"Dragon man"prompts rethinking of Middle Pleistocene hominin systematics in Asia  

作　　者：Christopher J.Bae Wu Liu Xiujie Wu Yameng Zhang Xijun Ni 

机构地区：[1]Department of Anthropology,University of Hawaii at Manoa,Honolulu,HI 96822,USA [2]Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 10044,China [3]Joint International Research Laboratory of Environmental and Social Archaeology,Shandong University,Qingdao 266237,China

出　　处：《The Innovation》2023年第6期25-26,共2页创新（英文）

基　　金：National Natural Science Foundation of China Grant 42372001.

摘　　要：Dear Editor,Chibanian(Middle Pleistocene)hominin fossils that could not be easily assigned to Homo erectus,H.neanderthalensis,or H.sapiens have traditionally been as-signed to an alinclusive group:"archaic H.sapiens."In an insightful observation of the Chibanian record almost four decades ago however,Tattersall railed against the use of the word"archaic"in this sense when referring to the human fossil record,as he justifiably noted that no other biological organism has the word"archaic"attached to it'For example,no one refers to an earlier version of Canis domesticus as"archaic"C.domesticus.The ancestor of the domestic dog is,and always has been,considered to be C.lupus.In Tattersall's opinion,it would seem that these"archaic H.sapiens"fossils should be assigned to one or more formal taxonomic names.As such,terms such as"archaic H.sapiens,""mid-Pleistocene Homo,"and"Middle Pleistocene Homo"have al-ways been considered to be wastebasket taxa that include way too much morphological variabilty for one proposed taxonomic group.Continuing to use wastebasket taxa only hinders any attempts to understand true phylogenetic and evolutionary relationships.

关 键 词：PROMPT RECORD MIDDLE 

分 类 号：Q98[生物学—人类学]