Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

16 Coelacanth and Eusthenopteron are fossil species that have characteristics

This preview shows page 2 out of 2 pages.

Museum human evolution expert Prof Chris Stringer, who has been studying Neanderthals and early modern humans for about 50 years, tackles the big question of whether we belong to the same species.

Everyone on the planet today, whatever they look like and wherever they live, is classified by biologists in the species Homo sapiens. But some commentators are now suggesting that the extinct Neanderthals with their heavy brows and big noses should be classified in our species as well.

So what defines our species, and who qualifies to join the club?

An expanding family tree

When I drew up a family tree covering the last one million years of human evolution in 2003, it contained only four species: Homo sapiens (us, modern humans), H. neanderthalensis (the Neanderthals), H. heidelbergensis (a supposedly ancestral species), and H. erectus (an even more ancient and primitive species). I have just published a new diagram covering the same period of time and it shows more than double the number of species, including at least four that were around in the last 100,000 years.

Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

Our species name (which means 'wise humans' - though we might question the wisdom of that name today) was given to us by that great Swedish classifier Carl Linnaeus in 1758. In those pre-evolutionary times, species were usually considered to be fixed identities, created by God.

Grouping living things in species allows biologists to study aspects of life ranging from our own evolutionary history to the conservation of rain forests in the Amazon.

Today we still recognise each species by its own special features.

How do Homo sapiens and Neanderthals differ?

The physical traits of Homo sapiens include a high and rounded ('globular') braincase, and a relatively narrow pelvis.

Measurement of our braincase and pelvic shape can reliably separate a modern human from a Neanderthal - their fossils exhibit a longer, lower skull and a wider pelvis.

Even the three tiny bones of our middle ear, vital in hearing, can be readily distinguished from those of Neanderthals with careful measurement. In fact the shape differences in the ear bones are more marked, on average, than those that distinguish our closest living relatives - chimpanzees and gorillas - from each other. 

Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

Comparison of Neanderthal (left) and modern human (right) skulls, from a display in Cleveland Museum of Natural History. Adapted from a derivative work by DrMikeBaxter (CC BY-SA 2.0) via Wikimedia Commons.  

Pronounced differences in the braincase, ear bones and pelvis can still be recognised in fossils of Neanderthals and modern humans from 100,000 years ago. This suggests a separate evolutionary history going back much further - so far so good for differentiating H. neanderthalensis from H. sapiens.  

Complications come when we consider a particular definition of species - one which Linnaeus did not develop, but which he probably would have appreciated.

The biological species concept

The biological species concept states that species are reproductively isolated entities - that is, they breed within themselves but not with other species. Thus all living Homo sapiens have the potential to breed with each other, but could not successfully interbreed with gorillas or chimpanzees, our closest living relatives.

On this basis, 'species' that interbreed with each other cannot actually be distinct species.

Critics who disagree that H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species can now cite supporting evidence from recent genetic research. This indicates that the two interbred with each other when they met outside Africa about 55,000 years ago. As a result, everyone today whose ancestors lived outside Africa at that time has inherited a small but significant amount of Neanderthal DNA, which makes up about 2% of their genomes.

I still believe they are distinct species

In the face of this seemingly decisive evidence, why do I cling to my belief that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens are distinct species?

Well, in my view the problem is not with ancient couplings between our ancestors and Neanderthals, but with the limitations of the biological species concept.

We now know from the same kind of genomic research that many other species of mammal interbreed with each other - for example different kinds of baboons (genus Papio), wolves and wild dogs (Canis), bears (Ursus) and large cats (Panthera). In addition, one recent estimate suggests that at least 16% of all bird species interbreed with each other in the wild. 

Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

A puma-leopard hybrid. You can see this specimen on display at the Museum at Tring. We now know that many mammal species can interbreed.

Thus the problem is not with Neanderthals and modern humans and all the other species that interbreed with each other, but with the biological species concept itself. It is only one of dozens of suggested species concepts, and one that is less useful in the genomic age, with its profuse demonstrations of inter-species mixing. The reality is that in most cases in mammals and birds, species diverge from each other gradually. It may take millions of years for full reproductive isolation to develop, something that clearly had not yet occurred for H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens.

In my view, if Neanderthals and Homo sapiens remained separate long enough to evolve such distinctive skull shapes, pelvises, and ear bones, they can be regarded as different species, interbreeding or not.

Humans are great classifiers, and we do like to keep things orderly. But we should not be surprised when the natural world (past and present) does not match up to our neat and simple schemes.

