Skip to content

Who Lies Sleeping? Home

There have been ages when other things ruled on the earth, and they had great stone cities. Remains are rarely, but still to be, found as cyclopean stones scarcely recognisable as constructions. Their builders all died vast epochs of time before man came, but there were conditions which could revive them when the cycle of being turned once more into the correct quadrant, when their successors proved to their makers that they had forsaken all responsibility for their tenancy as guardians of the earth.

Book Cover: Who Lies Sleeping?

Book Cover: Who Lies Sleeping?

And so it is not to be thought, that man is either the oldest or the last of earth’s masters. His predecessors wait—not in the world we know but at its edges. They rest asleep—tranquil, elemental and—except when they stir—unseen. For, after the Helliconian Spring of love and lust, the son-lover begins to sere the earth and the serpent is yet poised, motionless but alert, for its the moment to strike.

It is the serpent that conquers and enjoys the fruits of the tree of life. Must it ever be so?

These posts cover the content of the whole book plus supplementary pages and additional evidence. It begins here: Start.

Study finds Triceratops and Torosaurus were different stages of the same dinosaur

Study finds Triceratops, Torosaurus were different stages of one dinosaur

For a hundred years, scientists have believed that Triceratops and Torosaurus were two different types of dinosaurs. Triceratops had a three horned skull with a shortish frill, whereas Torosaurus had a much bigger frill with two large holes in it.

Montana State University paleontologists John Scannella and Jack Horner said in the July 14 issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology that Triceratops and Torosaurus are the same dinosaur at different stages of growth. Scannella is a doctoral student in earth sciences, and Horner is Regents Professor of Paleontology at MSU's Museum of the Rockies. The discovery contributes to an unfolding theory that dinosaur diversity was extremely depleted at the end of the dinosaur age.

Scannella and Horner benefited from an extensive 10 year study of the Hell Creek Formation in Eastern Montana. Led by Horner, the large scale project was conducted to reconstruct the ecosystems that existed during the Cretaceous Period that ended about 65 million years ago when there was a mass extinction of dinosaurs. Field crews collected hundreds of specimens.

They examined more than 50 Triceratops specimens for their study. More than 30 were skulls that came out of the Hell Creek Formation and are housed at the Museum of the Rockies. The paleontologists also examined skulls from several North American institutions, including the American Museum of Natural History in New York, the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC, and the Peabody Museum of Natural History at Yale University in New Haven, Conn.

They also measured the length, width and thickness of the skulls, and examined the microstructure, surface textures and shape changes of the frills. Microscope studies revealed that the tissues of Torosaurus specimens are more heavily remodeled than those of even the largest Triceratops, strongly suggesting that Torosaurus specimens are in fact adult Triceratops, Scannella said. Even in Triceratops that were previously considered to be adults, the skull was still undergoing dramatic changes.

Many undergraduate students, as well as volunteers from around the world, participated in the project by discovering and excavating the Triceratops specimens in the field. Some undergraduates also helped prepare the fossils once they were brought back to the Museum of the Rockies.

Forty percent of the specimens came from Triceratops at different stages of growth. Some of the skulls belonged to juvenile Triceratops and roughly the size of footballs. Other skulls are the size of a small car. The confusion over Triceratops and Torosaurus was easy to understand because juvenile dinosaurs were not just miniature versions of adults. They looked different, and their skulls changed radically as they matured. Recent studies have revealed extreme changes in the skulls of pachycephalosaurs, tyrannosaurs and other dinosaurs that died out about 65 million years ago in North America. Scannella said:

Paleontologists are at a disadvantage because we can't go out into the field and observe a living Triceratops grow up from a baby to an adult. We have to put together the story based on fossils. In order to get the complete story, you need to have a large sample of fossils from many individuals representing different growth stages.

The Triceratops study suggests that it is critical that paleontologists consider ontogeny, growth from a juvenile to an adult, as a source of relevant morphological variations before naming new species of dinosaurs to account for variation between specimens. Scannella added:

Without considering changes in shape throughout ontogeny, we overestimate dinosaur diversity and hence produce an unrealistic view of the paleoecology of these animals.

Scannella said he and Horner tried for three years to look for alternative explanations for their findings. They finally agreed that the Triceratops and Torosaurus were the same dinosaur.

Every avenue of investigation we took in attempts to falsify the hypothesis only supported the idea further.
Scannella

Torosaurus specimens are much rarer than Triceratops. None of the Torosaurus specimens came from immature animals. All Torosaurus skulls were large. If Torosaurus is actually the mature form of Triceratops, why are Torosaurus specimens rare compared to Triceratops? Perhaps mortality was high for Triceratops before they reached their fully mature morphology.

Scannella presented his and Horner's findings at the 2009 Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conference in Bristol, England, and it was met with equal parts intrigue and skepticism.

Skepticism is important and a good thing, but so far, all the evidence we have strongly supports the idea.

The finding that Torosaurus was a grown up Triceratops adds fuel to the theory that dinosaur diversity at the end of the Cretaceous Period and Mesozoic Era was far less than previously thought.

A major decline in diversity may have put the dinosaurs in a vulnerable state at the time when the large meteor struck the Earth at the end of the Cretaceous Period. It may have been the combination of the two factors—lower diversity and a major global catastrophe—that resulted in the extinction of all the non-avian dinosaurs. If the apparent decline in diversity wasn't triggered by a meteor—a relatively uncommon event, it may have been caused by circumstances which are more likely to affect diversity today, perhaps large scale sea level fluctuations or climate change. If so, Triceratops may have a lot to teach us about biodiversity and extinction today. By studying patterns of diversity in the past, we attain insights into current ecological trends.
Scannella

Complete Neanderthal genome yields insights into human evolution and evidence of interbreeding

Model head of a Neanderthal man

Updated

Physorg.com, and nhm.ac.uk: The genetic code of the Neanderthals has been revealed for the first time, giving surprising clues to their intimate relations with modern humans, scientists report in the journal Science.

