exchanged between elements of logical circuits have the same nature - electrical, and these signals can only receive one of two values - 0 or 1. The transmission of information in the brain is not based on a binary code, but rather on a ternary one. If the excitatory signal is correlated with one, and its absence with zero, then the inhibitory signal can be compared with minus one.
But in fact, the brain uses dozens of types of chemical signals - just as if a computer were using dozens of different electrical currents... And the zeros and ones could have dozens of different, say, colors. The most important difference is that the conductivity of each specific synapse... can change depending on the circumstances. This property is called synaptic plasticity. There is one more radical difference between the brain and an electronic computer. In a computer, the main amount of memory is stored not in the logical electronic circuits of the processor, but separately, in special storage devices. There are no areas in the brain specifically dedicated to long-term storage of memories. All memory is recorded in the same structure of interneuron synaptic connections, which is also a grandiose computing device - an analogue of a processor."
Popular science magazine
"Details of the World"
Neanderthal(lat. Homo neanderthalensis) - an extinct species from the genus People (lat. Homo). The first people with Neanderthal features (protoanderthals) appeared in Europe about 600 thousand years ago. Classic Neanderthals formed about 100-130 thousand years ago. The latest remains date back to 28-33 thousand years ago.
Opening
The remains of H. neanderthalensis were first discovered in 1829 by Philippe-Charles Schmerling in the caves of Engie (modern Belgium); it was the skull of a child. In 1848, the skull of an adult Neanderthal was found in Gibraltar (Gibraltar 1). Naturally, neither of these finds was considered at that time as evidence of the existence of an extinct species of people, and they were classified as the remains of Neanderthals much later.
The type specimen (holotype) of the species (Neanderthal 1) was found only in August 1856 in a limestone quarry in the Neanderthal Valley near Düsseldorf (North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany). It consists of the skull vault, two femurs, three bones from the right arm and two from the left, part of the pelvis, fragments of the scapula and ribs. The local gymnasium teacher Johann Karl Fuhlroth was interested in geology and paleontology. Having received the remains from the workers who found them, he paid attention to their complete fossilization and geological position and came to the conclusion of their considerable age and important scientific significance. Fuhlroth then handed them over to Hermann Schaafhausen, professor of anatomy at the University of Bonn. The discovery was announced in June 1857; this happened 2 years before the publication of Charles Darwin’s work “The Origin of Species.” In 1864, at the suggestion of the Anglo-Irish geologist William King, the new species was named after the place of its discovery. In 1867, Ernst Haeckel proposed the name Homo stupidus (i.e., Stupid Man), but in accordance with the rules of nomenclature, priority remained with King's name.
In 1880, the jawbone of a child of H. neanderthalensis was found in the Czech Republic, along with tools from the Mousterian period and the bones of extinct animals. In 1886, the perfectly preserved skeletons of a man and a woman were found in Belgium at a depth of about 5 m, also along with numerous Mousterian tools. Subsequently, the remains of Neanderthals were discovered in other places in the territory modern Russia, Croatia, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Iran, Uzbekistan, Israel and other countries. To date, the remains of more than 400 Neanderthals have been found.
Status of Neanderthals as a previously unknown species ancient man It didn't settle right away. Many prominent scientists of that time did not recognize him as such. Thus, the outstanding German scientist Rudolf Virchow rejected the thesis of “primitive man” and considered the Neanderthal skull to be just a pathologically altered skull of a modern person. And the doctor and anatomist Franz Mayer, having studied the structure of the pelvis and lower extremities, put forward the hypothesis that the remains belonged to a person who spent a significant part of his life riding a horse. He suggested that it could be a Russian Cossack from the Napoleonic Wars era.