Behaviour is irrelevant here

But what about the archaeological evidence that is also commonly cited in favour of uniting the Neanderthals with us as Homo sapiens - that they had 'cultural' behaviours such as burying their dead and painting designs on the walls of caves?

Well, interesting as that is, it should be excluded from the biological classification of species, since behaviours are potentially more plastic, evolve more quickly, and spread more easily within and between species than traits based on anatomy and DNA. 

  • Page ID16769
    • Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    • Suzanne Wakim & Mandeep Grewal
    • Butte College

    This drawing was created in 1848, but it's likely that you recognize the animal it depicts as a horse. Although horses haven't changed that much since this drawing was made, they have a long evolutionary history during which they changed significantly. How do we know? The answer lies in the fossil record.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Horse

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): Evolution of the Horse. The fossil record reveals how horses evolved. The lineage that led to modern horses (Equus) grew taller over time (from the 0.4 m Hyracotherium in early Eocene to the 1.6 m Equus). This lineage also developed longer molar teeth and the degeneration of the outer phalanges on the feet.

    Fossils are a window into the past. They provide clear evidence that evolution has occurred. Scientists who find and study fossils are called paleontologists. How do they use fossils to understand the past? Consider the example of the horse, outlined in figure \(\PageIndex{2}\). Fossils spanning a period of more than 50 million years show how the horse evolved.

    The oldest horse fossils show what the earliest horses were like. They were only 0.4 m tall, or about the size of a fox, and they had four long toes. Other evidence shows they lived in wooded marshlands, where they probably ate soft leaves. Over time, the climate became drier, and grasslands slowly replaced the marshes. Later fossils show that horses changed as well.

    • They became taller, which would help them see predators while they fed in tall grasses. Eventually, they reached a height of about 1.6 m.
    • They evolved a single large toe that eventually became a hoof. This would help them run swiftly and escape predators.
    • Their molars (back teeth) became longer and covered with hard cement. This would allow them to grind tough grasses and grass seeds without wearing out their teeth.

    Scientists can learn a great deal about evolution by studying living species. They can compare the anatomy, embryos, and DNA of modern organisms to help understand how they evolved.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\): Mammals (such as cats and whales) have homologous limb structures - with a different overall look but the same bones. Insects (such as praying mantis and water boatman) also have homologous limbs. Cat legs and praying mantis legs are analogous - looking similar but from different evolutionary lineages.

    Comparative anatomy is the study of the similarities and differences in the structures of different species. Similar body parts may be homologous structures or analogous structures. Both provide evidence for evolution.

    Homologous structures are structures that are similar in related organisms because they were inherited from a common ancestor. These structures may or may not have the same function in the descendants. Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\) shows the upper appendages of several different mammals. They all have the same basic pattern of bones, although they now have different functions. All of these mammals inherited this basic bone pattern from a common ancestor.

    Analogous structures are structures that are similar in unrelated organisms. The structures are similar because they evolved to do the same job, not because they were inherited from a common ancestor. For example, the wings of bats and birds, shown in the figure that follows, look similar on the outside and have the same function. However, wings evolved independently in the two groups of animals. This is apparent when you compare the pattern of bones inside the wings.

    Comparative embryology is the study of the similarities and differences in the embryos of different species. Similarities in embryos are likely to be evidence of common ancestry. All vertebrate embryos, for example, have gill slits and tails. All of the embryos in Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\), except for fish, lose their gill slits by adulthood, and some of them also lose their tail. In humans, the tail is reduced to the tail bone. Thus, similarities organisms share as embryos may no longer be present by adulthood. This is why it is valuable to compare organisms in the embryonic stage.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\): Embryos of different vertebrates look much more similar than the animals do at later stages of life. Rows I, II, and III illustrate the development of the embryos of fish on the far left, salamander, tortoise, chick, hog, calf, rabbit, and human on the far right, from the earliest to the latest stages.

    Structures like the human tail bone are called vestigial structures. Evolution has reduced their size because the structures are no longer used. The human appendix is another example of a vestigial structure. It is a tiny remnant of a once-larger organ. In a distant ancestor, it was needed to digest food, but it serves no purpose in the human body today. Why do you think structures that are no longer used shrink in size? Why might a full-sized, unused structure reduce an organism’s fitness?

