Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Neanderthal vs human brain using computational anatomy

  1. #1
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,802
    Points
    88,500
    Level
    92
    Points: 88,500, Level: 92
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 850
    Overall activity: 99.3%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.

    Neanderthal vs human brain using computational anatomy



    Scientists have for the first time set eyes on a three-dimensional Neanderthal brain in the form of a virtual model made to fit the empty, fossilised skulls of long-dead individuals, a study said Thursday.

    The reconstructed organ confirmed earlier observations, based more loosely on head size and shape, that Neanderthals had a larger brain than their early Homo sapiens cousins, but with a smaller cerebellum—the lower part near the spine that controls balance and movement.

    It is also involved in speech and learning.

    The distinction may have caused social and cognitive differences between the near relatives, and may explain why one went extinct while the other thrived, said Naomichi Ogihara of the Keio University in Japan, who co-authored a study in the journal Scientific Reports.

    "Although the difference could be subtle, such a subtle difference may become significant in terms of natural selection," he told AFP.

    But nothing can be concluded yet about any relation between the Neanderthal's brain organisation and its eventual demise.

    Ogihara and a team combined the disciplines of physical anthropology, mechanical engineering, and neuroscience for their reconstruction.

    They used virtual casts to model the shape and size of four fossilised Neanderthal skull cavities, and four of ancient humans.

    They then used MRI scans from nearly 1,200 modern-day people to model an "average" human brain, which they "deformed" to fit into the prehistoric skulls.

    This allowed the team to estimate what the brains would have looked like, and how individual regions would have differed between the two species.

    "We are so far from understanding the brain of prehistoric humans that any small advance is welcome," French palaeoanthropologist Antoine Balzeau told AFP of the study.

    He was not involved in the research.

    Neanderthals emerged in Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East some 200,000 years ago. They vanished about 30,000 years ago—coinciding roughly with the arrival of modern humans out of Africa.

    The two groups briefly overlapped and interbred, and today, non-African people carry about 1.5-2.1 percent of Neanderthal DNA.

    Long portrayed as knuckle-dragging brutes, recent studies have started to paint a picture of Neanderthals as sophisticated beings who made art, took care of the elderly, buried their dead, and may have been the first jewellers—though they were probably also cannibals.

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-04-scient...brain.html#jCp

    https://phys.org/news/2018-04-scient...aign=item-menu

    Reconstructing the Neanderthal brain using computational anatomy

    The present study attempted to reconstruct 3D brain shape of Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens based on computational neuroanatomy. We found that early Homo sapiens had relatively larger cerebellar hemispheres but a smaller occipital region in the cerebrum than Neanderthals long before the time that Neanderthals disappeared. Further, using behavioural and structural imaging data of living humans, the abilities such as cognitive flexibility, attention, the language processing, episodic and working memory capacity were positively correlated with size-adjusted cerebellar volume. As the cerebellar hemispheres are structured as a large array of uniform neural modules, a larger cerebellum may possess a larger capacity for cognitive information processing. Such a neuroanatomical difference in the cerebellum may have caused important differences in cognitive and social abilities between the two species and might have contributed to the replacement of Neanderthals by early Homo sapiens.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24331-0




  2. #2
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,305
    Points
    279,183
    Level
    100
    Points: 279,183, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    [QUOTE=Jovialis;540203]Scientists have for the first time set eyes on a three-dimensional Neanderthal brain in the form of a virtual model made to fit the empty, fossilised skulls of long-dead individuals, a study said Thursday.

    The reconstructed organ confirmed earlier observations, based more loosely on head size and shape, that Neanderthals had a larger brain than their early Homo sapiens cousins, but with a smaller cerebellum—the lower part near the spine that controls balance and movement.

    It is also involved in speech and learning.

    The distinction may have caused social and cognitive differences between the near relatives, and may explain why one went extinct while the other thrived, said Naomichi Ogihara of the Keio University in Japan, who co-authored a study in the journal Scientific Reports.

