The talk was engaging. Many people got a chance to ask questions. This was an outstanding feature of this format in this sort of venue. Most lectures I’ve been to leave such pressed time for questions that only 2-3 get fired away. That often leaves patrons at a loss. But SciCafe did it well, offering a good hour or so of discussion.

Nina’s talk is a good segway into some news that I came across today. As we know blond hair is a phenotype and carried by at least one a recessive allele in European populations. But many Oceanic peoples also have blonde hair, specifically those from Melanesia — distinct from Polynesia and Micronesia.

Melanesian Blond Hair

In a new Science paper, researchers identified a new missense mutation in TYRP1 in about half of the blondes in Micronesia which was not found in any of the 900 other individuals sampled from outside the South Pacific. This novel blond mutation in Solomon Islanders is thought to have popped up around 10,000 years ago. Furthermore, it appears to be the same one behind blondness in Fiji and other regions of the South Pacific.

Nina Jablonski eluded to the evolution of lighter phenotypes, like light skin occurring at least twice in the evolution of Homo sapiens and at least once in Homo neanderthalensis. But light skin need not be light hair, which is often a misconception. Research like this shows us that in dark-skinned people, one base pair mismatch leads to light hair.

Kenny, E., Timpson, N., Sikora, M., Yee, M., Moreno-Estrada, A., Eng, C., Huntsman, S., Burchard, E., Stoneking, M., Bustamante, C., & Myles, S. (2012). Melanesian Blond Hair Is Caused by an Amino Acid Change in TYRP1 Science, 336 (6081), 554-554 DOI: 10.1126/science.1217849

I’ll be following the project, but honestly I don’t have high hopes. I would love to be proven wrong. It seems lofty, using a lot of high yield buzzwords. My first impression was if this nothing more than a CV booster … Especially since it hasn’t been updated since last September. I guess it can’t be completely an empty shell because they have an impressive member on research team, Pardis Sabeti.

You can learn more about this project by checking out their site, watching the following video and following them on Twitter: @irangenes. If you want, you can participate in the project by filling out this survey.

A draft of the genome was released shortly afterwards in December, 2010. Today, after 30-fold coverage of the genome using Illumina GAIIx sequencing platform, the complete genome was released. It is free to download and use on Amazon Web Services… weighing in at 160gb.  I can imagine a lot of interesting comparisons can be made with this dataset and am happy the researchers made it available to the public.  There’s a caveat though, you can use the data but however agree that you cannot publish your findings until the researchers at Max Planck first get a stab at it.

I’m approaching my last semester as an undergraduate at Binghamton University, and if you haven’t guessed it by the context of this blog already, my envelopes were addressed to graduate schools of anthropology.

Now that I have almost finished paying a small fortune in application fees to play a lottery, I have had the time to start to catch up on some reading. While prospective graduate students might feel pessimistic about waiting to hear back about acceptances, what I’ve been skimming has sobered me up a little bit from my fall daydreams of excavations in faraway places.

I found myself searching the web reminding myself how as an anthropologist you should never expect to ever really get hired by a university. Not to say that I learned anything new.

There aren’t a lot of tenure track positions. You’re just going to have a lot of debt. It will take you a literal lifetime to pay back your loans. You’re going to be an adjunct professor and be paid less than a graduate student on a fellowship. Just don’t expect to work in academia.

That is a lot of negativity, but everyone has heard something similar. The most positive remark I hear about careers in academia is that the job market just can’t get any worse.  Surely by the time I finish my graduate work in a decade things will have turned around some, right?

For some reason like many others I am not dissuaded or in the least bit fazed by the outlook, at least at this stage in my aspirations. It is important to note I recognize that I am still in my naïve undergraduate phase. I hear in the long years of graduate school it becomes easier to get disillusioned. For now I am content. Call it unrealistic, but I’ll work my hardest and keep my fingers crossed.

I feel like most of my peers too have their eyes on the prize of a tenure track position, some time down the road. They too probably brush off knowing that very specific job listings for such positions receive hundreds of applications.