An international team analysed DNA from the remains of 3 Neanderthal individuals. After extracting ancient DNA from the 40,000 year old bones of Neanderthals, the scientists obtained a draft sequence of the whole Neanderthal genetic code, or genome, the first time this has been done. They also compared the Neanderthal genome to modern humans, Homo sapiens, from different parts of the world. Neanderthals are usually regarded as a separate species, Homo neanderthalensis. They were our closest relatives and they died out about 30,000 years ago.

The Neanderthal Genome Project

Richard E Green, an assistant professor of biomolecular engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz, began working on the Neanderthal genome as a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. Svante Pääbo, director of the institute’s genetics department, leads the Neanderthal Genome Project, which involves an international consortium of researchers. David Reich, a population geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, also played a leading role in the new study and the ongoing investigation of the Neanderthal genome.

The Neanderthal genome sequence allows us to begin to define all those features in our genome where we differ from all other organisms on the planet, including our closest evolutionary relative, the Neanderthals.
Svante Pääbo

The sequence was derived from DNA extracted from three Neanderthal bones found in the Vindiga Cave in Croatia. Smaller amounts of sequence data were also obtained from three bones from other sites. Two of the Vindiga bones could be dated by carbon dating of collagen and were found to be about 38,000 and 44,000 years old.

Deriving a genome sequence—representing the genetic code on all of an organism’s chromosomes—from such ancient DNA is a remarkable technological feat. The Neanderthal bones were not well preserved, and more than 95 percent of the DNA extracted from them came from bacteria and other organisms that had colonized the bone. The DNA itself was degraded into small fragments and had been chemically modified in many places.

The researchers identified a catalog of genetic features unique to modern humans by comparing the Neanderthal, human, and chimpanzee genomes. Genes involved in cognitive development, skull structure, energy metabolism, and skin morphology and physiology are among those highlighted in the study as likely to have undergone important changes in recent human evolution.

The researchers had to develop special methods to extract the Neanderthal DNA and ensure that it was not contaminated with human DNA. They used new sequencing technology to obtain sequence data directly from the extracted DNA without amplifying it first. Although genome scientists like to sequence a genome at least four or five times to ensure accuracy, most of the Neanderthal genome has been covered only one to two times so far.

Interbreeding

Neanderthals lived in much of Europe and western Asia, coexisting with humans for thousands of years before dying out 30,000 years ago. Until now, scientists could only speculate whether Neanderthals ever interbred with modern humans—fossil evidence led some scientists to speculate that interbreeding may have occurred—but the team’s results revealed some surprises. Modern humans outside of Africa share genetic information with Neanderthals, so they probably interbred with Neanderthals soon after they left Africa around 60,000 years ago, leaving Neanderthal DNA sequences in the genomes of present day non Africans.

In all probability, there was gene flow from Neanderthals to modern humans.
Richard E Green
Neanderthal

The Neanderthal DNA signal shows up not only in the genomes of Europeans, but also in people from East Asia and Papua New Guinea, where Neanderthals never lived. Green said:

The scenario is not what most people had envisioned. We found the genetic signal of Neanderthals in all the non African genomes, meaning that the admixture occurred early on, probably in the Middle East, and is shared with all descendants of the early humans who migrated out of Africa. We are just scratching the surface. The Neanderthal genome is a goldmine of information about recent human evolution, and it will be put to use for years to come.

The study did not address the functional significance of the finding that between 1 and 4 percent of the genomes of non Africans is derived from Neanderthals. But Green said that there is no evidence that anything genetically important came over from Neanderthals. The signal was sparsely distributed across the genome. If there was something that conferred a fitness advantage, we probably would have found it already by comparing human genomes.

A new understanding of the evolutionary path of modern humans

Professor Chris Stringer, the Natural History Museum’s human origins expert, is one of the architects of the “Out of Africa” theory, which explains how all humans living today share an African origin, and that those outside Africa migrated out in small groups during the last 60,000 years. His book The Origin of Our Species will be published early next year. He explains:

This research suggests that the genomes of people from Europe, China and New Guinea lie slightly closer to the Neanderthal sequence than do those of Africans. The most likely explanation for this finding is that the ancestors of people in Europe, China and New Guinea interbred with Neanderthals—or at least with populations that had a component of Neanderthal genes—in North Africa, Arabia or the Middle East, as they were exiting Africa, but before they spread out across the rest of the world.

Previous genetic studies

There have been genetic studies on Neanderthals before, Prof Stringer points out:

The first tiny piece of DNA from a Neanderthal fossil was published in 1997, and since then, with improvements in recovery techniques and computing power, 20 Neanderthals have yielded up increasing amounts of ancient DNA.

These DNA studies support evidence from the fossil record, showing that Neanderthals split from modern humans around 400,000 years ago. And similarly, studies on DNA from living people support fossil records showing that modern humans share an African origin within the last 200,000 years.

As one of the architects of “Out of Africa”, I have regarded the Neanderthals as representing a separate lineage, and most likely a separate species from Homo sapiens. Although I have never ruled out the possibility of interbreeding, I have considered this to have been small and insignificant in the bigger picture of our evolution – for example, the results of isolated interbreeding events could easily have been lost in the intervening millennia. Now, the Neanderthal genome strongly suggests those genes were not lost, and that many of us outside of Africa have some Neanderthal inheritance. Any functional significance of these shared genes remains to be determined, but that will certainly be a focus for the next stages of this fascinating area of research.
Prof Stringer

Comparison with Chimps

As well as comparing the Neanderthal genome with modern humans, the team also compared it with chimps. They found that genetic changes linked to skin and bone, metabolism, and brain functions, were unique to Homo sapiens.

