Mounier Aurélien, Marchal François, Condemi Silvana
Unité d'Anthropologie: Adaptabilité Bioculturelle, UMR 6578, CNRS, Université de la Méditerranée, EFS, Faculté de Médecine-Secteur Nord, Marseille, France.
J Hum Evol. 2009 Mar;56(3):219-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.12.006. Epub 2009 Feb 27.
The discovery of new fossils in Africa, Asia, and Europe, and the recognition of a greater diversity in the middle Pleistocene fossil record, has led to a reconsideration of the species Homo heidelbergensis. This nomen, formulated by Schoetensack in 1908 to describe the Mauer jaw (Germany), was almost forgotten during most of the past century. Numerous fossils have been attributed to it but no consensus has arisen concerning their classification. The holotype anatomical traits are still poorly understood, and numerous fossils with no mandibular remains have been placed in the taxon. Some researchers propose H. heidelbergensis as an Afro-European taxon that is ancestral to both modern humans and Neandertals whereas others think it is a strictly European species that is part of the Neandertal lineage. We focus on the validity of H. heidelbergensis, using the traditional basis of species recognition: anatomical description. We provide a comparative morphological analysis using 47 anatomical traits of 36 Pleistocene fossils from Africa, Asia, and Europe and 35 extant human mandibles. We re-examine the mandibular features of Mauer and discuss the specimen's inclusion in H. heidelbergensis, as well as alternative evolutionary theories. To lend objectivity to specimen grouping, we use multiple correspondence analysis associated with hierarchical classification that creates clusters corresponding to phenetic similarities between jaws. Our phenetic and comparative morphological analyses support the validity of H. heidelbergensis as a taxon. A set of morphological features can be statistically identified for the definition of the species. Some traits can be used to delimit H. heidelbergensis in an evolutionary framework (e.g., foramina mentale posteriorly positioned, horizontal retromolar surface). Those traits are also present on African (e.g., Tighenif) and European (e.g., Sima de los Huesos) specimens that show a close relationship with the Mauer mandible. Therefore, the definition of H. heidelbergensis is more precise and mainly supports the theory of an Afro-European taxon, which is the last common ancestor of H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens. However, the results of this study fail to entirely discount the hypothesis that considers H. heidelbergensis as a chronospecies leading to the Neandertals.
非洲、亚洲和欧洲新化石的发现,以及对中更新世化石记录中更大多样性的认识,促使人们重新审视海德堡人这一物种。这个名称由朔滕萨克于1908年提出,用于描述毛尔下颌骨(德国),在过去的大部分世纪里几乎被遗忘。许多化石都被归为该物种,但在它们的分类上尚未达成共识。其正模标本的解剖特征仍未得到充分理解,而且许多没有下颌骨遗骸的化石也被归入了这个分类单元。一些研究人员提出,海德堡人是一个分布于非洲和欧洲的分类单元,是现代人类和尼安德特人的共同祖先,而另一些人则认为它是一个严格意义上的欧洲物种,是尼安德特人谱系的一部分。我们基于物种识别的传统依据——解剖学描述,来关注海德堡人的有效性。我们使用来自非洲、亚洲和欧洲的36个更新世化石以及35个现存人类下颌骨的47个解剖特征进行了比较形态分析。我们重新审视了毛尔下颌骨的特征,并讨论了该标本被归入海德堡人的情况以及其他进化理论。为了使标本分组更具客观性,我们使用了与层次分类相关的多重对应分析,该分析创建了与颌骨之间表型相似性相对应的聚类。我们的表型和比较形态分析支持了海德堡人作为一个分类单元的有效性。可以通过统计确定一组形态特征来定义该物种。一些特征可用于在进化框架中界定海德堡人(例如,颏孔向后定位、磨牙后区水平)。这些特征也存在于与毛尔下颌骨关系密切的非洲标本(如提格尼夫)和欧洲标本(如骨坑)上。因此,海德堡人的定义更加精确,主要支持了非洲 - 欧洲分类单元的理论,即它是尼安德特人和智人的最后共同祖先。然而,这项研究的结果未能完全排除将海德堡人视为导致尼安德特人出现的线系渐变种的假说。