Classification
Almost since the discovery, scientists have been debating the status of Neanderthals. Some of them are of the opinion that Neanderthal man is not an independent species, but only a subspecies of modern man (lat. Homo sapiens neanderthalensis). This is largely due to the lack of a clear definition of the species. One of the characteristics of a species is reproductive isolation, and genetic studies suggest that Neanderthals and modern people crossed. On the one hand, this supports the point of view about the status of Neanderthals as a subspecies of modern humans. But on the other hand, there are documented examples of interspecific crossings, as a result of which fertile offspring appeared, so this characteristic cannot be considered decisive. At the same time, DNA studies and morphological studies show that Neanderthals are still an independent species.
Origin
A comparison of the DNA of modern humans and H. neanderthalensis shows that they descended from a common ancestor, dividing approximately, according to various estimates, from 350-400 to 500 and even 800 thousand years ago. The likely ancestor of both of these species is Homo heidelbergensis. Moreover, Neanderthals descended from the European population of H. heidelbergensis, and modern humans – from the African one and much later.
Anatomy and morphology
Men of this species had an average height of 164-168 cm, weight about 78 kg, women - 152-156 cm and 66 kg, respectively. The brain volume is 1500-1900 cm 3, which exceeds the average brain volume of a modern person.
The cranial vault is low but long, the face is flat with massive brow ridges, the forehead is low and strongly inclined back. The jaws are long and wide with large teeth, protruding forward, but without a chin protrusion. Judging by the wear on their teeth, Neanderthals were right-handed.
Their physique was more massive than that of modern man. The chest is barrel-shaped, the torso is long, and the legs are relatively short. Presumably, the dense physique of Neanderthals is an adaptation to the cold climate, because. due to a decrease in the ratio of body surface to its volume, heat loss by the body through the skin is reduced. The bones are very strong, this is due to highly developed muscles. The average Neanderthal was significantly stronger than modern humans.
Genome
Early studies of the H. neanderthalensis genome focused on mitochondrial DNA (mDNA) studies. Because mDNA under normal conditions is inherited strictly through the maternal line and contains a significantly smaller amount of information (16,569 nucleotides versus ~3 billion in nuclear DNA), so the significance of such studies was not very great.
In 2006, the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and 454 Life Sciences announced that the Neanderthal genome would be sequenced over the next few years. In May 2010 they were published preliminary results this work. Research has revealed that Neanderthals and modern humans may have interbred, and every living person (except Africans) carries between 1 and 4 percent of H. neanderthalensis genes. Sequencing of the entire Neanderthal genome was completed in 2013, and the results were published in the journal Nature on December 18, 2013.
Habitat
Fossil remains of Neanderthals have been discovered across a large area of Eurasia, which includes such modern countries like Great Britain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Germany, Croatia, Czech Republic, Israel, Iran, Ukraine, Russia, Uzbekistan. The easternmost find is the remains discovered in the Altai Mountains (Southern Siberia).
However, it should be taken into account that a significant part of the period of existence of this species occurred in last glaciation, which could destroy evidence of Neanderthal habitation in more northern latitudes.
No traces of H. neanderthalensis have yet been found in Africa. This is probably due to the adaptation to the cold climate of both themselves and the animals that formed the basis of their diet.
Behavior
Data archaeological research show that Neanderthals spent most of their lives in small groups of 5-50 people. There were almost no old people among them, because... most did not live to be 35 years old, but some individuals lived to be 50. There is plenty of evidence of Neanderthals caring for each other. Among those studied, there are skeletons that have traces of cured injuries and diseases, therefore, during the healing, the tribesmen fed and protected the wounded and sick. There is evidence that the dead were buried, with funeral offerings sometimes found in the graves.
It is believed that Neanderthals rarely met strangers in their small territory or left it themselves. Although there are occasional finds of high-quality stone from sources more than 100 km away, these are not sufficient to conclude that there was trade or even regular contact with other groups.