The draft Neanderthal sequence is probably riddled with errors, Green said, but having the human and chimpanzee genomes for comparison makes it extremely useful despite its limitations. Places where humans differ from chimps, while Neanderthals still have the ancestral chimp sequence, may represent uniquely human genetic traits. Such comparisons enabled the researchers to catalog the genetic changes that have become fixed or have risen to high frequency in modern humans during the past few hundred thousand years.

It sheds light on a critical time in human evolution since we diverged from Neanderthals. What adaptive changes occurred in the past 300,000 years as we were becoming fully modern humans? That’s what I find most exciting. Right now we are still in the realm of identifying candidates for further study.
R E green

The ancestral lineages of humans and chimpanzees are thought to have diverged about 5 or 6 million years ago.

Recent Gene Flow

By analyzing the Neanderthal genome and genomes of present-day humans, Green and his colleagues estimated that the ancestral populations of Neanderthals and modern humans separated between 270,000 and 440,000 years ago.The evidence for more recent gene flow between Neanderthals and humans came from an analysis showing that Neanderthals are more closely related to some present day humans than to others. The researchers looked at places where the DNA sequence is known to vary among individuals by a single “letter”. Comparing different individuals with Neanderthals, they asked how frequently the Neanderthal sequence matches that of different humans.

The frequency of Neanderthal matches would be the same for all human populations if gene flow between Neanderthals and humans stopped before human populations began to develop genetic differences. But that’s not what the study found. Looking at a diverse set of modern humans—including individuals from Southern Africa, West Africa, Papua New Guinea, China, and Western Europe—the researchers found that the frequency of Neanderthal matches is higher for non Africans than for Africans.

Even a little interbreeding could account for these results. The researchers estimated that the gene flow from Neanderthals to humans occurred between 50,000 and 80,000 years ago. The best explanation is that the admixture occurred when early humans left Africa and encountered Neanderthals for the first time. Green said:

How these peoples would have interacted culturally is not something we can speculate on in any meaningful way. But knowing there was gene flow is important, and it is fascinating to think about how that may have happened.

The researchers were not able to rule out one possible alternative explanation for their findings. In that scenario, the signal they detected could represent an ancient genetic substructure that existed within Africa, such that the ancestral population of present day non Africans was more closely related to Neanderthals than was the ancestral population of present day Africans. Green said:

We think that’s not the case, but we can’t rule it out.

The researchers expect many new findings to emerge from ongoing investigations of the Neanderthal genome and other ancient genetic sequences. Pääbo’s group recently found evidence of a previously unknown type of hominid after analyzing DNA extracted from what they had thought was a Neanderthal finger bone found in Siberia. Green is also taking part in that continuing investigation.

Timing of human protein evolution as revealed by massively parallel capture of Neanderthal nuclear DNA sequences, Science on Thursday, May 6, 2010. The paper is available online at
http://www.sciencemag.org/sciencexpress/recent.dtl

Feathers too weak for early bird flight

A fossil imprint of an Archeopteryx

Archaeopteryx, the theropod dinosaur believed to be the earliest bird, was discovered 150 years ago but debates about how flight evolved still persist. The two theories are that flight evolved in running bipeds through a series of short jumps or that Archaeopteryx leapt from tree to tree using its wings as a balancing mechanism.

Dr Robert Nudds at The University of Manchester’s Faculty of Life Sciences, is carrying out a series of biomechanical investigations to shed light on the subject with his colleague Dr Gareth Dyke at University College Dublin. Dr Nudds and Dr Dyke applied a novel biomechanical analysis to the flight feathers of the early birds Archaeopteryx and Confuciusornis to find out if they were strong enough to allow flight.

The dinosaur feathers had a much thinner central stem (rachis) which must have been solid or they would have broken under the lift forces generated during flight, or by gusts of wind. This solid structure is different from modern birds, whose rachises are broader, hollow straws. It is impossible to tell from fossils whether the rachises were solid or hollow. Their feathers must have been different to modern birds and they were poor fliers. Indeed, if the dinosaurs feathers had had hollow rachises, they would not have been able to fly at all. These are surprising results, says Dr Nudds, whose findings are published in Science:

I thought the feathers would be strong enough with a hollow rachis to fly but they werent. Even with a solid rachis, they were not very good. These dinosaurs were rubbish at flying.

The fossils of Confuciusornis and Archaeopteryx suggest flight and at this stage it would be a brave person to say they couldn’t fly, Dr Nudds says, but he believes the dinosaurs feathers were solid and therefore they could fly, though poorly. It suggests the origin of flapping flight might have been later than Archaeopteryx and Confuciusornis.

Nudds thought the feathers were originally for insulation or display purposes then they found that by elongating them they had a parachuting surface, then a gliding surface. Archeopteryx and Confuciusornis were still at a very early stage in the evolution of flight.

Dr Nudds and Dr Dykes work builds on their previous paper, in the Journal Evolution, which investigated how the movement of feathered dinosaur forelimbs evolved into flapping flight. Again they found the flight was a consequence of gradual changes in wing shape and movement—a long, slow evolution. Dr Nudds adds:

Our analysis also shows that Confuciusornis, which is younger by 25 million years, was worse at flying than Archaeopteryx. This raises the further question of lineage—did the dinosaur-bird line branch off, giving rise to flying and flightless birds?

He and Dr Dyke plan to analyse other fossilized feathers to find out when flapping flight evolved. However such specimens are rare.

I dont mind. It makes it more exciting and all the more intriguing.
Dr Nudds

Communicating Science to the Public Effectively

PhysOrg.com. Scientific advances often provoke deep concern on the part of the public, especially when these advances challenge strongly held political or moral perspectives.

