Denisovans

we’ve-had-a-denisovan-skull-since-the-1930s—only-nobody-knew

We’ve had a Denisovan skull since the 1930s—only nobody knew


It’s a Denisovan? Always has been.

After years of mystery, we now know what at least one Denisovan looked like.

A 146,000-year-old skull from Harbin, China, belongs to a Denisovan, according to a recent study of proteins preserved inside the ancient bone. The paleoanthropologists who studied the Harbin skull in 2021 declared it a new (to us) species, Homo longi. But the Harbin skull still contains enough of its original proteins to tell a different story: A few of them matched specific proteins from Denisovan bones and teeth, as encoded in Denisovan DNA.

So Homo longi was a Denisovan all along, and thanks to the remarkably well-preserved skull, we finally know what the enigmatic Denisovans actually looked like.

Two early-human skulls against a black background.

Credit: Ni et al. 2021

The Harbin skull (left) and the Dali skull (right).

Unmasking Dragon Man 

Paleoanthropologist Qiang Ji, of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and colleagues tried to sequence ancient DNA from several samples of the Harbin skull’s bone and its one remaining tooth, but they had no luck. Proteins tend to be hardier molecules than DNA, though, and in samples from the skull’s temporal bone (the ones on the sides of the head, just behind the cheekbones), the researchers struck pay dirt.

They found fragments of a total of 95 proteins. Four of these had variations that were distinct to the Denisovan lineage, and the Harbin skull matched Denisovans on three of them. That’s enough to confidently say that the Harbin skull had belonged to a Denisovan. So for the past few years, we’ve had images of an almost uncannily well-preserved Denisovan skull—which is a pretty big deal, especially when you consider its complicated history.

While the world is now aware of it, until 2021, only one person had known what the skull looked like since its discovery in the 1930s. It was unearthed in Harbin, in northeast China, during the Japanese occupation of the area. Not wanting it to be seized by the occupying government, the person who found the skull immediately hid it, and he kept it hidden for most of the rest of his life.

He eventually turned it over to scientists in 2018, who published their analysis in 2021. That analysis placed the Harbin skull, along with a number of other fossils from China, in a distinct lineage within our genus, Homo, making them our species’ closest fossil relatives. They called this alleged new species Homo longi, or “Dragon Man.”

The decision to classify Homo longi as a new species was largely due to the skull’s unique combination of features (which we’ll discuss below). But it was a controversial decision, partly because paleoanthropologists don’t entirely agree about whether we should even call Neanderthals a distinct species. If the line between Neanderthals and our species is that blurry, many in the field have questioned whether Homo longi could be considered a distinct species, when it’s even closer to us than the Neanderthals.

Meanwhile, the 2021 paper also left room for debate on whether the skull might actually have belonged to a Denisovan rather than a distinct new species. Its authors acknowledge that one of the fossils they label as Homo longi had already been identified as a Denisovan based on its protein sequences. They also point out that the Harbin skull has rather large molars, which seem to be a common feature in Denisovans.

The paper’s authors argued that their Homo longi should be a separate branch of the hominin lineage, more closely related to us than to Denisovans or Neanderthals. But if the Harbin skull looked so much like Denisovan fossils and so little like fossils from our species, the alleged relationship begins to look pretty dubious. In the end, the 2021 paper’s authors dodged the issue by saying that “new genetic material will test the relationship of these populations to each other and to the Denisovans.”

Which turned out to be exactly what happened.

A ghost lineage comes to life

Denisovans are the ghost in our family tree. For scientists, a “ghost lineage” is one that’s known mostly from genetic evidence, not fossils; like a ghost, it has a presence we can sense but no physical form we can touch. With the extremely well-preserved Harbin skull identified as a Denisovan, though, we’re finally able to look our “ghost” cousins in the face.

Paleogeneticists have recovered Denisovan DNA from tiny fragments of bone and teeth, and even from the soil of a cave floor. Genomics researchers have found segments of Denisovan DNA woven into the genomes of some modern humans, revealing just how close our two species once were. But the handful of Denisovan fossils paleoanthropologists have unearthed are mostly small fragments—a finger bone here, a tooth there, a jawbone someplace else—that don’t reveal much about how Denisovans lived or what they looked like.

We know they existed and that they were something slightly different from Homo sapiens or Neanderthals. We even know when and where they lived and a surprising amount about their genetics, and we have some very strong hints about how they interacted with our species and with Neanderthals. But we didn’t really know what they looked like, and we couldn’t hope to identify their fossils without turning to DNA or protein sequences.

Until now.

Neanderthals and Denisovans probably enjoyed the view from Denisova Cave, too. Credit: loronet / Flickr

The face of a Denisovan

So what did a Denisovan look like? Harbin 1 has a wide, flattish face with small cheekbones, big eye sockets, and a heavy brow. Its upper jaw juts forward just a little, and it had big, robust molars. The cranium itself is longer and less dome-like than ours, but it’s roomy enough for a big brain (about 1,420 millimeters).

Some of those traits, like the large molars and the long, low cranium, resemble those of earlier hominin species such as Homo erectus or Homo heidelbergensis. Others, like a relatively flat face, set beneath the cranium instead of sticking out in front of it, look more like us. (Early hominins, like Australopithecus afarensis, don’t really have foreheads because their skulls are arranged so their brains are right behind their faces instead of partly above them, like ours.)