Knowing the odds, I am very curious what percentage of individuals starting work on a PhD have the intention of working somewhere other than a university. Are there a lot of you out there?

How many of you have thought about other applications of highly specialized degrees? If in eight years I am an expert on Neandertal lithic industries in southwest Belarus—as a random example– what jobs are most likely for me? Cultural resource management? Museum work?

I suppose it is something I can start thinking about, assuming I get in somewhere. If I am accepted I will have a solid seven years to mull over future directions, which should be sufficient time. Right now I am looking forward to it.

By Matthew Magnani

The company known as 23andMe recently released an analysis that claims to answer precisely this question. While personal genome sequencing has not yet hit the mainstream market, 23andMe looks at SNPs, or variations in single nucleotide pairs. Through a comparison between your SNPs and those found in the Neandertal genome draft, for a couple hundred dollars you will be given a percentage. The service has been given the name “Neanderthal Ancestry Estimator.”

Researcher extracts DNA from a Neandertal specimen

Computational biologist Eric Durand developed the project, and has previously worked on both the Neandertal genome draft and Denisova genetics.

I encourage you to take a look at an outline of the methodology, online in a white paper. Are we really at the point where a private company can tell us a likely percentage of our Neandertal ancestry for $207? I’ll let you be the judge.

By Matthew Magnani

Based on the skeletal remains, how can we ascertain specifics about hominin diet? For this particular study, researchers used microwear analysis on two molars from Dmanisi. Microwear analysis observes the patterning left on teeth by components of specific diets. As one example, tough silicates in plants leave identifiable traces, as do other silica-based sands that end up being chewed.

Comparisons in wear patterns were made with Dmanisi H. erectus and African H. erectus as well as the genus Australopithecus and earlier Homo, to get an idea of where the Dmanisi hominins fit in on the spectrum of microwear diagnostic traits. These diagnostic traits include heterogeneity of the tooth surface, as well as complexity in the roughness of the tooth surface. To give you an idea of general evolutionary trends, Australopithecines typically had larger teeth and thicker enamel to break down tougher, lower quality foods. As later Homo emerged, teeth tended to get smaller and enamel thinner.

The results indicated that the molars of Dmanisi Homo erectus were very similar to African Homo erectus in general. However, there were also characteristics found to be consistent with other earlier hominin species. Overall the authors cautioned against drawing conclusions with such a small number of teeth, saying that meaningful statistical results are unattainable based on the sample size.

According to authors, the wear patterns on the Dmanisi teeth are indicative of hominins that exploited a range of foods. It seems then that versatility and not specialization is what defines H. erectus in both Africa and Europe. The ability to take advantage of a larger resource base is no doubt one of the factors that allowed the first hominins to spread out across such an expansive area.

By Matthew Magnani

Pontzer, H., Scott, J.R., Lordkipanidze, D., Ungar, P.S. 2011.“Dental microwear texture analysis and diet in the Dmanisi hominins.” Journal of Human Evolution 61:683-687.

Australian Museum.

A lot had happened this year with hominin research and some would redefine conventional understandings of this group. Below is a list of new studies that came out this year that I find quite interesting on hominin. Read up so you can show off in class with your knowledge of current hominin research. You know, just so you can make sure that your adjunct is really paying attention of what he/she is doing instead of begrudgingly teaching a class because he/she has to. Or maybe you have a geeky classmate you want to impress. Or if you’re like me, you just wanna be the smartest in class because Asian Fail is not an option. So, enjoy … and if they question you, tell them I said so.

Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus

• Male philopatry and female dispersal in both A. africanus and P. robustus. Is this a strategy to prevent inbreeding and mate choice by females? Ancient Hominid Males Stayed Home While Females Roamed, Study Finds

Paranthropus boisei

• Seems like we’ll have to re-evaluate P. boisei‘s nickname, “Nutcracker Man”. Recent study showed that P. boisei didn’t eat nuts but instead used its big teeth to chew on grasses and sedges. No nuts for ‘Nutcracker Man’: Early human relative apparently chewed grass instead

Homo erectus

• H. erectus were the first to controlled fire but it wasn’t just used for warmth. New study shows that H. erectus were the first to cook their food (with fire) and process their food with tools. Homo Erectus Processed Food Like Humans, Harvard Scientists Say

• Stone artifacts, mostly flakes from stone tools, from the Dmanisi site in Georgia (the country, not the state) might suggests that H. erectus evolved outside of Africa. However, no conclusive evidence can be made due to the poor conditions of fossils found near these artifacts. Human ancestors in Eurasia earlier than thought

• H. erectus reached South Asia earlier than previously thought, between 1.5 to 1 million years ago according to Acheulean tools. Go east, ancient tool makers

• Findings from Solo River Terrace (SoRT) in Indonesia shows that H. erectus never coexisted with H. sapiens. Using three dating techniques: U-series, Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) and argon-argon, scientists found H. erectus went extinct between 143,000 to 550,000 years ago. H. sapiens are thought to reached Indonesia about 40,000 years ago. Human Ancestor Older Than Previously Thought; Finding Offers New Insights Into Evolution

Homo neanderthalensis

• Neandertals probably died off because there were too many early humans to compete with. According to a statistical analysis, the Périgord region of southwestern France has the highest concentration of Neandertals and early humans. The ratio between Neandertal to early human was 1 to 10. There were just too many humans for Neanderthals to survive

• Mousterian culture might have lasted longer than previously thought and Neandertals might have spread as far as northern Russia in the mountains of Polar Urals, near the Arctic Circle. Last Neanderthals Near the Arctic Circle?

• Neandertals were predominantly right-handed, according to their teeth. Also, humans have been predominantly right-handed for at least 500,000 years. Neanderthal ancestors were mostly right-handed

Homo floresiensis (the Hobbits)

• The debate whether H. floresiensis is a separate species or just microcephalic H. sapiens continues on. New study shows that the measurement of the Hobbit skull is within the range of microcephalic H. sapiens. Taking the measure of a hobbit

From left to right: Homo floresiensis (LB1) and Homo sapiens.

Homo sapiens (early and modern humans)

• Early humans have been playing hanky panky with Neandertals and possibly the Denisovans. Proof? A toe bone and its DNA. Stone Age toe could redraw human family tree

• A particular segment of our X-chromosome were inherited from Neandertals. This supports the hypothesis that early humans interbred with Neandertal. However, only non-African humans have this segment. Confirmed: All non-African people are part Neanderthal

• Might not be a conscious decision, but apparently early humans that left Africa interbred with Neandertal to protect themselves against diseases. This is probably an unintended result more than an active thought process. First modern humans protected themselves against disease after leaving Africa by ‘interbreeding with Neanderthals’

*Bouchra child, Homo sapiens*

• Dr. Harold Dribble and his team found the skull of “world’s oldest human child” dated around 108,000 years old in Morocco and nicknamed it Bouchra. The boy died when he was 8 years old. This specimen has not been described in any scientific paper so watch out for it soon. World’s Oldest Child Found in Morocco

Dopamine is an important neurotransmitter that functions in a lot of behaviors and reactions, such as movement, lactation, aggression, fear, etc. In diseases like Parkinson, dopamine levels lower and movement becomes uncontrolled. In other diseases like schizophrenia, either dopamine levels are high or response to dopamine is higher, and paranoia & hallucinations manifest. Treating schizophrenia involves blocking dopamine receptors. As you can imagine, a common side effect of antipsychotics is movement disorders — or Parkinsonism.

So why am I on this neuropsychiatric kick on an anthropology blog? Our cultural and behavioral predisopostions ultimately boil down to chemicals in our brain interacting and stimulating other areas. One of the most important functions of dopamine is in the reward system of the brain, an area called the nucleus accumbens that primes pleasurable behavior to repeat, such as sex, eating, and drugs.