An American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ project on Improving the Scientific Community’s Understanding of Public Concerns about Science and Technology examined the ways in which scientists engage with the public, and how their mutual understanding could be improved. More than fifty scientists, engineers, public policy experts, lawyers, ethicists, and journalists participated in a series of workshops that focused on four areas of public concern:

  1. the siting of nuclear waste repositories
  2. the spread of personal genetic information
  3. the next generation of the Internet
  4. the risks and benefits of emerging energy technologies.

Several common themes emerged:

  • Scientists and the public both share a responsibility for the divide. Scientists and technical experts sometimes take for granted that their work will be viewed as ultimately serving the public good. Members of the public can react viscerally and along ideological lines, but they can also raise important issues that deserve consideration.
  • Scientific issues require an anticipatory approach. A diverse group of stakeholders research scientists, social scientists, public engagement experts, and skilled communicators should collaborate early to identify potential scientific controversies and the best method to address resulting public concerns.
  • Communications solutions differ significantly depending on whether a scientific issue has been around for a long time (eg, how to dispose of nuclear waste) or is relatively new (eg, the spread of personal genetic information). In the case of longstanding controversies, social scientists may have had the opportunity to conduct research on public views that can inform communication strategies. For emerging technologies, there will be less reliable analysis available of public attitudes.

In Do Scientists Understand the Public?, a new paper based on the Academy study, science journalist Chris Mooney reviews the workshop findings and recommendations. According to Mooney, scientists and the public often have “very different perceptions of risk, and very different ways of bestowing their trust and judging the credibility of information sources. Perhaps scientists are misunderstanding the public due to their own quirks, assumptions, and patterns of behavior”, says Mooney. Laypeople, meanwhile, tend to “strain their responses to scientific controversies through their ethical or value systems, as well as through their political or ideological outlooks”. The monograph is available online at
http://www.amacad.org/publications/scientistsUnderstand.aspx

A complementary report, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, outlined a comprehensive communication strategy for the establishment of “marine reserves” off the California coast apply not to other areas of science and natural resource management, and could and should be adopted more widely. Kirsten Grorud-Colvert, a research associate in the Department of Zoology at Oregon State University said:

More effective communication is badly needed at almost every level of science. It doesn’t have to be expensive, but we have to get out of the ivory tower, away from our scientific jargon and work more closely with our various audiences.

The researchers noted in their report that scientists who see communication as a top down transmission of information run the risk of alienating key audiences. Those audiences, they said, include resource users, local and national interest groups, communities, land and resource managers, political leaders and the general public. These groups are diverse. Some are well informed and others less so. They have a wide range of values and opinions, and no single form of communication will be most effective at reaching all of them.

But scientists must try to transcend what is often a combative and politicized atmosphere in resource management discussions, the researchers said, and work to base their statements on peer reviewed data. They also must present their findings impartially to build trust.

The comprehensive approach to communication used in the successful establishment of marine reserves in the Channel Islands and along the California coast offers insights useful elsewhere. Among the steps that were used:

  • Scientists worked to “know the audience”, identifying the various group needs, levels of expertise and background, and using that to tailor communication efforts.
  • A few main messages were identified, such as identifying the problem, why it should matter to the audience, what actions are needed, and what benefits would derive from those actions.
  • A diverse range of communication approaches were used, ranging from printed materials to web sites and small group presentations.
  • Efforts were made to identify and track the success of the communication strategy, based either on accomplishing a specific goal or measuring the increase in understanding among target audiences.

In this example, an educational booklet and film titled The Science of Marine Reserves was developed, with input from both marine ecologists and science communication specialists. More than 10,000 of an updated version of the booklet have been distributed to 57 countries. And since its launch in 2008, 600,000 visitors from 220 countries have visited the content on a web site titled Protect Planet Ocean.

Not every science communication effort may be this ambitious, Grorud-Colvert said, but as funding for science becomes more competitive, there’s an increasing demand to make it more relevant to public issues and meet funding agency requirements for outreach strategies to communicate the findings. She added:

Being willing to participate in the public forum and investing time is a big part of this. A lot of scientists just aren’t used to that. But these are important issues and we all need to do a better job of communicating about them with honesty and credibility. We need to help people understand what’s known, what isn’t known and what’s still being debated, and build trust in the process of science.

Giant Dinosaurs did not Chew

Dinosaur research: Chew and stay small

PhysOrg.com—The larger an animal is, the more time it spends eating. This means an elephant hardly has time to sleep. It spends 18 hours every day satisfying its huge appetite. Professor Martin Sander from the University of Bonn explains:

This led us to one of the many riddles that gigantism of dinosaurs puts before us. They were just so large that a day would have had to have 30 hours so that they were able to meet their energy demands.

Martin Sander is a spokesman for an international research group, The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation), which is looking for explanations for this and other paradoxes, and which has funded the project to date. Now for the first time, their research is offering a plausible answer to the question which the group sought to answer six years ago: why the giant long-neck dinosaurs were even able to exist. The researchers also explain why today’s terrestrial animals are nowhere near reaching the Jurassic size record. Mammals chew. Giant dinosaurs gulped.

Chewing helps to digest the food faster. By the grinding process it is broken down and at the same time its surface is enlarged. This way the digestive enzymes are able to attack the food more easily. Sander says: Chewing is a property of prototheria which no large herbivorous terrestrial mammal has got rid of. But chewing requires time—a resource that becomes scarce with increasing size. At the same time the the ones that chew need a large head, since molars and muscles have to be put somewhere. Not without reason elephants are quite big headed.

However, the herbivorous giant dinosaurs had relatively small, light skulls. Only this fact enabled them to grow extremely long necks. And these again helped them to make food intake as efficient as possible. So they did not constantly have to heave their 80 ton body over the Jurassic savanna while looking for their greens. They just remained on the spot and used their agile neck to browse their surroundings. This was particularly relevant for the heavy weights. Smaller dinos simply had far smaller necks compared to their body length.