In other words, Harbin’s features are what paleoanthropologists call a mosaic, with some traits that look like they come from older lineages and some that seem more modern. Mosaics are common in the hominin family tree.

But for all the detail it reveals about the Denisovans, Harbin is still just one skull from one individual. Imagine trying to reconstruct all the diversity of human faces from just one skull. We have to assume that Densiovans—a species that spanned a huge swath of our planet, from Siberia to Taiwan, and a wide range of environments, from high-altitude plateaus in Tibet to subtropical forests—were also a pretty diverse species.

It’s also worth remembering that the Harbin skull is exactly that: a skull. It can’t tell us much about how tall its former user was, how they were built, or how they moved or worked during their life. We can’t even say for sure whether Harbin is osteologically or genetically male or female. In other words, some of the mystery of the Denisovans still endures.

What’s next?

In the 2021 papers, the researchers noted that the Harbin skull also bears a resemblance to a 200,000- to 260,000-year-old skull found in Dali County in northwestern China, a roughly 300,000-year-old skull found in Hualong Cave in eastern China, and a 260,000-year-old skull from Jinniushi (sometimes spelled Jinniushan) Cave in China. And some fossils from Taiwan and northern China have molars that look an awful lot like those in that Tibetan jawbone.

“These hominins potentially also belong to Denisovan populations,” write Ji and colleagues. That means we might already have a better sample of Denisovan diversity than this one skull suggests.

And, like the Harbin skull, the bones and teeth of those other fossils may hold ancient DNA or proteins that could help confirm that intriguing possibility.

Science, 2023 DOI: 10.1126/science.adu9677 (About DOIs).

Photo of Kiona N. Smith

Kiona is a freelance science journalist and resident archaeology nerd at Ars Technica.

We’ve had a Denisovan skull since the 1930s—only nobody knew Read More »

high-altitude-cave-used-by-tibetan-buddhists-yields-a-denisovan-fossil

High-altitude cave used by Tibetan Buddhists yields a Denisovan fossil

Eating in —

Cave deposits yield bones of sheep, yaks, carnivores, and birds that were butchered.

Image of a sheer cliff face with a narrow path leading to a cave opening.

Enlarge / The Baishiya Karst Cave, where the recently analyzed samples were obtained.

Dongju Zhang’s group (Lanzhou University)

For well over a century, we had the opportunity to study Neanderthals—their bones, the items they left behind, their distribution across Eurasia. So, when we finally obtained the sequence of their genome and discovered that we share a genetic legacy with them, it was easy to place the discoveries into context. In contrast, we had no idea Denisovans existed when sequencing DNA from a small finger bone revealed that yet another relative of modern humans had roamed Asia in the recent past.

Since then, we’ve learned little more. The frequency of their DNA in modern human populations suggest that they were likely concentrated in East Asia. But we’ve only discovered fragments of bone and a few teeth since then, so we can’t even make very informed guesses as to what they might have looked like. On Wednesday, an international group of researchers described finds from a cave on the Tibetan Plateau that had been occupied by Denisovans, which tell us a bit more about these relatives: what they ate. And that appears to be anything they could get their hands on.

The Baishiya Karst Cave

The finds come from a site called the Baishiya Karst Cave, which is perched on a cliff on the northeast of the Tibetan Plateau. It’s located at a high altitude (over 3,000 meters or nearly 11,000 feet) but borders a high open plain, as you can see in the picture below.

Oddly, it came to the attention of the paleontology community because the cave was a pilgrimage site for Tibetan monks, one of whom discovered a portion of a lower jaw that eventually was given to a university. There, people struggled to understand exactly how it fit with human populations until eventually analysis of proteins preserved within it indicated it belonged to a Denisovan. Now called the Xiahe mandible, it remains the most substantial Denisovan fossil we’ve discovered to date.

The Ganjia Basin borders the cliffs that contain the Baishiya Karst Cave.

Enlarge / The Ganjia Basin borders the cliffs that contain the Baishiya Karst Cave.

Dongju Zhang’s group (Lanzhou University)

Since then, excavations at the site had turned up a large collection of animal bones, but none that had been identified as Denisovan. Sequencing of environmental DNA preserved in the cave, however, revealed that the Denisovans had occupied the cave regularly for at least 100,000 years, meaning they were surviving at altitude during both of the last two glacial cycles.

The new work focuses in on the bones, many of which are too fragmentary to be definitively assigned to a species. To do so, the researchers purified fragments of proteins from the bones, which contain large amounts of collagen. These fragments were then separated according to their mass, a technique called mass spectrometry, which works well even with the incredibly small volumes of proteins that survive over hundreds of thousands of years.

Mass spectrometry relies on the fact that there are only a limited number of combinations of amino acids—often only one—that will produce a protein fragment of a given mass. So, if the mass spectrometry finds a signal at that mass, you can compare the possible amino acid combinations that produce it to known collagen sequences to find matches. Some of these matches will end up being in places where collagens from different species have distinct sequences of amino acids, allowing you to determine what species the bone came from.

When used this way, the technique is termed zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry, or ZooMS. And, in the case of the work described in the new paper, it identified nearly 80 percent of the bone fragments that were tested.

High-altitude cave used by Tibetan Buddhists yields a Denisovan fossil Read More »