Neanderthal child's maxilla from Baume Moula-Guercy (Soyons, Ardèche, France).

This article provides an ontogenetically-based comparative description of the Guercy 3 partial child's maxilla with Rdm2 -RM1 and unerupted RI2 -RP4 from Baume Moula-Guercy (MIS 5e) and examines its affinities to European and Middle Eastern Middle-to-Late Pleistocene (≈MIS 14-MIS 1) Homo. Description of the Guercy 3 maxilla and dentition (7.0 year ± 0.9 month) is based on observations of original fossils, casts, CT scans, literature descriptions, and virtual reconstructions. Our ontogenetic sample comprises a Preneanderthal-Neanderthal group and a Homo sapiens group. These groups are subdivided into (1) Preneanderthals (≈MIS 14-9), Early Neanderthals (MIS 7-5e), and Late Neanderthals (MIS 5d-3), and (2) Middle (MIS 5), Upper (MIS 3-2), and Late Upper Paleolithic (≈MIS 1), and recent H. sapiens. Standard techniques were employed for measurements and developmental age determinations.The Guercy 3 maxilla lacks changes found in Late Neanderthals, including the positioning of the root of the zygomatic process, infraorbital and nasal plates, premaxilla, buccal and labial alveolus, maxillary sinus, nasal cavity, and verticality of anterior tooth implantation. The morphology of the Guercy 3 maxilla more closely approximates that of Sima de los Huesos Preneanderthals, while the dentition more closely approximates the Early-Late Neanderthal condition. Maxillary remains of children and juveniles between MIS 14-MIS 5e are rare, and the available sample is fragmentary and distorted. Although fragmentary, the Guercy 3 maxilla is undistorted and provides new insights into the evolution of the midface in Neanderthals.

Endocranial anatomy of the Guercy 1 early Neanderthal from Baume Moula-Guercy (Soyons, Ardèche, France).

We provide the first comparative description of the endocranium of the Guercy 1 Early Neanderthal and examine its affinities to Preneanderthals, Neanderthals, and Homo sapiens. The Guercy 1 cranium derives from deposits chronostratigraphically and biostratigraphically dated to the Eemian Interglacial (MIS 5e). For comparative purposes, we compiled a sample of European and Southwest Asian subadult and adult Middle-to-Late Pleistocene hominins (≈MIS 12-MIS 1; N = 65). We sampled both a Preneanderthal-Neanderthal group and a Homo sapiens group. The Preneanderthal-Neanderthal group was further divided into three time-successive subgroups defined by associated MIS stages. Metric and morphological observations were made on original fossils and physical and virtual endocranial reconstructions. Guercy 1 and other Early Neanderthals, differ from Preneanderthals by increased development of the prefrontal cortex, precentral and postcentral gyri, inferior parietal lobule, and frontoparietal operculum. Early Neanderthal differ, in general, from Late Neanderthals by exhibiting less development in most of the latter brain structures. The late group additionally differentiates itself from the early group by a greater development of the rostral superior parietal lobule, angular gyrus, superior and middle temporal gyri, and caudal branches of the superior temporal gyrus. Endocranial morphology assessed along the Preneanderthal-Neanderthal sequence show that brain structures prominent in Preneanderthals are accentuated in Early-to-Late Neanderthals. However, both the Early and Late groups differentiate themselves by also showing regionally specific changes in brain development. This pattern of morphological change is consistent with a mosaic pattern of neural evolution in these Middle-to-Late Pleistocene hominins.

Neanderthal cranial remains from Baume Moula-Guercy (Soyons, Ardèche, France).

OBJECTIVES: We provide the first comparative description of the Guercy 1 cranium and isolated cranial fragments from Baume Moula-Guercy and examine their affinities to European Preneanderthals, Neanderthals, and Homo sapiens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Moula-Guercy hominins derive from deposits chronostratigraphically and biostratigraphically dated to the Eemian Interglacial (MIS 5e). For comparisons we compiled a sample of European and Southwest Asian subadult-adult Middle-to-Late Pleistocene hominins (≈MIS 14-MIS 2; N = 184). This sample represents a Preneanderthal-Neanderthal group and a H. sapiens group, both of which were further divided into three time-successive subgroups defined by associated marine isotope stages (MIS). Metric and morphological observations were made on the original fossils and a virtual reconstruction of Guercy 1. Developmental age and sex and the minimum-maximum number of individuals were assessed. RESULTS: Guercy 1 represents the remains of a late stage adolescent (≈15-16.0 years) female. Morphological and metric data combine to associate the total morphological pattern expressed in Guercy 1 with our MIS 7-MIS 5e ("Early Neanderthal") subgroup. Some features, especially those related to the frontal, suggest linkage to a paleodeme comprising the Moula-Guercy, Artenac, La Chaise Abri Suard and, possibly, the Biache-Saint-Vaast samples. DISCUSSION: Remains of MIS 7-MIS 5e Neanderthals are rare and fragmentary, especially those dated to the Last Interglacial. The Baume Moula-Guercy sample provides new insights into the total morphological pattern expressed in MIS 5e Neanderthals. Further, our results support earlier suggestions that MIS 7-MIS 5e European hominins represent a morphotype that is distinct from both earlier and later members of the Preneanderthal-Neanderthal group.

Is the incidence of elbow osteoarthritis underestimated? Insights from paleopathology.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis is uncommon at the elbow in contemporary populations. We sought to determine whether this was also the case in medieval and premodern times. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standard criteria for osteoarthritis were applied to 496 complete elbows from a necropolis in Provence, France. RESULTS: Osteoarthritis was found in 27% of elbows. Significant differences were noted across periods and age groups but not between the right and left sides. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the symptoms of elbow osteoarthritis may be far milder than expected from the underlying pathological lesions. The incidence of elbow osteoarthritis in contemporary populations is probably underestimated. The high prevalence of elbow osteoarthritis in archeological populations cannot be taken as a marker for activities placing stress on the upper limbs.