New teeth every month

Horsetails were part of the sauropods’ diet, for, according to research by the group, they are exceptionally nutritious. However, only a few animals feed off them today. Horsetails contain a lot of silicate which acts like sandpaper, so they are hard on teeth. These dinosaurs did not chew them but just plucked them and gulped them down, offering no problem to teeth! Even so, scientists from the US have recently discovered that sauropods renewed their teeth exceptionally often, some even in a monthly cycle.

Dinosaur research: Chew and stay small

The digestion process itself probably took several days with the giant dinosaurs, due to the missing molars. However, their stomachs were so large that they still provided them with enough energy round the clock. Moreover, the metabolism of these giant animals was incredibly powerful. They possessed amazingly sophisticated lungs, which were far more effective than those of humans. The large number of air sacs which permeated the body cavity and vertebra of the dinosaurs played an important role in their function. Combined with a nifty system of valves they ensured that a gas exchange could take place while breathing in as well as while breathing out. A nice side effect was that the neck got significantly lighter this way. This was important for the statics of the animals. Sander says:

In the history of species the lungs of today’s birds and of the giant dinosaurs have the same origin. This effective air exchange principle was invented about 230 million years ago.

This is consistent with the fact that the earth passed through an oxygen trough at the time. The concentration only 12 to 15 per cent, ie a third less than today. So being able to pick out the few oxygen molecules in the thin air as rapidly and well as possible was a huge advantage.

Scientists announce discovery of 3.6 million-year-old relative of ‘Lucy’

Scientists announce discovery of 3.6 million-year-old relative of ’Lucy’

PhysOrg.com—Scientists from The Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Kent State University, Case Western Reserve University, Addis Ababa University and Berkeley Geochronology Center were part of an international team that discovered and analyzed a 3.6 million year old partial skeleton found in Ethiopia. It’s only the second partial skeleton of A afarensis to be recovered. Renowned Ethiopian fossil hunter Alemayehu Asfaw found the first element of “Kadanuumuu” in February 2005 at Korsi Dora, about 210 air miles northeast of the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa. The specimen was exposed on the surface and further investigation resulted in the recovery of more elements.

Excavations between 2005 and 2008 uncovered an upper arm, a collarbone, neck bones, ribs, pelvis, sacrum, a thighbone, a shinbone and the shoulder blade. Excavations took more than five years to complete. 400,000 years older than the famous “Lucy” skeleton, its remains provide conclusive proof that A afarensis could walk upright freely without the use of its hands. Advanced upright walking, like that of modern humans, occurred much earlier than previously thought.

The partial skeleton belongs to “Lucy’s” species, Australopithecus afarensis, found in the Woranso-Mille area of Ethiopia’s Afar region by a team led by Dr Yohannes Haile-Selassie, Curator and Head of physical anthropology at The Cleveland Museum of Natural History. It was excavated over five years after the discovery of a fragment of the lower arm bone in 2005. The excavation recovered the most complete clavicle and one of the most complete shoulder blades ever found in the human fossil record.

The specimen was nicknamed “Kadanuumuu”, meaning “big man” in the Afar language, indicating its size. The male hominid was between 5 feet; and 5 feet 6 inches tall, while “Lucy” was only about 3 feet 6 inches. “Kadanuumuu” appears to be in good agreement with fossilized footprints dated to about 3.6 million years ago and discovered in Laetoli, a site in Tanzania in eastern Africa. The footprints show that early human ancestors habitually walked upright; there are no knuckle-impressions or signs of abducted toes. Haile-Selassie said:

The KSD skeleton is long sought fossil evidence. It complements the Laetoli footprints and incontrovertibly shows A afarensis was an obligate bipedal since its first appearance in the fossil record. This individual was fully bipedal and could walk almost like modern humans. We can now confidently say that “Lucy” and her relatives were almost as proficient as we are walking on two legs, and that the elongation of our legs came earlier in our evolution than previously thought.

KSD is shorthand for “Korsi Dora”, the name of the locality where the skeleton was found. Co-author Dr C Owen Lovejoy, Kent State University professor of anthropology, explained:

The new specimen tells us much more about the pelvis, thorax, and limb proportions than “Lucy” did alone.

Previous examinations of Lucy led some scientists to conclude A afarensis was not fully adapted to upright walking, partly from her short stature. Long legs are a characteristic of bipedalism. “Kadanuumuu” has most of the same skeletal parts as Lucy and others never previously known, including a significant portion of the rib cage and a nearly complete adult shoulder blade. Before now anthropologists concluded evolutionary ancestors had shoulders more like those of chimpanzees. But “Kadanuumuu” surprised researchers by revealing a shoulder very different from chimpanzees, which are thought to be the closest living relatives of Homo sapiens. Haile-Selassie explained:

Kadanuumuu’s shoulder was also a major discovery. It shows that our ancestor’s shoulder blade and rib cage were much more similar to those of modern humans than previously had been thought. This tells us that chimpanzees have evolved a great deal since we shared a last common ancestor with them.

New Horned Dinosaurs in North America

Scientists announce new horned dinosaur

PHYSorg.com—A new horned dinosaur, Medusaceratops lokii, approximately 20 feet long and weighing more than 2 tons, has been discovered in Montana. The newly identified plant eating dinosaur lived nearly 78 million years ago during the Late Cretaceous period. Its identification marks the discovery of a new genus of horned dinosaur. And another new species of horned dinosaur unearthed in Mexico has larger horns that any other species—up to 4 feet long—and has given scientists fresh insights into the ancient history of western North America, according to a research team led by paleontologists from the Utah Museum of Natural History at the University of Utah.

Montana

Medusaceratops belongs to the Chasmosaurinae subfamily of the horned dinosaur family Ceratopsidae. The other subfamily is Centrosaurinae. The specimen is the first Campanian aged chasmosaurine ceratopsid found in Montana. It is also the oldest known Chasmosaurine ceratopsid.

The new dinosaur was discovered in a bonebed on private land located along the Milk River in North Central Montana. Fossilized bones from the site were acquired by Canada Fossil, Inc, of Calgary, Alberta, in the mid-1990s. The company consulted with Ryan and his colleagues to identify material from the site. At first, the scientists could not make a positive identification.

Medusaceratops had giant brow bones more than 3 feet long over each eye, and a large, shield-like frill off the back of its skull adorned with large curling hooks. Medusaceratops lokii means “Loki’s horned-faced Medusa”, referring to the thickened, fossilized, snake-like hooks on the side of the frill. It was named after Loki, the Norse god of mischief, because the new dinosaur initially caused scientists some confusion.

Scientists announce new horned dinosaur

Ryan said:

At first we couldn’t figure out what we had. Some of the material looked as if it came from a form related to Centrosaurus, a centrosaurine noted for having short brow horns. The rest of the pieces had giant brow horns similar to Triceratops, a chasmosaurine. That’s one of the problems with bonebed seven, though you can collect a large amount of material, much of it is broken and all of it is disarticulated, so the story is rarely clear cut.

Eventually Ryan found a complete articulated skull of a centrosaur with long brow horns in southern Alberta of what appeared to be the new animal from Montana, and named it Albertaceratops in 2007. At that time, he assumed he was looking at a stray that had literally crossed the international border millions of years ago. After reexamining the Montanan material, Ryan realized that at least some of the material in the Montana bonebed was not Albertaceratops. Some of the elements were much larger than any other horned dinosaur from the same time period, including Albertaceratops. And even though Albertaceratops and Medusaceratops are superficially similar, the shape and number of the hooks and ornaments along the edge of the frill actually puts them in separate horned dinosaur groups, with Medusaceratops being a chasmosaur. Co-author, Anthony Russell, professor of biological sciences at the University of Calgary in Alberta, said:

Although the ornamentation on the frill is pretty spectacular, it probably was not used for defense against predators. Rather it was more likely prehistoric “bling” used to attract a mate.

Medusaceratops is the oldest member of the Chasmosaurinae in North America and shows that the group, like its most famous member, Triceratops, had long brow horns and were fairly large when they first evolved. But later chasmosaurs that are just a bit younger than Medusaceratops tend to have much shorter horns and have much smaller, lighter bodies. Ryan said

Here we have something almost the size of Triceratops, but 10 million years before it lived. T rex was not around yet, so what was Medusaceratops squaring off against? That’s one of the things we’re now looking for in Alberta.

Mexico

Meanwhile, in Mexico, a new horned dinosaur has given scientists fresh insights into the ancient history of western North America. Mark Loewen, a paleontologist with the Utah Museum of Natural History and lead author of the study, said:

We know very little about the dinosaurs of Mexico, and this find increases immeasurably our knowledge of the dinosaurs living in Mexico during the Late Cretaceous.
First horned dinosaur from Mexico

The 72-million year old rhino sized creature, Coahuilaceratops magnacuerna, was a four to five ton plant eater belonging to a group called horned dinosaurs, or ceratopsids, from the Greek word ceratops meaning “horned face”.

The study was partially funded by the National Geographic Society.

A Different World

For most of the Late Cretaceous Period, from 97 million to 65 million years ago, high global sea levels resulted in flooding of the central, low lying portion of North America. As a result, a warm, shallow sea extended from the Gulf of Mexico to the Arctic Ocean, splitting the continent into eastern and western landmasses.

Dinosaurs living on the narrow, peninsula-like western landmass—known as Laramidia—occupied only a narrow belt of plains that were sandwiched between the seaway to the east and rising mountains to the west. Central America had not formed at the time, which made Mexico the southern tip of this island continent.

In many ways, the Late Cretaceous is the best understood time during the Age of Dinosaurs, thanks in large part to more than 120 years of dinosaur hunting in Canada, Montana, New Mexico and the Dakotas. Recent work has revealed new dinosaurs living at the same time in Utah, New Mexico and Texas, yet the dinosaurs from Mexico have remained virtually unknown. One of the team who made the discovery said:

As the southernmost dinosaurs on Laramidia, we are confident that Mexican dinosaurs will be a critical element in unraveling the ancient mystery of this island continent.
First horned dinosaur from Mexico

Loewen described the arid, desert terrain where the dinosaur was recovered as nothing like Mexico during the Late Cretaceous. About 72 million years ago, the region was a humid estuary with lush vegetation, an area where salt water from the ocean mixed with fresh water from rivers, much like the modern Gulf Coast of the southeastern United States. Many dinosaur bones in the area are covered with fossilized snails and marine clams, indicating that the dinosaurs inhabited environments adjacent to the seashore.

The rocks in which Coahuilaceratops was found also contain large fossil deposits of jumbled duck billed dinosaur skeletons. These sites appear to represent mass death events, perhaps associated with storms such as hurricanes that occur in the region today. One of the scientists said:

Sitting near the southern tip of Laramidia, this region may have been hammered by monstrous storms. If so, such periodic cataclysms likely devastated miles of coastline, killing off large numbers of dinosaurs.

Recovering a Giant Horned Head

Until recent years, there have been few large scale paleontological projects in Mexico focused on the Mesozoic Era, from 253 million to 65 million years ago, also known as the Age of Dinosaurs. Indeed Coahuilaceratops is among the first dinosaurs from Mexico to be named.

