john hawks weblog

paleoanthropology, genetics and evolution

Anthropology 105

  • Radius and ulna

    Mon, 2011-09-26 10:49 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A lab exercise to learn the anatomy of the bones of the lower arm.

    The radius and ulna are the two bones of the lower arm. Rotation of the wrist is actually accomplished by a rotation of the radius around the ulna. The radius is on the lateral side of the arm, while the ulna is medial.

    The radius can turn at the elbow joint, and therefore the part of the radius that articulates with the humerus, called the radial head, has a rounded circumference that allows it to rotate in contact with the proximal ulna. The radius has a large tuberosity on the front, toward the medial side.

    The proximal ulna has a large notch bounded by two bony processes. The olecranon process fits into the olecranon fossa of the humerus, while the coronoid process fits against the anterior surface of the humerus when the elbow is flexed. Between these two processes, a half-moon shaped notch, called the semilunar or trochlear notch, fits strongly around the trochlea of the humerus, creating a stable and strong hinge joint to counter the weak but rotating joint of the radius. The proximal ulna has a notch for the radial head, called the radial notch, which is on the lateral side of the ulna.

    At the distal end, most of the proximal wrist joint is occupied by the distal radius, with the distal ulna free to rotate relative to the wrist. Both bones have pointed styloid processes, which extend on the medial and lateral sides of the wrist.

    What to do: At this station are many right and left radii and ulnae, including some fragmentary bones. Use your time to learn well how to tell right and left apart.

  • Humerus

    Mon, 2011-09-26 09:46 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A lab introduction to the anatomy of the humerus.

    The bone of the upper arm is called the humerus. It articulates with the scapula at the shoulder joint, and the radius and ulna at the elbow.

    The proximal end of the humerus is dominated by a half-spherical articular surface, called the head, that forms the ball of the ball-and-socket joint of the shoulder. The head points medially into the shoulder joint. On the lateral side, a bump called the greater tubercle projects proximally.

    The distal end of the humerus has two articular surfaces. The first of these, called the trochlea, is a pulley-shaped surface that accommodates the ulna. The other, called the capitulum, is a small spherical structure lateral to the trochlea that articulates with the head of the radius. The capitulum is on the lateral side, the trochlea is medial.

    On the posterior surface, above the trochlea is a large dent, called the olecranon fossa. The proximal end of the ulna fits into this fossa when the elbow is extended.

    What to do: At this station are many right and left humeri, including some fragmentary bones. Work on telling right and left humeri from each other. You will find the distal end of the bone very helpful, with the trochlea medial and capitulum lateral, and the olecranon fossa on the posterior aspect.

  • Primate vertebral numbers

    Sun, 2011-09-18 20:36 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory exercise to explore the numbers of vertebrae in different primates.

    Between the skull and the sacrum, humans have 24 vertebrae. Well, most humans, anyway. Sometimes humans have a few more or less.

    Humans vary in the length of the lumbar region, the number of vertebrae between the lowest ribs and the pelvis. The typical number is five, but some people have only four. Rarely, people have six lumbar vertebrae.

    Non-human primates also vary in the number of lumbar vertebrae. This variation is connected to locomotion. Species with vertical, suspensory postures have relatively short lumbar columns. Chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans have fewer lumbar vertebrae than humans. Quadrupedal primates, including most monkeys and prosimians, have longer lumbar columns than humans.

    What to do: This station has several skeletons of different kinds of primates — both New World and Old World monkeys and apes. Determine the number of lumbar vertebrae in each of these primates. Do these primates vary in the other segments? Do they ,for instance, have the same number of ribs?

    Anatomy of the vertebral column
    Study questions: 
    1. Consider the number of lumbar vertebrae in gorillas and orangutans. Explain how these apes each have relatively few lumbar vertebrae and humans have more than either. What do you suppose was the number of vertebrae in the common ancestors of these apes and humans?
    2. Why do quadrupeds have a longer lumber spine?
    3. Why do you think there is very little variation in the cervical spine?
  • The anatomy of a vertebra

    Sun, 2011-09-18 20:23 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory exercise to introduce the anatomical features of vertebrae.