H. neanderthalensis made extensive use of a variety of stone tools. However, over hundreds of thousands of years, their manufacturing technology has changed very little. Besides the obvious assumption that Neanderthals, despite their large brains, were not very smart, there is an alternative hypothesis. It lies in the fact that due to the small number of Neanderthals (and their number never exceeded 100 thousand individuals), the likelihood of innovation was low. Most of the Neanderthal stone tools belong to the Mousterian culture. Some of them are very sharp. There is evidence of the use of wooden instruments, but they themselves have practically not survived to this day.
Neanderthals used different kinds weapons, including spears. But most likely they were used only in close combat, and not for throwing. This is indirectly confirmed big amount skeletons with traces of injuries caused by large animals that Neanderthals hunted and which formed the bulk of their diet.
Previously, it was believed that H. neanderthalensis fed exclusively on the meat of large land mammals, such as mammoths, bison, deer, etc. However, later discoveries showed that small animals and some plants also served as food. And in the south of Spain, traces were also found that Neanderthals ate marine mammals, fish and shellfish. However, despite the variety of food sources, obtaining sufficient quantities was often a problem. Proof of this are skeletons with signs of diseases caused by malnutrition.
It is assumed that Neanderthals already had a significant command of speech. This is indirectly evidenced by the production of complex tools and the hunting of large animals, which require communication for learning and interaction. In addition, there is anatomical and genetic evidence: the structure of the hyoid and occipital bones, the hypoglossal nerve, the presence of a gene responsible for speech in modern humans.
Extinction hypotheses
There are several hypotheses explaining the disappearance of this species, which can be divided into 2 groups: those associated with the emergence and spread of modern humans and other reasons.
According to modern ideas, modern man, having appeared in Africa, gradually began to spread to the north, where by this time Neanderthal man was widespread. Both of these species coexisted for many millennia, but Neanderthal was eventually completely replaced by modern humans.
There is also a hypothesis linking the disappearance of the Neanderthals with climate change caused by the eruption of a large volcano about 40 thousand years ago. This change led to a decrease in the amount of vegetation and the number of large herbivorous animals that fed on vegetation and, in turn, were the food of the Neanderthals. Accordingly, lack of food led to the extinction of H. neanderthalensis itself.
Scientists have identified significant differences in the development of the brains of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals, which may partly explain evolutionary success Homo sapiens. An article by researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig was published in the journal Current Biology. The results of the work are briefly presented in the press release of the institute.
Neanderthal brain size is not very different from that of Neanderthals H. sapiens, Besides, in Lately appeared a large number of evidence that H. neanderthalensis were able to make quite “cunning” tools, which were comparable in complexity to the tools of Homo sapiens.
U H. sapiens intellectual capabilities depend not only on the size of the brain, but also on its organization. The authors of the new work studied the structure of the brain of Neanderthals by analyzing the bones of the skull - although the soft tissue of the brain is not preserved for a long time, it leaves a clear mark on the inside of the skull. Scientists compared such traces left on the skull bones of a Neanderthal child less than one year old and on the skull of an adult H. neanderthalensis. Based on the data obtained, the authors were able to model the dynamics of the development of various parts of the brain as Neanderthals grew older.
It turned out that in the first months after birth, the shape of the brain in representatives of two species of the genus Homo approximately the same. But then in Homo sapiens the parietal and temporal regions begin to predominantly increase in size, while in Neanderthals such selective growth did not occur.
Scientists note that people with defects in these two departments have impaired social communication and speech skills. This fact indirectly indicates that Neanderthals could not develop these skills necessary to build complex societies to the same extent as H. sapiens.
In order to compensate for the small number of studied remains of Neanderthals, the authors developed a computer model of brain development H. sapiens, in which there is no preferential increase in the parietal and temporal regions. The final structure of the brain in this case was practically no different from the Neanderthal brain, the ScienceNOW portal clarifies.
Recently, scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology deciphered the Neanderthal genome. Its preliminary analysis and comparison with the Homo sapiens genome showed that these species . In addition, much evidence has recently been discovered that H. sapiens had children with other members of the family Homo. You can read more about this.