Coahuilaceratops comes from a rock unit known as the Cerro del Pueblo Formation, which dates to between 71.5 million and 72.5 million years ago. The skeletons, discovered in 2001 near the town of Porvenir de Jalpa, approximately 40 miles west of Saltillo, were excavated in 2003. The fossils then were prepared at the Utah Museum of Natural History, requiring two years of meticulous work.

Based on the bone development of the skull and skeleton, the scientists believe that this animal was an adult at the time of death. Remains of a juvenile animal of the same species were also found at the site. Coahuilaceratops was about 22 feet long as an adult, 6 feet to 7 feet tall at the shoulder and hips, with a 6 feet long skull, and likely weighed about four to five tons. Being one of the largest herbivores in its ecosystem, adult Coahuilaceratops probably did not have to worry about large tyrannosaur predators.

By far the most obvious characteristic of Coahuilaceratops is its massive pair of horns, one above each eye. While the researchers lack a complete horn, they estimate from fossils they excavated that the horns were 3 feet to 4 feet long, Loewen said.

Although such horns are common features of ceratopsid dinosaurs, those of Coahuilaceratops appear to be the largest known for the group, exceeding the size of eye horns even in Triceratops. Scientists are uncertain of the massive eye horns’ purpose, but the most widely accepted idea is that they were related to reproductive success, functioning to attract mates and fight with rivals of the same species.

Coahuilaceratops is the first identifiable species of horned dinosaur found in southern Mexico. The horned dinosaurs are an extraordinary example of vertebrate evolution. They evolved and diversified on Laramidia along a thin strip of land that stretched from Alaska to Mexico. Finding this horned dinosaur so far south in Mexico offers us a different picture of what the ancestors of Triceratops were like.

First horned dinosaur from Mexico

In addition to Coahuilaceratops, the research team found remains of two other horned dinosaurs, which are less well understood. The latest expedition also recovered remains of two duck billed dinosaurs, as well as the remains of carnivores, including large tyrannosaurs (smaller, older relatives of T rex) and more diminutive Velociraptor-like predators armed with sickle claws on their feet.

Together with an abundance of fossilized bones, researchers discovered the largest assemblage of dinosaur trackways known from Mexico, an extensive area criss-crossed with the tracks of different kinds of dinosaurs. In all, the emerging picture shows a diverse group of dinosaurian herbivores and carnivores, perhaps representing a previously unknown assemblage of species. Loewen said:

Rather than focusing only on individual varieties of dinosaurs, we are attempting to reveal what life was like in Mexico 72 million years ago, and understand how the unique ecosystem of Mexico relates to ecosystems to the north at the time.

Few North American dinosaurs from this time period are known outside of the Drumheller region of Alberta. Eberth explained that researchers now have two points of comparison to examine not only different dinosaurs, but also different environments and ecologies. Don Brinkman, a researcher at the Royal Tyrrell Museum. He is studying non-dinosaur vertebrates found at the site, including turtles, fish, and lizards, added:

Dinosaurs from this particular period are important because this is a time that is relatively poorly understood. The locality in Mexico goes a long way to filling in a gap in our knowledge of the record of changes in dinosaur assemblages throughout the Late Cretaceous.

Aquatic brain food allowed evolution of human intelligence

Archeologists Discover 'Brain Food' In Early Human Ancestors' Diet

PhysOrg.com—Scientists now know what may have helped fuel the evolution of the human brain two million years ago. Archeologists working in Kenya found that our human ancestors ate a wide variety of animals including fish, turtles and even crocodiles. Based on analyses of animal bones and stone tools they excavated, the research team found that our early ancestors incorporated aquatic brain food in their diet.

These aquatic foods are really important sources of the long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and docosahexaenoic acid that are so critical to human brain growth, said co-author and paleoanthropologist Dr Richmond. Finding these foods in the diets of our early ancestors suggests they may have helped to lift constraints on brain size and fuel the evolution of a larger brain.

The discovery of such a diverse animal diet is important because early human brain size increased dramatically after two million years ago. Growing a large brain requires an enormous investment in calories and nutrients and places considerable costs on the mother and developing infant. Anthropologists have long considered meat in the diet as key to the evolution of a larger brain. However, until now, there was no evidence that human ancestors this long ago had incorporated into their diets animal foods, from lakes and rivers, rich in brain nutrients.

A team of scientists from Kenya, the United States, the UK, Australia and South Africa discovered a 1.95 million year old site in northwestern Kenya in 2004. Preservation of the excavated site was so remarkable that the team was able to develop a detailed reconstruction of the environment. Over four years, the scientists excavated thousands of fossilized bones and stone tools, and were able to determine that at least 10 individual animals, and perhaps many more, were butchered by early humans at this site. Many of these bones showed evidence of cut marks made by early human ancestors as a result of using sharp stone tools to cut meat from the bones or crush long bones to access the fat rich bone marrow.

Archeologist David Braun of the University of Cape Town in South Africa, who was the lead author on the research said:

At sites of this age we often consider ourselves lucky if we find any bone associated with stone tools, but here we found everything from small bird bones to hippopotamus leg bones.

Gaining access to smaller animals like turtles and fish may have allowed these early humans to increase the protein in their diet without the danger of interacting with dangerous carnivores, such as lions and hyenas. These early humans were relatively small and not well suited to compete with the large carnivores that lived at that time. Stumbling upon brain fueling food may have been a fortunate side effect of finding foods at lakes and rivers.

Paleontologist Marion Bamford of the University of Witswatersrand in South Africa identified fossilized plant remains that revealed the wet and possibly marshy environment in which these early humans were living. Lead zooarchaeologist, Jack McCoy of Rutgers University, identified bones of various animals including turtles, fish, crocodiles and large antelopes that ended up as the meals of these early humans. Dr Richmond of GW took part in fossil identification and analyzing how the findings were important for human evolution.

