man I have had these things where im like. if your over a certain age sex and gender where considered synonymous. I get that in modern times the view is changing but here if you have a scientific news article using the term gender for sex. I just think we went form consistancy to inconsistency with the terms.
Every Homo naledi we know of is female, and the implications are fascinating
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Midnight@slrpnk.net to archaeology@mander.xyz
Comments
HubertManne@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
tristynalxander@mander.xyz 2 weeks ago
How different are AMELX & AMELY and what specifically are they testing for? Is it possible a species mutation in the Y variant made it look more like the X variant in the tests? Can they do whole protein mass spec to verify the protein identity?
Okay, I found the paper, they did test by mass spec though it’s complicated by degradation. Still, they say there are 23 diagnostic amino acid substitutions, and of the 18 residue polymorphisms the species only has two, so probably not a back mutation misinterpretation. I agree with their conclusions.
Yeah, I don’t know. That’s the extent of my expertise. If the archaeology people say it’s the woman-cave, they probably know best.
Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Very interesting article. And I agree with the authors conclusion: a collection of just female corpses is not random. So grave site it is. And the final question is something I hadn’t considered yet: how do we treat a non-human cultures remains? Scientifically its important to analyse it, but I understand that at a certain point it becomes grave robbery.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I mean…
They’re more likely to be hybrids instead of a real species. They have dental traces of both near sapian cousins and only found in waaaaaay more ancestral cousins.
With hybrids it’s actually kind of common for males to abort before birth. Something about the mothers immune reaction to the y chromosome or something, I’m going off memory.
But it could also explain why that group of hybrids lived alone.
A hypothetical reason for why human/neanderthal hybrids tended to be born to human mothers, was neanderthals developed faster. So to a neanderthal mother, a hybrid appeared to have developmental delays mentally while also being a weakling and never lived to reach its intellectual peak.
Meanwhile a hybrid raised among humans would develop physically faster and always be stronger, but also develop mentally faster, even if not peaking as high.
It’s possible that Naledi may have only been capable of reproducing females from one or both origin species. Or even been a neutral (possibly sterile) group between the two origin species where hybrids (always female) were abandoned to be raised but what may have been outcasts.
Like, we honestly can’t even say they’re a unique species and we’ve been off by a lot more before.
I feel like 10,000 years is a pretty safe line…
Contramuffin@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Is there any evidence that Neanderthals were less intelligent than humans at their peak? I was under the impression that recent research has basically completely nullified the idea that Neanderthals were less intelligent, and the current belief is that they’re just as intelligent as humans. Is there newer research that I’m not aware of that contrasts this line of thinking?
NightFantom@slrpnk.net 2 weeks ago
That’s never stopped archaeologists before for human cultures either
prettybunnys@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
The other conclusion is a genetic modification that makes our test for “male” not work on them.
Which is also posited in the article.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
why would species have anything whatsoever to do with this?
Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Becaude we cant ask descendants about their wishes for example.