    "Although the difference could be subtle, such a subtle difference may become significant in terms of natural selection," he told AFP.

    But nothing can be concluded yet about any relation between the Neanderthal's brain organisation and its eventual demise.

    Ogihara and a team combined the disciplines of physical anthropology, mechanical engineering, and neuroscience for their reconstruction.

    They used virtual casts to model the shape and size of four fossilised Neanderthal skull cavities, and four of ancient humans.

    They then used MRI scans from nearly 1,200 modern-day people to model an "average" human brain, which they "deformed" to fit into the prehistoric skulls.

    This allowed the team to estimate what the brains would have looked like, and how individual regions would have differed between the two species.

    "We are so far from understanding the brain of prehistoric humans that any small advance is welcome," French palaeoanthropologist Antoine Balzeau told AFP of the study.

    He was not involved in the research.

    Neanderthals emerged in Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East some 200,000 years ago. They vanished about 30,000 years ago—coinciding roughly with the arrival of modern humans out of Africa.

    The two groups briefly overlapped and interbred, and today, non-African people carry about 1.5-2.1 percent of Neanderthal DNA.

    Long portrayed as knuckle-dragging brutes, recent studies have started to paint a picture of Neanderthals as sophisticated beings who made art, took care of the elderly, buried their dead, and may have been the first jewellers—though they were probably also cannibals.

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-04-scient...brain.html#jCp

    https://phys.org/news/2018-04-scient...aign=item-menu





    Striking finding.

    This isn't the first time it's been proposed that Neanderthals could engage in sapiens sapiens type speech and might not have been as adept at learning new things. The same thing showed up in snp comparisons between the Neanderthal genome and ours.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  3. #3
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,802
    Points
    88,500
    Level
    92
    Points: 88,500, Level: 92
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 850
    Overall activity: 99.3%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Striking finding.

    This isn't the first time it's been proposed that Neanderthals could engage in sapiens sapiens type speech and might not have been as adept at learning new things. The same thing showed up in snp comparisons between the Neanderthal genome and ours.
    Indeed

    A few months ago I read an article on study that found that the cerebellum is a critical component of our brain that makes us behave human.

    I made a thread on it a few months ago:

    However, in recent years neuroscientists have discovered that the cerebellum also plays a mysterious but significant role in human cognition, emotion regulation, and overall psychological well-being. Additionally, countless human and animal studies have found a correlation between atypical structure/functional connectivity of Purkinje neurons in the cerebellum and autism spectrum disorders (ASD).

    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...lum-Hold-Clues

    http://science.sciencemag.org/content/358/6366/1027

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...lum-hold-clues
    I think it is very telling that homo sapien cerebellums were larger than neanderthals. Perhaps it was big factor in why humans were able to eventually replaced them. It probably made them better equipped to have larger social groups.

  4. #4
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,305
    Points
    279,183
    Level
    100
    Points: 279,183, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Indeed

    A few months ago I read an article on study that found that the cerebellum is a critical component of our brain that makes us behave human.

    I made a thread on it a few months ago:



    I think it is very telling that homo sapien cerebellums were larger than neanderthals. Perhaps it was big factor in why humans were able to eventually replaced them. It probably made them better equipped to have larger social groups.
    Indeed. Human cooperation is part of development of culture. There are also limits on what you can pass on to other people if speech is limited.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tutkun Arnaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-03-18
    Posts
    296

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a2a(m223)(L801)

    Country: Albania



    0 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Indeed

    A few months ago I read an article on study that found that the cerebellum is a critical component of our brain that makes us behave human.