    Each vertebra has several parts. The most important are:

    Body
    The largest part of the vertebra, this is a cylindrical column of spongy bone, padded by cartilaginous discs above and below.
    Vertebral foramen
    The hole in the center of the vertebra, through which passes the spinal cord.
    Spinous process
    A projection on the posterior aspect of the bone, together these form the ``spine'' that can be felt from outside the skin.
    Transverse processes
    Left and right, these project from the vertebra allowing muscular and ligamentous attachments.

    Additionally, the first two vertebrae below the head are special in their anatomy. The first, called the atlas, holds up the head and lacks any vertebral body. Its anatomy is like a simple ring of bone. The second, the axis has a large projection from its superior surface, called the dens, or odontoid process, which stabilizes rotation of the neck.

    The rest of the vertebrae are slightly different from each other, depending on the part of the spine. The transverse processes of the cervical vertebrae tend to be split, or bifid, as are the spinous processes of C3-C6. The thoracic vertebrae have articular surfaces for the ribs, called rib facets, and their spinous processes are long and directed downward (caudally). The lumbar vertebrae have very large and thick vertebral bodies and stout spinous processes.

    Anatomy of the vertebral column
  • The different types of vertebrae

    Sun, 2011-09-18 20:17 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory exercise to introduce the different segments of the vertebral column

    The spine extends from the head to the sacrum, and in most people consists of 24 vertebrae. The vertebral column can be divided into three segments:

    Cervical
    The first seven vertebrae, all in the neck. These are smaller and lightly built.
    Thoracic
    Twelve vertebrae, each articulating with the twelve pairs of ribs.
    Lumbar
    The lower five vertebrae, between the ribs and the sacrum. These have the largest vertebral bodies.
    Anatomy of the vertebral column

    Each of the three segments of the spine has a curve. The cervical spine and the lumbar curve both are convex anteriorly, while the thoracic spine curves the opposite way, convex posteriorly. Each vertebra is shaped a bit like a wedge to support these curves, especially noticeable with the five lumbar vertebrae. The lumbar curve is unique to humans, allowing us to maintain a vertical posture above our pelvis.

  • Reading a genetic map: the beta-globin gene cluster

    Sun, 2011-09-18 16:50 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    The beta-globin gene cluster provides a way to examine how a genetic map portrays the positions and sizes of genes.

    A genetic map shows the location of genes and other DNA elements on a chromosome. The Human Genome Project created a genetic map that lists more than 3 billion nucleotides of DNA in an order that represents a partial consensus of many human DNA sequences. This map continues to be refined as we develop more understanding of human DNA structure and variation. The results are openly available to the public for download or analysis.

    We can examine this human genetic map by using a tool called a genome browser. One of the best-known genome browsers was constructed and is maintained by the Genome Bioinformatics Group of the University of California-Santa Cruz, called the UCSC Genome Browser. The tool can be found on the web at http://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgGateway, and a broader set of genome tools can be found at the home page, http://genome.ucsc.edu/

    One of the most widely known molecular structures is hemoglobin. Normal hemoglobin in human red blood cells is labeled HbA. Hemoglobin is not a protein, but a structure of four proteins bound with a smaller molecule called heme. An iron atom in the heme can bind oxygen, so that hemoglobin can transport oxygen throughout the body. The heme is strongly associated with one each of α and β protein subunits. Because HbA includes four subunits, two α and two β, it can be denoted α2β2.

    The protein subunits of hemoglobin are each encoded by a separate gene. We are going to explore the regions around these two genes, HBA1 (α-globin) and HBB (β-globin).

    Guide to using the genome browser

    Some representative screenshots from the UCSC Genome Browser. The middle picture shows the whole length of the database entry for HBB, while the bottom shows the view zoomed in to the base level. Both screenshots were taken with all genome browser tracks turned off except for the UCSC Genes track.

    1. Open a browser window with the UCSC Genome Browser search page.
    2. Enter "beta globin" as the search term.
    3. The results page will give a list of several genes as possible matches. The first on the list is HBB, which is the β-globin gene. Choose it.
    4. The browser will now show you a graphic representing the region of the HBB gene. At any time, you can enter HBB into the "gene" query box to return to this location.
    5. The result will look something like this:
    6. Genome browser result for HBB, showing the length of the whole gene. The only database track in this result is "UCSC Genes", all others are turned off.

