Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35249390›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2022

Fossils, fish and tropical forests: prehistoric human adaptations on the island frontiers of Oceania.

Patrick Roberts, Katerina Douka, Monica Tromp, Stuart Bedford, Stuart Hawkins, Laurie Bouffandeau, Jana Ilgner, Mary Lucas, Sara Marzo, Rebecca Hamilton and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Tropical forests in the deep human past.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  4. Fossils, fish and tropical forests: prehistoric human adaptations on the island frontiers of Oceania.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Patrick RobertsDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4403-7548
Katerina DoukaDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Monica TrompDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0747-9099
Stuart BedfordDepartment of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Stuart HawkinsCollege of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Laurie BouffandeauUMR 7209 AASPE, CNRS, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1080-8516
Jana IlgnerDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Mary LucasDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Sara MarzoDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Rebecca HamiltonDepartment of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany.
Wallace AmbroseCollege of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
David BulbeckCollege of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Sindy LuuDepartment of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-1712-5024
Richard ShingVanuatu Cultural Centre, Port Vila, Vanuatu.
Chris GosdenSchool of Archaeology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Glenn SummerhayesSchool of Social Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Matthew SpriggsSchool of Archaeology and Anthropology, College of Arts and Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oceania is a key region for studying human dispersals, adaptations and interactions with other hominin populations. Although archaeological evidence now reveals occupation of the region by approximately 65-45 000 years ago, its human fossil record, which has the best potential to provide direct insights into ecological adaptations and population relationships, has remained much more elusive. Here, we apply radiocarbon dating and stable isotope approaches to the earliest human remains so far excavated on the islands of Near and Remote Oceania to explore the chronology and diets of the first preserved human individuals to step across these Pacific frontiers. We demonstrate that the oldest human (or indeed hominin) fossil outside of the mainland New Guinea-Aru area dates to approximately 11 800 years ago. Furthermore, although these early sea-faring populations have been associated with a specialized coastal adaptation, we show that Late Pleistocene-Holocene humans living on islands in the Bismarck Archipelago and in Vanuatu display a persistent reliance on interior tropical forest resources. We argue that local tropical habitats, rather than purely coasts or, later, arriving domesticates, should be emphasized in discussions of human diets and cultural practices from the onset of our species' arrival in this part of the world. This article is part of the theme issue 'Tropical forests in the deep human past'.

Indexed as

FossilsHominidaeAnimalsFishesForestsHumansOceaniaRadiometric Datinghuman dispersalsNear and Remote OceaniapalaeoecologyPleistocenestable isotope analysistropics

Identifiers

PMID35249390
PMCPMC8899615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.