    I made a thread on it a few months ago:



    I think it is very telling that homo sapien cerebellums were larger than neanderthals. Perhaps it was big factor in why humans were able to eventually replaced them. It probably made them better equipped to have larger social groups.
    Neanderthals lived in Climate challenging areas like North Europe. Without some brains they would not have been able to make it. Also the fact that non African people have higher IQ than Africans (if you will accept the later as true), could have come from gene input we got from Neanderthals. There is a saying" that in small hinges hang big doors" which would translate that small genetic differences could make for big intelligence difference. And this also could lead to believe that yes races and ethnic groups are not equally smart for genetic reasons. I know Angela who leans heavily left would be tempted for an infraction, but we must express our views .

  6. #6
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,305
    Points
    279,183
    Level
    100
    Points: 279,183, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Neanderthals lived in Climate challenging areas like North Europe. Without some brains they would not have been able to make it. Also the fact that non African people have higher IQ than Africans (if you will accept the later as true), could have come from gene input we got from Neanderthals. There is a saying" that in small hinges hang big doors" which would translate that small genetic differences could make for big intelligence difference. And this also could lead to believe that yes races and ethnic groups are not equally smart for genetic reasons. I know Angela who leans heavily left would be tempted for an infraction, but we must express our views .
    I don't give infractions for civilly stated opinions, even if I think they're incorrect. I'm also very far from being a left wing person. By European standards I'm definitely right wing. I'm just not a racist.

    By all means go on misinterpreting me, though. It fits right in with all your misinterpretations of genetic data, and history, archaeology, and everything else.

  7. #7
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,802
    Points
    88,500
    Level
    92
    Points: 88,500, Level: 92
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 850
    Overall activity: 99.3%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Neanderthals lived in Climate challenging areas like North Europe. Without some brains they would not have been able to make it. Also the fact that non African people have higher IQ than Africans (if you will accept the later as true), could have come from gene input we got from Neanderthals. There is a saying" that in small hinges hang big doors" which would translate that small genetic differences could make for big intelligence difference. And this also could lead to believe that yes races and ethnic groups are not equally smart for genetic reasons. I know Angela who leans heavily left would be tempted for an infraction, but we must express our views .
    Don't try to shoehorn so many implications based on absolutely nothing. The study shows homo sapiens had a larger cerebellum.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Moi-même's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-16
    Location
    Quebec City
    Posts
    96
    Points
    3,592
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,592, Level: 17
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 258
    Overall activity: 0%

    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2a1

    Ethnic group
    French Canadian
    Country: Canada-Quebec



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Neanderthals lived in Climate challenging areas like North Europe. Without some brains they would not have been able to make it. Also the fact that non African people have higher IQ than Africans (if you will accept the later as true), could have come from gene input we got from Neanderthals. There is a saying" that in small hinges hang big doors" which would translate that small genetic differences could make for big intelligence difference. And this also could lead to believe that yes races and ethnic groups are not equally smart for genetic reasons. I know Angela who leans heavily left would be tempted for an infraction, but we must express our views .
    Ever heard of the Flynn effect?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

    Basically, the score "100" is an average, which went up slowly for about 3 points a decade since the first tests in th 1930s. Average scorers on today's tests get much higher results on the early versions of IQ tests. So, African IQ is as high as what was observed among Westerners in the 1930s. When they'll get better scolarisation, they'll do just as good as the rest.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    17-09-17
    Posts
    321
    Points
    3,221
    Level
    16
    Points: 3,221, Level: 16
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 229
    Overall activity: 19.0%


    Country: United States



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Neanderthals lived in Climate challenging areas like North Europe. Without some brains they would not have been able to make it. Also the fact that non African people have higher IQ than Africans (if you will accept the later as true), could have come from gene input we got from Neanderthals. There is a saying" that in small hinges hang big doors" which would translate that small genetic differences could make for big intelligence difference. And this also could lead to believe that yes races and ethnic groups are not equally smart for genetic reasons. I know Angela who leans heavily left would be tempted for an infraction, but we must express our views .
    Your idea that non-Africans are genetically smarter due to Neanderthal DNA has as much credibility as me saying you are less smart than an asiatic dwarf hampster.