    7. The "position" box and the chromosome ideogram both show which chromosome we are looking at: Chromosome 11. The scale at the top of the genetic map will tell you the range of positions that is covered by the coding sequence of HBB. At the top of the figure, you can see the positions, here running from 5,203,500 past 5,204,500 — more than a thousand bases across, in other words.
    8. HBB has three exons, or coding intervals, and these are indicated in the figure by the darker bars. The three dark bars are connected by thin lines that represent the two non-coding intervals, or introns. The HBB gene runs from right to left in the figure, as indicated by the small "arrow feathers" coming off the line running through the exons. In addition, the database has a second entry for HBB, which comes from an alternative transcript found in some tissue samples.
    9. Click the button that says "base", or zoom in by dragging the mouse across a small part of the gene display. You should be able to see the nucleotide sequence at the top of the display.
    10. Here you can see the actual sequence of human chromosome 11, across roughly 80 bases. The initial zoom brings us into the intron between exons 2 and 3 of the HBB gene. You can explore this zoom level by clicking on the arrows. Eventually you will reach the exons, where the UCSC Genes display can show you the amino acid sequence of the gene.
    11. Return to the display of the whole HBB gene. Again, you will see the interval covering all three exons of HBB.
    12. Now click the button that says "zoom out 10x." Now instead of looking at roughly 1000 bases, you are looking at more than 10,000 — or 10 kilobases. You will be looking at the immediate neighborhood around HBB. Notice to the right of HBB is another gene, HBD. This is δ (delta) globin, which takes the place of β-globin in a small fraction of circulating hemoglobin. You can click on this gene to get more information about it.
    13. Genome browser display zoomed out 10 times from the HBB gene. To the bottom right, you can see the map position of HBD, human δ-globin.

    14. Zoom out again. Instead of 10 kilobases, you are now looking at more than 100 kilobases of chromosome 11. Now you will see a string of genes stretching downstream of HBB. First HBD, then HBBP1, HBG1 and HBG2, and HBE1. All of these genes are structurally similar to β-globin. The reason why they are similar is that they all originated by gene duplications during the early evolution of vertebrates. Originally, they were copies of a single sequence, but they became different over time and some of them took on new functions. This area is called the β-globin gene cluster.
    15. The gene labeled HBBP1 is a pseudogene. It has a structure similar to a functional gene but does not correspond to a functional gene product. This kind of pseudogene is almost like a fossil within the genome.
    16. The γ (gamma) and ε (epsilon) globin proteins are part of variant hemoglobins. Fetal hemoglobin, HbF, is produced before birth and includes two γ instead of two β subunits, making it α2γ2. Embryonic hemoglobin produced in the embryonic yolk sac includes ε subunits along with ζ (zeta) subunits instead of α.

    If you have time at this station, enter "HBA1" in the genome search box. This is the α-globin gene found in HbA.

    1. On which chromosome is α-globin? Is it inherited together with β-globin?
    2. Zoom out on this region. You will find the other genes in the α-globin gene cluster. What are they?
    3. What would you hypothesize about the origin of these genes?
  • Statures of fossil Homo

    Tue, 2011-09-13 00:25 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory exercise that applies regression equations to estimate the statures of some fossil hominin femora.

    Homo erectus and Neandertals were more or less human-sized. That may not be saying much, since we are so variable in stature ourselves.

    In this case, the fossils don't entirely speak for themselves. To estimate the sizes of ancient people, working with long bones, we must apply some kind of regression or other estimation method.

    1. KNM-ER 1481 is a complete femur from Koobi Fora, Kenya, approximately 1.9 million years old. Without any associated skull or teeth, we can't be sure what species it represents. Many scientists attribute it to early Homo because of its differences from known australopithecine femora.
    2. The Trinil femur was found by Eugene Dubois in 1892 as he excavated fossil beds at Trinil, Java. He had found a human skullcap the year before, and after finding the femur's humanlike anatomy, Dubois named a new species, Pithecanthropus erectus. This is the original Homo erectus femur. Today, we are less certain about its age and association with the partial skull. It may be a million years old, but it may be substantially younger.
    3. The femur from Spy, Belgium, represents a Neandertal who lived around 45,000 years ago. This femur is part of a more complete skeleton, and exhibits many of the characteristic features of Neandertal long bones, including the great thickness and curvature of the shaft and very large joint surfaces.
    4. What to do: Here you will examine the fossil cast femora, using regression equations to predict stature of the individual.