    Darwin could compare only the anatomy and embryos of living things. Today, scientists can compare their DNA. Similar DNA sequences are the strongest evidence for evolution from a common ancestor. Look at the diagram in Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\). The diagram is a cladogram, a branching diagram showing related organisms. Each branch represents the emergence of new traits that separate one group of organisms from the rest. The cladogram in the figure shows how humans and apes are related based on their DNA sequences.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\): Cladogram of Humans and Apes. This cladogram is based on DNA comparisons. It shows how humans are related to apes by descent from common ancestors. Humans are most closely related to chimpanzees and Bonobo (our common ancestor existed most recently). We are less closely related to gorillas, and even less closely related to Orangutan.

    Biogeography is the study of how and why organisms live where they do. It provides more evidence for evolution. Let’s consider the camel family as an example.

    Today, the camel family includes different types of camels (Figure \(\PageIndex{6}\)). All of today’s camels are descended from the same camel ancestors. These ancestors lived in North America about a million years ago.

    Early North American camels migrated to other places. Some went to East Asia via a land bridge during the last ice age. A few of them made it all the way to Africa. Others went to South America by crossing the Isthmus of Panama. Once camels reached these different places, they evolved independently. They evolved adaptations that suited them for the particular environment where they lived. Through natural selection, descendants of the original camel ancestors evolved the diversity they have today.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{6}\). Camel Migrations and Present-Day Variation. Members of the camel family now live in different parts of the world. Dromedary camels are found in Africa, Bactrian camels in Asia, and Llamas in South America. They differ from one another in a number of traits. However, they share basic similarities. This is because they all evolved from a common ancestor. What differences and similarities do you see?

    The biogeography of islands yields some of the best evidence for evolution. Consider the birds called finches that Darwin studied on the Galápagos Islands (Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\))). All of the finches probably descended from one bird that arrived on the islands from South America. Until the first bird arrived, there had never been birds on the islands. The first bird was a seed eater. It evolved into many finch species, each adapted for a different type of food. This is an example of adaptive radiation. This is the process by which a single species evolves into many new species to fill available ecological niches.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\): Galápagos finches differ in beak size and shape, depending on the type of food they eat. Those eating buds and fruits have the largest beaks. Insect and grub eaters have narrower beaks

    In the 1970s, biologists Peter and Rosemary Grant went to the Galápagos Islands to re-study Darwin’s finches. They spent more than 30 years on the project, but their efforts paid off. They were able to observe evolution by natural selection actually taking place.

    While the Grants were on the Galápagos, a drought occurred, so fewer seeds were available for finches to eat. Birds with smaller beaks could crack open and eat only the smaller seeds. Birds with bigger beaks could crack open and eat seeds of all sizes. As a result, many of the smaller-beaked birds died in the drought, whereas birds with bigger beaks survived and reproduced. As shown in Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\), within 2 years, the average beak size in the finch population increased. In other words, evolution by natural selection had occurred.

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\). Evolution of Beak Size in Galápagos Finches. The left graph shows the beak sizes of the entire finch population studied by the Grants in 1976. The right graph shows the beak sizes of the survivors in 1978. In just 2 years, the mean beak size increased from about 9 mm to just above 10 mm.

    1. How do paleontologists learn about evolution?
    2. Describe what fossils reveal about the evolution of the horse.
    3. What are vestigial structures? Give an example.
    4. Define biogeography.
    5. Describe an example of island biogeography that provides evidence of evolution.
    6. Humans and apes have five fingers they can use to grasp objects. Are these analogous or homologous structures? Explain.
    7. Compare and contrast homologous and analogous structures. What do they reveal about evolution?
    8. Why does comparative embryology show similarities between organisms that do not appear to be similar as adults?
    9. What does a cladogram show?
    10. Explain how DNA is useful in the study of evolution.
    11. A bat wing is more similar in anatomical structure to a cat forelimb than to a bird wing. Answer the following questions about these structures.
      1. Which pairs are homologous structures?
      2. Which pairs are analogous structures?
      3. Based on this, do you think a bat is more closely related to a cat or to a bird? Explain your answer.
      4. If you wanted to test the answer you gave to part c, what is a different type of evidence you could obtain that might help answer the question?
    12. True or False. Fossils are the only type of evidence that supports the theory of evolution.
    13. True or False. Adaptive radiation is a type of evolution that produces new species.

    https://bio.libretexts.org/link?16769#Explore_More

    The Galapagos finches remain one of our world's greatest examples of adaptive radiation. Watch as these evolutionary biologists detail their 40-year project to document the evolution of these famous finches:

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

    LICENSED UNDER

    Describe how these two species differ anatomically and what that means about where they each lived.

    • Was this article helpful?