Why aren't Peking Man considered Heidelbergenssi?

  • Thread starter Calpalned
  • Start date
In summary, the article states that there are three species of erectus- ergaster, erectus, and heidelbergensis- based on the location of the specimens. The article also states that body proportions vary greatly between individuals and that "Turkana Boy" was tall and slender, like modern humans from the same area, while the few limb bones found of "Peking Man" indicate a shorter, sturdier build.
  • #1
Calpalned
297
6
7) Why are peking and java man considered homo

erectus, while the fossils of the same time period (600,000 BC) found

in Europe are considered Heidelbergensis? According to wikipedia,

peking man fossils had brain sizes from 1000 cc to about 1220 cc,

well within the range of Heidebergensis.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Calpalned, sorry I couldn't reply earlier, I'm a bit swamped right now, but wanted to get you started. There have been differences of opinion over classification of older hominids. I'm going to start you off with an article that describes the revision in age, and hope to follow up shortly with more about what separates the species.

Peking Man' older than thought

Iconic ancient human fossils from China are 200,000 years older than had previously been thought, a study shows. The new dating analysis suggests the "Peking Man" fossils, unearthed in the caves of Zhoukoudian are some 750,000 years old.
Continued...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7937351.stm
 
  • #3
Evo said:
Hi Calpalned, sorry I couldn't reply earlier
No worries, I'm actually thankful to even have a reply. I realized that my question is quite similar to the one here https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/perhaps-they-are-all-the-same-species.799820/ , where I asked about why erectus, ergaster, heidelbergensis and antecessor, despite having the same basic skull shape (except for increasing brain size) are labeled as different species.
 
  • #4
They're good questions. It seems to come down to where specimens are found and slight differences.

Some scientists have split H. erectus into three separate species, based on the geographic region in which specimens have been found: H. ergaster (Africa), H. erectus (Asia), and H. heidelbergensis (Europe).

Generally, H. erectus (inclusive) is characterized by large molars, an unpronounced chin, heavy brow ridges, and a long, low skull, relative to modern Homo sapiens. The skeleton of H. erectus was heavier, or "more robust," than the average modern human skeleton. Body proportions vary greatly from individual to individual. "Turkana Boy" was tall and slender, like modern humans from the same area, while the few limb bones found of "Peking Man" indicate a shorter, sturdier build.
(See more below)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/k.html

Wikipedia actually collects information from different sources on Peking man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peking_Man
 
  • #5
Evo said:
They're good questions. It seems to come down to where specimens are found and slight differences.

(See more below)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/k.html

Wikipedia actually collects information from different sources on Peking man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peking_Man

I see... In my opinion, it is rather interesting that modern humans from Asia, Europe and Africa are all classified as the same species while homo erectus from those three continents are seperate... Anyway, thanks for the reply, I understand this concept better now.
 

1. Why are Peking Man and Heidelbergensis not considered the same species?

Peking Man (Homo erectus pekinensis) and Heidelbergensis (Homo heidelbergensis) are two distinct species of hominins that lived during different time periods. Peking Man lived in China approximately 700,000 to 200,000 years ago, while Heidelbergensis lived in Europe approximately 600,000 to 200,000 years ago. They have significant differences in physical characteristics and cultural behaviors, indicating that they were separate species.

2. What are the main physical differences between Peking Man and Heidelbergensis?

Some of the main physical differences between Peking Man and Heidelbergensis include skull shape, cranial capacity, and dental features. Peking Man had a low and elongated skull, with a cranial capacity of around 850 cubic centimeters. Heidelbergensis had a higher and more round skull, with a cranial capacity of around 1200 cubic centimeters. Peking Man also had larger teeth and a more pronounced brow ridge compared to Heidelbergensis.

3. Are there any similarities between Peking Man and Heidelbergensis?

Despite their differences, Peking Man and Heidelbergensis also share some physical characteristics. Both species had larger brains and more advanced cognitive abilities compared to earlier hominins. They also both had a prominent chin, which is a feature that is unique to modern humans.

4. Why do some scientists believe that Peking Man and Heidelbergensis may have interbred?

There is some evidence that suggests that Peking Man and Heidelbergensis may have interbred. This is based on the discovery of some fossils that have features of both species, as well as genetic studies that have found similarities between Peking Man and Heidelbergensis DNA. However, this is still a topic of debate among scientists and more evidence is needed to confirm this theory.

5. How do the cultural behaviors of Peking Man and Heidelbergensis differ?

Peking Man and Heidelbergensis also had different cultural behaviors, which further supports the idea that they were different species. Peking Man is known for using fire and creating simple stone tools, while Heidelbergensis had more advanced tool-making and hunting techniques. Additionally, Heidelbergensis is associated with the first evidence of burial rituals and symbolic thinking, which are characteristics of modern humans but not present in Peking Man.

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
8K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
15K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
109
Views
53K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top