      1. Determine the sex of the individual. The femur head diameter is a relatively good indicator of sex. If it is less than 44 mm, the individual is likely to be a female. More than 46 mm, and the individual is likely to be a male. In between these values, you may need more information — either from the rest of the skeleton or from the size and robusticity of the femur itself.
      2. Measure the maximum length of the femur. This measurement is taken using the osteometric board, and represents the maximum distance from any points on the proximal and distal ends of the bone. Take your measurement in centimeters.
      3. Apply the correct regression equation. These are specific to sex and race. The femora at this station come from donated anatomy collections from the early 20th century, and represent people of European ancestry. The male and female regression equations for this population are listed at right.
    Study questions: 
    1. What are some weaknesses of estimating body size for fossil humans by applying a regression drawn from a contemporary human population?
  • Heritability and stature

    Mon, 2011-09-12 01:42 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Heritability is the proportion of variance in a phenotype explained by additive genetic variance.

    Tall parents tend to have tall children.

    That's a simple generalization, not an absolute statement. You may be a short person with two tall parents. If you know many families, you'll probably know someone who is an exception to the rule. Two short parents may have a very tall daughter, and two siblings may be very different heights.

    Still, if we look at many families we will find that the stature of the parents lets us make some fair predictions about the statures of their children. We can look at data to quantify just how parent and offspring heights are related.

    For example, here is a plot of the statures of students in my Anthropology 105 class in 2010, compared to the mean of their mothers' and fathers' statures. The average of mother and father's heights are the midparent stature.

    Young men in this class have a taller average stature than young women. The picture separates men and women, and both taller sons and daughters tend to come from taller parents.

    We can do a bit better than this to quantify the relationship of the parents' and sons' and daughters' statures: We can put lines on the graph to show how the sons' and daughters' heights tend to increase with the midparent stature:

    Each of these lines is called a linear regression between midparent stature and offspring stature. The linear regression is the line that has the smallest squared distance from all of the points, added together.

    The squared distance is special. In statistics, the average squared distance from all points to the mean is called the variance. When we consider a trait like stature, there are many possible biological causes that can contribute to individuals being taller or shorter than the average. In statistical terms, these causes are all factors that contribute to the variance of stature.

    In the chart above, the linear regression represents the amount of the variance of the stature of the offspring that was contributed by the variance of their midparent statures. Parent statures can predict offspring statures and the linear regression is the prediction.

    It's not a perfect prediction. Take a look at the midparent value of 160 cm. When the midparent average is 160 cm, the regressions predict that daughters will be 156 cm and sons will be 168 cm. Out of Anthropology 105 students last year, two men had parents with an average of 160 cm, and both of them were very close to 168 cm in height — a good prediction! But the two women with parents this stature have very different heights. One is only 148 cm, the other 162, both more than 2 inches from the predicted value, in different directions. The regression gives the best prediction we can make from the parents, but there is obviously a lot of variation that can't be predicted in that way.

    Let's look more closely at the female students. The following chart adds together females from several years of Anthropology 105, with their midparent statures.

    The slope of the regression across these 300 women is 0.72. That means that roughly 72 percent of the variance of the students' stature can be attributed to variance in their midparent stature.

    This regression is special in genetics. Daughters resemble their parents because they inherit genes from them. The regression between the midparent and daughters' statures gives us a way to estimate the effects of those genes. In fact, the proportion of variance in a trait that can be explained by genes is the same as the slope of the regression. Geneticists call this proportion the heritability of stature. In my Anthropology 105 classes over the last few years, we would estimate the heritability of stature as 0.72, or 72%.

    Again, there are exceptions. Sometimes parents give other things to their children besides genes. The right foods, the right resources can make a difference to growth and development. And some genes can have unexpected effects. Most obviously, some genes make sons a lot taller than daughters, which is why we've considered the two sexes separately.