The site, known to the archaeologists as FwJj 20, is located in the northern part of the Koobi Fora research area on the eastern side of Lake Turkana in Marsabit District, Kenya. The presence of overlying layers of volcanic ash helped the team pin down the age of the site. Geologists on the team, Naomi Levin of John Hopkins University and Andrew Herries of the University of New South Wales, Australia, were able to use a combination of techniques to estimate the age of the site as close to 1.95 million years. David Braun and his international team will return to northern Kenya to find more answers to questions about the diets of our earliest ancestors.

More information: Paper: Braun, D.R., Harris, J.W.K., Levin, N.E., McCoy, J.T., Herries, A.I.R., Bamford, M., Bishop, L., Richmond, B.R., Kibunjia, M., 2010. “Early hominin diet included diverse terrestrial and aquatic animals 1.95 Ma ago in East Turkana, Kenya.” PNAS.

Some sauropods held their long necks high

Sauropod dinosaur

PhysOrg.com—The long necks of sauropod dinosaurs really were held high, in spite of theories suggesting they were more likely to keep their necks low because of the high blood pressure resulting from the long distance from heart if they lifted their heads.

The sauropods were the among largest dinosaurs and included well-known species such as the Brachiosaurus, Brontosaurus (now called Apatosaurus) and Diplodocus, which had long necks to extend their reach. Many scientists have for decades thought they held their necks low to extend their reach horizontally rather than vertically because of the energy that would be required to hold their necks high. In some sauropods the neck could be over 10m long. More recently there has been controversy, with other scientists thinking that during food shortages holding their necks high to grab food would be worth the energy expended.

The study was carried out by functional morphologist Andreas Christian of the University of Flensburg in Germany, and concentrated on fossils of Euhelopus zdanskyi a mid-sized Early Cretaceous sauropod that lived around 112-130 million years ago. It weighed a moderate (for a sauropod) 3,800kg, with its head and neck weighing more than 210kg. It measured 11-12m from head to tail, and the distance from the base of the neck to the nose was about 4.6m.

Christian calculated the stresses that would have been felt by the cartilage in the sauropods neck joints, and found the most energy efficient pose would have been to hold its neck straight and inclined at about 45 degrees above horizontal, rather like a modern giraffe. He also calculated the energy costs for walking given distances and compared them to the energy required to raise the neck, and the energy expenditures for maintaining a high blood pressure for five minutes of high browsing.

The results of the calculations showed that even though a lot of energy is required to pump blood to such heights, from an inclined pose less work would be needed to hold its neck vertically to graze for up to half an hour than it would need to move their large bodies 100 meters to look for food. The findings were also true for the much larger Brachiosaurus, and may be true for some other sauropods.

Chrisian said the sauropods may have used their necks differently depending on the distribution of food and the kinds of vegetation, and during food scarcity would have found the ability to extend their reach vertically advantageous if not essential.

More information: Andreas Christian, Some sauropods raised their necks—evidence for high browsing in Euhelopus zdanskyi, Biology Letters, Published online before print 2 June, 2010.

Warm-blooded sea reptiles of the Jurassic

Ichthyosaur

PHYSorg.com—Reptiles roaming the oceans at the time of the dinosaurs could maintain a constant body temperature well above that of the surrounding water.

French scientists have developed a method of measuring body temperatures of extinct animals. Professor Ryosuke Motani, a paleontologist at the UC Davis Department of Geology, who wrote a perspective article for the 11 June issue of Science describing the work of Aurelien Bernard and colleagues at the Universite Lyon, France on the “fish tooth thermometer”, said:

It’s great that this can be tested. We can now apply this test to study the evolution of ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs and other marine reptiles.

Bernard et al measured oxygen isotopes in fossil teeth to estimate the body temperatures of extinct animals. Oxygen is present in the atmosphere mostly as oxygen-16 and also as oxygen-18. Animals incorporate both forms into their bones and teeth as they grow, but the ratio of oxygen-16 to 18 taken up varies depending partly on temperature.

The researchers first looked at teeth from fossil fish. Assuming that, like modern fish, these were cold blooded, the temperature signal from their teeth should match that of the sea water in which they lived. The researchers then used this fish tooth thermometer to look at teeth from fossil marine reptiles, ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs and mosasaurs.

Ichthyosaurs were animals like dolphins that probably cruised in deep water. Plesiosaurs had long necks and four flippers, and swam rather like a sea lion. Mosasaurs probably lived close to the coast and ambushed their prey. All three groups flourished between 250 and 65 million years ago.

Bernard and colleagues found ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs both had body temperatures well above their surroundings. Mosasaurs’ body temperature appeared to track with water temperature. However, Bernard’s results give water temperatures that are high, Motani said—as high as 39 degrees Celsius (102 F), a temperature at which modern fish and marine reptiles could not grow. The fish-tooth thermometer might be thrown off because the percentage of oxygen-18 in the atmosphere has changed over millennia, Motani said. When he corrected for this, the ichthyosaur body temperature came down to about 24 degrees Celsius (75 F). That’s a good fit with living animals, Motani said.

Some modern marine animals are also homeothermic, meaning that they regulate their body temperature. Leatherback turtles can maintain a constant core temperature because they are large and have a layer of blubber. Tuna have a high metabolic rate compared to other fish, giving them a higher body temperature. Ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs may have used similar strategies. The conclusion that these animals could maintain a steady body temperature also fits with what we know about these animals—that they were active and cruising in the open seas rather than lurking in shallower water.

Motani hopes to use the new approach to understand the evolution of marine reptiles from lizards to dolphin like animals. At the time ichthyosaurs evolved, there was a drastic drop in sea levels and a loss of shallow coastal waters. He said:

They didn’t start off homeothermic—able to maintain a steady body temperature—they probably evolved homeothermy as they became more fish shaped. Now we can test that hypothesis.