In this video, Robert Sapolsky of Stanford Neurology makes the distinction between how dopamine levels rise in the anticipation of pleasure and not as a response to pleasure. I especially like that comment he made regarding reward and religion, “There’s no monkey out there willing to lever press because St. Peter is down the line.”

This pioneering study was led by Peter Parham of Stanford University, and was only possible after the draft genome of H. neanderthalensis was published. The researchers looked at human leukocyte antigens (HLAs), genes important to the functioning of the immune system.

Different regions of the world are known to have unique HLAs, because different variations create specific disease resistances. It would have been advantageous for the earliest modern humans to breed with a species (or subspecies) already adapted to living in a different climate. Moderns could have picked up helpful genes that were already in existence from Neandertal populations, which would have possibly allowed their populations to expand more rapidly. Why wait for random mutation when you can interbreed with a people already successfully adapted to an area?

Neandertal Child Reconstruction

While only approximately 6% of the modern European genome was contributed from earlier hominins, around half of specific HLAs can be attributed to these earlier forms of people. As a form of further substantiation, Europeans have HLA variations present within the Neandertal genome not found in Africans. Interestingly, Asian populations today also have a variation not present anywhere else, which could indicate Denisovan (mystery Siberian hominin) admixture.

As if the draft sequence showing interbreeding was not enough last year– this study has raised the bar on the type of information we can hope to glean from looking at ancient DNA. There was a time when archaeology and anatomy were the only windows we had into our ancestral relatives. It will be exciting to see what is uncovered next.

By Matthew Magnani

Cover via Amazon

June 12^th is the 30^th anniversary of Raiders of the Lost Ark and Indiana Jones remains the world’s most famous archaeologist.  How many real-life archaeologists are household names?  In honor of Indy‘s birthday, I’m posting a revised excerpt of an essay I wrote for the Society for American Archaeology’s Archaeology for the Public website several years ago (see  this link for the complete version):

In 1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark set the tone for virtually every action blockbuster that has been produced since, and it is easily the most well-known fictional film with archaeological content.  Its sequels Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984), Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989), and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) were also very commercially successful.  Despite the differences I’ve outlined (and there are many more), a large segment of the general public associates archaeology with the now legendary character of Indiana Jones.  When people find out you’re an archaeologist, their first question is often “Is it really like Indiana Jones?”  As a result, Indy gets a lot of criticism from professionals who get tired of explaining that archaeology is rewarding, is often full of adventure and excitement, but it’s not very much like Indiana Jones.  But archaeologists and educators can use the popularity of the Indiana Jones movies to their advantage.  These films, by depicting what archaeology isn’t, provide an entertaining opportunity for teachers and students to make comparisons and discuss what archaeology is.

Many of us, especially children and adolescents, are first exposed to the field of archaeology by viewing fictional adventurers like Indiana Jones.  Personally, I first heard the word archaeology when I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark as a kid.  While sitting in that darkened theater, I was so impressed by Indy’s intelligence and determination that I resolved to go to the school library and read more about this mysterious thing called archaeology.  Despite my initial disappointment that archaeologists didn’t carry bullwhips, I quickly became fascinated with real archaeology.  That was 30 years ago and I’m still fascinated.  The Indy movies don’t accurately reflect archaeology, but their popularity has the potential to spark public interest in finding out more about archaeology – the facts behind the fiction.  The archaeologists of tomorrow might very well be sitting at home or in class watching Raiders of the Lost Ark today.  In that sense, Indiana Jones is a hero to movie-goers, educators, and archaeologists alike.

So I argued then, and still believe, that Indiana Jones can help popularize real archaeology.  Evidently, the Archaeological Institute of America shares this belief since Harrison Ford is a member of their governing board.  What do you think?  Is Indiana Jones good for archaeology?  Please share your thoughts and memories of Raiders of the Lost Ark in the comments.

- Jay Fancher