    The heritability of a trait is a powerful concept. It's important to understand some of its strengths and limits:

    1. Heritability refers to a population. A female in my Anthropology 105 class may be taller or shorter than her parents. We can't predict 72% of that student's stature; instead, 72% of the variance in the students can be explained by the variance among their parents.
    2. Traits with higher heritability have a lower influence from the environment. Traits that are highly influenced by the environment have a lower heritability.
    3. The response of a population to selection on a trait is determined by the heritability.
    4. Geneticists can look at other relatives besides parents to estimate heritability. Some of the strongest estimates come from comparing identical twins (who have the same genes) to fraternal twins (who share on average half their genes).
    5. Estimating heritability doesn't require us to know anything about the actual genes themselves.

    The last point is very important. We can quantify the influence of genes without knowing anything about which genes even affect a trait. Francis Galton invented the parent-offspring method of estimating heritability, more than twenty years before the word "gene" was coined. Remembering this helps to remind us that the concept of heritability is limited. It is not a guide to how genes work, it is a simple scale of which traits have a stronger or weaker genetic influence.

    Because it is a proportion, heritability varies only between zero and one. A trait with zero heritability is one for which none of the variance can be explained by the parents' variance.

    Heritability may be very low because the individuals in the population have little genetic variability. For example, an orchard of apple trees may consist of genetically identical individuals that are clones of a single parent tree. The apples (hopefully) all taste the same. But the trees may be very different in height, branch form, and the number of apples. These traits may be strongly influenced both by the environments of individual trees and by chance. By contrast, wild populations of oak trees are not made up of clones. The heights of individual trees are still strongly influenced by environments, but they may also be influenced by differences in genes.

    Study questions: 
    1. Make a list of three traits that have low heritability in humans. Why are these mostly influenced by the environment and not genes?
    2. Are there environments inhabited by human populations that would make the influence of genes seem to be less on some traits?
    3. Suppose that the linear regression between midparent and offspring for a trait has a slope of 0.56. What would you estimate as the heritability of this trait?
  • The normal distribution and anthropometrics

    Wed, 2011-09-07 12:31 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A combination of random genetic and environmental factors cause individuals to cluster near the average for many traits we measure.

    Organisms within a population are variable; they are not all the same. When you measure a lot of organisms, you begin to notice that you can predict some things about their variation.

    For example, stature is a very simple measurement so it may be surprising how much it can tell anthropologists a lot about individuals and populations. Stature changes as an individual grows and matures, and as she ages. The rate at which stature changes during growth reflects health and nutrition. The average stature in different populations reflects their environment and their evolutionary history. Stature can even tell us about ancient climates and migrations of peoples in the past.

    To get at such interesting information, anthropologists have to understand how stature varies within a single population of people. This involves understanding some statistics.

    For many traits that we measure including stature, a simple rule is at play: Most individuals will be near the average, and few individuals will be very far from the average. Here's a plot called a histogram, showing the stature of female students from my course last year:

    Female student stature histogram

    A histogram of female students' stature in my Anthropology 105 course. The curving line represents the normal distribution with the same mean and standard deviation as the women in the class.

    In this plot, the x axis is stature (body height) in 5 cm increments. The height of each bar represents the number of women who have statures within that 5 cm bin. For example, 28 women had statures between 160 and 165 cm, but only 4 women had statures between 145 and 150 cm. No one was shorter than 145 cm, and no one was taller than 185 cm. The histogram shows how many individuals fall in each bin, a quick way to see the distribution of the observations.

    The mean stature of women in the class was 163.4 cm. The standard deviation of their statures was 6.7 cm. The standard deviation is how different women were on average from the class mean. How often are women far from the average stature? We can make another histogram to show this for the class:

    Most of the women had statures between 157 and 170 cm — in other words, within one standard deviation of the mean. As we look farther and farther from the mean, we see fewer and fewer women with statures that extreme.

    Patterns like this one are very common in natural populations. It is in fact so common that we call it the normal distribution. Most individuals have traits near the average, and we see fewer and fewer individuals as we look far from the average. In that sense, there's something about the individuals in a human population that seems like it's not random: If you draw any individual by random chance and measure him or her, you're more likely to find a person near the average height than far from the average. You can't predict the stature, but if you guess the stature will near the average, you'll be right a good fraction of the time. It's not like flipping a coin or rolling a die.

    Why does this pattern emerge?

    Suppose we have a fair die, and roll it once. We should have an equal chance of rolling a one, two, three, four, five or six. If we roll the die many times, we should start seeing around the same proportion of ones as we see sixes, fives, and threes. This is one way to look at random chance: Each outcome has an equal probability of happening, and we can't predict which will happen in any given trial.

    Now suppose we take two rolls of the die and add them both together. Our trials are still random. We might roll a one and then a three, or a five and then a two, or two sixes. But when we look at the sum of the two numbers, we see a pattern begin to emerge. You will see a lot of sevens, fewer threes and nines, and very few twos or twelves. In other words, you can begin to predict that the outcome will be near the average.

    Why is this? There's only one way to get a sum equal to two: You have to roll two ones, "snake-eyes". But there are lots of ways to get a seven. You can get a one and a six, or a six and a one. You can get a three and a four, or a five and a two. In fact, there are twelve different ways to get a seven, and if you roll many pairs of dice, you'll get on average twelve times as many sevens as twos.

    In dice, if we combine two different random events, we will be more likely to see an outcome near the average than at an extreme. If we roll ten dice, or fifty, we become more and more likely to see an outcome near the average.

    A similar principle applies in biology. A person's body grows by a series of genetic and environmental events. Within a population, some of the factors that affect growth are random. People vary in the combination of genes they carry because of the random chance of inheriting them from their parents. And people vary in the environments they experience because of the random chance of who they are and where they live. A person's stature, in other words, is affected by many, many influences. Some genes may tend to make stature a little taller, others make it a little shorter. Some foods tend to make stature a little taller, others a little shorter. The combination of all these things determines how tall a person will be, and when we consider a population of people all together, they will tend to be clumped near the average.

    This is why many traits follow the normal distribution. But there are exceptions. A person's ABO blood type, for example, is a trait that has essentially no influence from the environment and is entirely determined by a combination of alleles for one particular gene. For blood type, there is no normal distribution in humans. We are A, B, AB, or O, period.

    Also, some biological factors may be very large in their effects. When we look at human stature, the largest single influence on stature is sex. Males average taller than females. Like most things, this is not an absolute — some tall women stand above the average man. But the difference between the sexes is enough to really change the distribution of stature in the population. When we look at females alone, we see a normal distribution, but when we mix individuals of both sexes, the pattern is much flatter. People are less clustered near the average, because half of them average taller and half average shorter.

    Study questions: 
    1. Can you think of some other biological traits that do not vary according to a normal distribution?
    2. If you look at individuals within a single family, should they also have statures that vary according to a normal distribution? Why or why not?
    3. What is the importance of the standard deviation when we interpret variation in the population?
  • Meet Daubentonia madagascarensis

    Wed, 2011-09-07 09:21 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory station at which students encounter the skull and mandible of the aye-aye

    The aye-aye is possibly the world's strangest primate. The species is native to Madagascar, and falls into the family of all primates from that island, the lemurs. But the aye-aye is a very specialized lemur, with anatomical features and behaviors not found in other lemurs.

    Aye-ayes hunt for insects, using their fingers to tap on branches and locate grubs and insects that have burrowed into the bark and wood. Their middle finger is slender and elongated, with a claw on the end. They use this to probe inside insect burrows and take them out.

    Like some other lemurs, aye-ayes are nocturnal creatures, active at night. They are highly endangered and survive only in two forest preserves.

    The skull and mandible of the aye-aye are very distinctive compared to most other primates, even other lemurs.

    Study questions: 
    1. Inspect the dentition, or teeth, of the aye-aye and compare them to the other primates at this station. Do they have the same number of teeth?
    2. Nocturnal mammals tend to have larger eyes than diurnal mammals, which are active during the day. How can you compare the orbit size of the aye-aye to the other primates at this station? Are there others you think are likely to be nocturnal?
    Study terms: 

Pages

Subscribe to Anthropology 105

Neandertals

For years, I've worked on their bones. Now I'm working on their genes. Read more about the science studying these ancient people.

Denisova

From a finger bone of an ancient human came the record of a completely unexpected population. My lab is working on the science of the Denisova genome.

Acceleration

The advent of agriculture caused natural selection to speed up greatly in humans. We're uncovering some of the ways that populations have rapidly changed during the last 10,000 years.

Malapa

Just outside Johannesburg, the Malapa site is producing some of the most exciting finds in human evolution. This site is the headquarters of the Malapa Soft Tissue Project.