| Aching
Feet 5,200 Years Ago?
By NAOMI KOPPEL
Associated Press Writer
ZUG, Switzerland January 12, 2001 (AP) — A piece of flattened moss
discovered under a main road on the shores of a Swiss lake had
archaeologists puzzled — until they discovered it contained the imprint
of a foot. Now they have declared the item to be the oldest insole ever
discovered, dating back some 5,200 years.
"At first we thought it was the remains of a piece of cloth, but we
took it back to the laboratory and eventually we realized what it was,''
Stefan Hochuli, Zug state archaeologist, told The Associated Press.
The investigators
found that one side of the moss had the imprint of a foot, while the other
was flat, suggesting it had been pressed against a flat surface. They
believe the insole would have fitted inside a leather shoe, but the shoe
itself was destroyed by the wet lakeside soil. The insole is 10
inches long and was made for a shoe that today would be a men's size 6,
Hochuli said. He added that he was amazed that a thin piece of moss had
survived intact for so long and even more amazed that it had been
discovered.
The archaeologists
carried out their dig during the renovation of a main road through Zug, a
town in central Switzerland. They already knew that it was the site of a
lakeside Neolithic settlement, and the age has been confirmed through
dating other items found at the location.
Hochuli said fewer
than 10 shoes from that period have been discovered but that no one had
ever found an insole as old as this. The most famous shoes are the ones
worn by Oetzi, a body found perfectly preserved in the ice in the Alps
between Austria and Italy in 1991. Others were found in the Netherlands,
Spain, and at two sites in Switzerland.
Archeologists are completing work to preserve the insole, and then it will
go on display at Zug's museum of prehistory, said Hochuli. |
By
PAUL RECER
Associated Press
SAN DIEGO January 9, 2001 (AP) - A supercluster of galaxies and quasars
massed together across 600 million light years of space is the largest
structure in the observable universe, astronomers say.
In a study
presented Monday at the national meeting of the American Astronomical
Society, researchers reported that the structure, which includes billions
upon billions of stars, is believed to be 6.5 billion light years away.
"We have found nothing bigger in the (astronomy) literature and
nobody has brought to our attention anything bigger," said Gerard
Williger, a researcher at the National Optical Astronomy Observatories now
working at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.
When viewed from Earth, the structure is just below the center of the
constellation Leo the Lion. It stretches across an expanse of the sky of
two degrees by five degrees, or an area about forty times that of the full
moon as seen from Earth.
Williger said it is not known if the gathering of quasars and galaxies is
bound together gravitationally or if it is a chance cluster formed by a
ripple in the smooth expansion of the universe that followed the Big Bang,
which is thought to have set off the formation of the universe.
"This may be an artifact of the Big Bang," he said, speculating
that conditions at that point in space may have been uniquely ripe for the
quick formation of stars, galaxies and quasars.
That such a large structure could form so quickly after the Big Bang calls
into question some of the traditional theories of how the universe
evolved, Williger said, since it is difficult to explain how gravity could
pull together such an immense cluster in a relatively short time. Further
study, which would include calculations of the mass in the structure, may
yield new understanding.
"A successful theory has to explain the extremes," Williger
said.
Light from the galaxies began its long journey about 6.5 billion years ago
when the universe was just a third of its present age and the solar
system, including the Earth, had not yet been formed, he said.
The structure includes at least 11 galaxies and 18 quasars in an area
where the expected density of objects would be expected to include only
two or three quasars and perhaps four galaxies, he said.
Quasars are
galaxies with very active and bright center objects, thought to be powered
by black holes. Quasars can shine with the brilliance of a trillion suns
and astronomers can use this light to silhouette objects nearer Earth.
Average galaxies, such as the sun's home, the Milky Way, can contain 100
billion stars. A light year is the distance light travels in a year in
space, about 6 trillion miles.
Williger and his colleagues, using the four-meter telescope at the Cerro
Tololo Inter-American Observatory in Chile, detected the supercluster's
non-quasar galaxies indirectly, by analyzing the light received from
quasars that are even farther away. This light is absorbed by the halos of
gas surrounding the galaxies, producing shadows that reveal the presence
of the galaxies.
There are other clusters of quasars in distant space, but none are as
densely grouped as the supercluster in Leo, Williger said.
He said the Leo supercluster is more than twice the size of The Great
Wall, a gathering of galaxies much closer to the Earth. The Great Wall is
about 250 million light years across. |
Earth’s
Senior Solid Hints At Early Start For Land and Life
January 10, 2001 (AP) — Scientists have found a crystal believed to be
at least 4.3 billion years old, making it the oldest known solid on Earth.
And they say its sparkling facets contain hints that oceans, continents
and perhaps even life itself developed much earlier than previously
thought.
THE GRAIN of zircon, hardly wider than a human hair, was born in a molten
fury not long after Earth formed. It was discovered inside younger stone
in what is now Australia.
“It represents a significant advance in reconstructing Earth’s Dark
Ages,” said geologist Alex Halliday of the Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology in Zurich. He was not involved in the research.
Zircon is a durable crystal made of silicon, oxygen and zirconium, among
other elements. The oldest grain identified is one of a dozen very old
crystals extracted from the Jack Hills section of northwestern Australia.
TWO INDEPENDENT
STUDIES
Two studies of the grains were conducted independently by international
research teams. Their results were published in Thursday’s issue of the
journal Nature.
One study reports that the oldest zircon is at least 4.3 billion years
old. The second study puts its age at up to 4.4 billion years old.
“We are pretty confident,” said T. Mark Harrison, a UCLA geochemist
and co-author of one of the studies. “Two studies conducted
independently apparently have come to the same conclusion.”
Both research teams dated the zircon grains by analyzing their isotopes of
uranium. Uranium decays into lead. By calculating the ratio of uranium to
lead, they determined that a dozen of the grains were very old indeed.
Both teams used a high-resolution ion microprobe and a mass spectrometer
to analyze the crystals.
EARTH’S EARLIEST CONDITIONS
Earth is believed to have formed into a terrestrial planet 4.56 billion
years ago when swirling space debris and gas clumped together. The
researchers said the zircon crystals grew from molten granite that formed
at high temperatures more than 10 miles below the Earth’s surface.
The oldest crystal’s geochemical properties offer a glimpse into Earth’s
early conditions.
Researchers said the zircon’s high level of heavy oxygen isotopes
suggest it was cooled by surface water after it formed. If correct, this
means that oceans appeared 200 million to 300 million years after Earth’s
formation.
In this water, they speculate, simple life might have spawned. Current
research holds that life appeared on Earth 3.9 billion years ago.
“Our results raise the possibility that a biosphere could have arisen on
Earth 400 million years earlier than is now thought,” Harrison said. “But
it’s not a smoking gun.”
The oldest known intact rocks on Earth, located in northwestern Canada,
are 3.96 billion years old.
“The stage was set 4.3 billion years ago for life to emerge on Earth,”
said University of Colorado astrobiologist Steven J. Mojzsis, Harrison’s
colleague on the study. “There was probably already in place an
atmosphere, an ocean, and a stable crust within about 200 million years of
the Earth’s formation.” |
| Australian
study argues against ‘single migration’ theory
By Guy Gugliotta
THE WASHINGTON POST
January 9, 2001 — Australian scientists studying ancient human fossils
have recovered DNA that throws into question the theory that modern Homo
sapiens spread throughout the world in a single migration out of Africa
about 100,000 years ago.
INSTEAD, THE
RESEARCHERS lend support to the “multiregional” hypothesis — that
human ancestors left Africa about 1.5 million years ago, fanned out across
the “Old World,” and evolved into modern humans.
The findings should provide fresh fuel for the spirited controversy among
scholars over the origin of the modern, genetically similar humans who
populate the world today and the fate of the ancestors who preceded them.
In a report scheduled for publication this month in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, the Australian team reported recovering a
form of genetic material known as mitochondrial DNA from 10 fossils of
Australians between 2,000 and more than 60,000 years old.
Nine of the 10 had DNA similar to contemporary humans, the report said,
but DNA from the 10th and oldest fossil, a 62,000-year-old anatomically
modern man from southeastern Australia’s Lake Mungo region, was
genetically unrelated to the others.
This finding potentially has great significance, because it disputes the
view that modern Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa 100,000 years ago and
“replaced” archaic species throughout the world.
Instead, the Lake Mungo fossil suggests at least one anatomically modern
lineage that has no relationship to contemporary humans, the Australian
team said. The fossil appears to belong to an independent genetic line
that is now extinct.
‘MULTIREGIONAL’ THEORY
This finding would lend support to the “multiregional” school, which
acknowledges that human ancestors spread out of Africa about 1.5 million
years ago, but that modern humans evolved gradually in different areas.
"A single migration out of Africa is simplistic,” said team member
and molecular biologist James Peacock of the Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organization. “There would be no reason for us to
think that Lake Mungo man wasn’t one of the precursors of modern
aborigines just because his mitochondrial DNA sequence has become extinct.”
The dispute between replacement theorists and multiregionalists has arisen
over the last decade with the growing use of DNA analysis in genetics.
Mitochondria are cell components containing genetic material — DNA —
that enable scientists to trace the lineage of plants and animals from
generation to generation. The mitochondrial DNA in all contemporary humans
is closely related, despite what appear to be radical differences in race,
coloring and body type.
Working backward in time, geneticists reached the conclusion that “modern
humans” originated from common ancestors who left Africa about 100,000
years ago, and shoved aside whatever human ancestors they found elsewhere.