    For what you are saying to be true, first of all, you have to prove that non-Africans are genetically smarter, which has not been proven. Second, that Neanderthals were smarter than sapiens, which the article completely counters by actually saying sapiens are more intelligent than neandethals in most ways we think of intelligence today, such as problem-solving, communication and learning and adaptability. Third, if you prove 1 & 2, you need to point to a specific part of Neanderthal DNA that makes non-Africans more intelligent. You don't have any of these conditions, just as I don't have them for the asiatic dwarf hamster comparison.

  10. #10
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,802
    Points
    88,500
    Level
    92
    Points: 88,500, Level: 92
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 850
    Overall activity: 99.3%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    For more than 200,000 years, Neanderthals successfully occupied the cold, dark forests and shores of Europe.

    Then early humans came along.

    Archaeological evidence suggests that human migrants from Africa arrived on the European continent around 40,000 years ago. About that same time, the Neanderthals all died off.

    For decades, anthropologists have puzzled over what factors contributed to this rapid and total replacement of Neanderthals by their modern human cousins.

    Now, a multi-disciplinary team including mechanical engineers, neuroscientists and physical anthropologists have provided a new clue to this mystery by creating the first digital reconstruction of four Neanderthal brains.

    By comparing these brains with an average human brain, the authors suggest that different ways of processing information may have helped humans outcompete their hominid cousins.

    The work was published Thursday in Scientific Reports.

    To reconstruct a Neanderthal brain, the authors started by measuring the overall shape of the inside of four Neanderthal skulls.

    Next, they created an "average" digital modern human brain and skull by combining MRI data of more than 1,000 modern humans.

    Once they had these two measurements, they were able to use a computer program to warp the size and shape of the human brain to match the shape of the interior of the Neanderthals' skulls in a process called deformation.

    This method is not entirely untested. The authors report that the same process has been shown to effectively re-create the structure of a bonobo brain by morphing a chimpanzee brain, and vice versa.

    Using this technique, the researchers discovered that while the two types of brains were about the same size, there was a clear difference in shape.

    In particular, the authors found that the cerebellum, a region of the brain that lies toward the lower back of our heads, was significantly larger in humans than in Neanderthals.

    This part of the brain is associated with speech comprehension and production, working memory and cognitive flexibility, said Naomichi Ogihara, a mechanical engineer at Keio University in Yokohama, Japan, who worked on the study.

    And in this region of the brain, size does matter.

    The researchers demonstrated this by looking at data on brain size and abilities from 1,095 people that showed a clear relationship between the size of the cerebellum and language comprehension and cognitive flexibility.

    The authors propose that because of their relatively small cerebellums, Neanderthals may have been less able to adapt to changes in the environment compared with the early human invaders, giving the humans a tremendous advantage.

    However, the team's reconstructions also suggested Neanderthals did have at least one advantage over early humans. The visual processing center of their brains, known as the occipital lobe, was larger than their human counterparts.

    Ogihara said the Neanderthals may have developed this adaptation in response to the low light levels in Europe compared with Africa, but it could have hindered them from expanding the cerebellum.

    If that is indeed the case, this volumetric trade-off worked for a very long time—until it didn't.


    Oh, and one more thing: Readers should remember, however, that this attempt to reconstruct the brain inside a fossil skull is new to the field, and perhaps could be improved upon in the future, Ogihara said.

    "We would like to further elaborate our methodology by exchanging thoughts and ideas with researchers in the related fields working on human brain evolution," he said.

    He'd also like to use this method to reconstruct the brains of other hominins in the future.



    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-04-size-a...thals.html#jCp
    Looks like the larger cerebellum was suggested to be advantageous for humans, compared to that of the Neanderthal's. The larger occiptial lobe developed to accommodate the low-light of Europe was the trade off that worked out for the Neanderthals, until they were out competed by a new species with a differently developed brain. The larger cerebellum helped the humans become more adaptive to changes in the environment, than the Neanderthal.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •