Mass spectrometric U-series dating of Laibin hominid site in Guangxi, southern China

Nanjing Normal University, Nan-ching, Jiangsu Sheng, China
Journal of Archaeological Science (Impact Factor: 2.2). 12/2007; 34(12):2109-2114. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2007.02.008


The Laibin hominid represents one of the rare finds of modern Homo sapiens in China, rare for its relative completeness and well-established stratigaphic provenance. This paper presents the results of mass spectrometric U-series dating of intercalated calcite samples from the Laibin site. The capping flowstone and the calcite vein, which sandwich the hominid fossil-containing deposits, date to 38.5 ± 1.0 and 44.0 ± 0.8 ka, setting respectively the minimum and maximum ages to the fossils. The second flowstone layer is 112.0 ± 1.4 ka old, indicating that the cultural sequence may possibly extend to somewhere between 44 and 112 ka. Securely dated Laibin finds should be of importance in reconstructing human physical and cultural evolution in the region.

Download full-text


Available from: Hai Cheng,
  • Source
    • "). Problematic Liujiang aside, the fragmentary Laibing specimen, also from Guangxi Province, is dated to between 38,000 and 44,000 BP (Shen et al., 2007). Moving south, a range of other late Pleistocene specimens from Niah Cave in Malaysia (Brothwell, 1960; Kennedy, 1977; Barker et al., 2007), Tabon Cave in the Philippines (Macintosh, 1978; Dizon et al., 2002; D etroit et al., 2004), and Wajak in Indonesia (Dubois, 1922; Storm, 1995; Storm et al., 2013) have secure dates ranging from 40,000 to 16,000 BP. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to examine and assess the nonmetric dental trait evidence for the population history of East and Southeast Asia and, more specifically, to test the two-layer hypothesis for the peopling of Southeast Asia. Using a battery of 21 nonmetric dental traits we examine 7,247 individuals representing 58 samples drawn from East and Southeast Asian populations inhabiting the region from the late Pleistocene, through the Neolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age, and into the historic and modern periods. The chief data reduction technique is a neighbor-joining tree generated from the triangular matrix of mean measure of divergence values. Principal findings indicated a major dichotomization of the dataset into (1) an early Southeast Asian sample with close affinities to modern Australian and Melanesian populations and (2) a very distinct grouping of ancient and modern Northeast Asians. Distinct patterns of clinal variation among Neolithic and post-Neolithic Mainland Southeast Asian samples suggest a center to periphery spread of genes into the region from Northeast Asia. This pattern is consistent with archaeological and linguistic evidence for demic diffusion that accompanied agriculturally driven population expansion in the Neolithic. Later Metal Age affinities between Island and Mainland coastal populations with Northeast Asian series is likely a consequence of a South China Sea interaction sphere operating from at least 500 BCE, if not from the Neolithic. Such results provide extensive support for the two-layer hypothesis to account for the population history of the region. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 09/2014; 155(1). DOI:10.1002/ajpa.22537 · 2.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The rate adjusted from autosomal rates has inflated these time estimates by two-third as compared with pedigree rate. There are evidence for earliest modern human activities in Australia and neighboring New Guinea about 40 to 45 kya [23], in Southeast Asia about 37 to 38 kya [24], in China about 38 to 44 kya [25,26], and in Europe about 40 [27,28]. However, the time for Out-of-Africa migration estimated using rates obtained from human-chimpanzee comparisons are only 42.51 (95% CI: 40.96 to 43.98) and 35.50 (95% CI: 33.13 to 37.22) kya, which are smaller than the earliest archaeological evidence. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Y chromosome is a superb tool for inferring human evolution and recent demographic history from a paternal perspective. However, Y chromosomal substitution rates obtained using different modes of calibration vary considerably, and have produced disparate reconstructions of human history. Here, we discuss how substitution rate and date estimates are affected by the choice of different calibration points. We argue that most Y chromosomal substitution rates calculated to date have shortcomings, including a reliance on the ambiguous human-chimpanzee divergence time, insufficient sampling of deep-rooting pedigrees, and using inappropriate founding migrations, although the rates obtained from a single pedigree or calibrated with the peopling of the Americas seem plausible. We highlight the need for using more deep-rooting pedigrees and ancient genomes with reliable dates to improve the rate estimation.
    Investigative Genetics 08/2014; 5(12). DOI:10.1186/2041-2223-5-12
  • Source
    • "Late Pleistocene (or probably Late Pleistocene) crania: Chilinshan 1 (PA 60), Liujiang 1 (PA 89), Minatogawa 4, Niah Cave 1, ZKD-Upper Cave 101 (AN 71), and Ziyang 1 (PA 58) (Wu, 1958, 1961; Chia and Wu, 1959; Woo, 1959; Brothwell, 1960; Suzuki, 1982; Shen et al., 2007 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A bi-level nasal floor, although present in most Pleistocene and recent human samples, reaches its highest frequency among the western Eurasian Neandertals and has been considered a fea-ture distinctive of them. Early modern humans, in contrast, tend to feature a level (or sloping) nasal floor. Sufficiently intact maxillae are rare among eastern Eurasian Pleistocene humans, but several fos-sils provide nasal floor configurations. The available eastern Eurasian Late Pleistocene early modern humans have predominantly level nasal floors, similar to western early modern humans. Of the four observable eastern Eurasian archaic Homo maxillae (Sangiran 4, Chaoxian 1, Xujiayao 1, and Chang-yang 1), three have the bi-level pattern and the fourth is scored as bi-level/sloping. It therefore appears that bi-level nasal floors were common among Pleistocene archaic humans, and a high frequency of them is not distinctive of the Neandertals.
Show more