‘KILLER AFRICANS’
“Some of my colleagues call this the ‘killer Africans’ theory,”
said team member Alan Thorne, an anthropologist at the Research School of
Pacific and Asian Studies at the Australian National University.
This view appeared to have been borne out last year when scientists
reported that DNA recovered from three Neanderthal fossils did not match
contemporary DNA, indicating that Neanderthals were a different species
rendered extinct about 30,000 years ago during the Ice Age, as modern
humans swept across Europe.
Modern humans crossed over to Australia from New Guinea over an Ice Age
land bridge, Thorne explained, and although the Lake Mungo fossil is the
oldest known human remains on the continent, they were found more than
2,000 miles from the northern coast, an indication that humans had been in
Australia considerably longer.
More important for the debate on human origins, the Lake Mungo fossil is
“gracile,” or anatomically modern, lacking the broad, ridged foreheads
and heavy bone structure of Neanderthals and other “robust” humans.
Four of the Australian fossils, however, were robust, even though their
DNA was clearly related to that of contemporary humans. Finally, Peacock
said, sequences from the Lake Mungo DNA have been identified in the nuclei
of contemporary humans, suggesting there was reproductive contact, rather
than simply replacement, between the extinct lineage and the ancestors of
contemporary humans.
MORE STUDY NEEDED
“This study puts the Neanderthal study in perspective,” said John H.
Relethford, an anthropologist at the State University of New York at
Oneonta who wrote a commentary to accompany the Australian research. “It
doesn’t mean that the out-of-Africa theory is wrong, but it chips away
at it.”
New York University molecular anthropologist Todd Disotell, a leading
proponent of the replacement theory, said the Australian study could be
“a very significant result, if the analysis holds up,” but “I need
to see some more detail.”
Disotell noted that the DNA of “over 10,000 people have now been
sampled,” and the results “are consistent with the recent replacement
hypothesis.” By contrast, “ancient DNA is really hard to work with.
Did they do this right? That is the big question.”
© 2001 The Washington Post Company |
Human
Migration Theory Disputed
By PAUL RECER
AP Science Writer
January 12, 2001 - Modern humans likely arose from small groups that
journeyed from continent to continent, not in a single migration from
Africa, anthropologists say.
These individual
groups probably intermingled with archaic humans such as the Neanderthal,
said the researchers, who analyzed ancient skulls from around the world.
They said that distinctive features in ancient skulls, some dating to more
than 200,000 years, suggest modern humans descended independently from
common ancestors that lived on nearly every continent and mingled with
earlier human types.
"There was no single wave of modern humans out of Africa,'' said
Milford H. Wolpoff, a University of Michigan anthropologist and co-author
of the study, published in Friday's edition of the journal Science.
Modern humans did originate in Africa, Wolpoff said, but they migrated in
small groups over thousands of years and journeyed to Asia, Europe and
even as far as Australia.
"It was not a single wave,'' he said. "It was more like a leaky
faucet. They moved out in dribbles.''
This is contrary to the Eve theory, which holds that modern humans evolved
in Africa and moved into the rest of the world in a singular movement of
perhaps 10,000 people. Once on the other continents, the theory holds, the
moderns supplanted the existing more ancient humans, such as the
Neanderthal.
But Wolpoff and his co-authors said that skulls dated 25,000 to 30,000
years from Europe and from Australia share strong characteristics of
40,000 to 200,000-year-old archaic human skulls found in Europe,
Indonesia, and Africa.
The more recent skulls from Europe, for instance, showed clear evidence of
a Neanderthal influence, along with features of the early modern humans
that evolved in Africa. Early modern human skulls from Australia had
similarities to the more ancient skulls from Indonesia.
Wolpoff said this suggests modern humans dribbled out of Africa in small
numbers and migrated to distant lands where they mingled with a more
ancient human type that already lived in those places.
Eventually, he said, the superior genes of modern humans dominated the
species through natural selection and the clearly identifiable archaic
humans, such as the Neanderthal, disappeared.
"The Neanderthal disappeared as a result of interbreeding,'' Wolpoff
said.
Traces of those archaic humans survive still, in the genes of modern
humans, said John Hawks, University of Utah anthropologist and co-author
of the study. And these genes produce distinctive markings on modern human
skulls.
"There are still Neanderthals today and they are us,'' Hawks said in
a statement released by the University of Utah. "People of European
descent are also people of Neanderthal descent.''
The conclusion is controversial, and another University of Utah
anthropologist, Henry Harpending, said he is unconvinced.
"The genetic evidence is unequivocal in support of the idea that we
are all descended from a small group of Africans within the last 100,000
years,'' Harpending said in a statement. "There is no Neanderthal in
us.''
———
On the Net:
Journal Science: http://www.eurekalert.org
|