A favourite creationists straw man parody of science says that evolutionary biologists believe evolution is a process of increasing complexity, leading eventually to humans - the most complex of all species.
This is utter nonsense, of course, being intelligently designed to easily attack and make evolutionary biology look like something no rational person would believe, so creationists dupes can feel smugly superior to scientists without bothering to learn any real science.
Creationists dogma also says that a genome was intelligently designed, so does not contain any redundant or non-coding DNA, since an intelligent designer would not have designed needless complexity and prolific waste (both characteristics of a mindless evolutionary process).
So, it leaves creationists floundering when science discovers genomes many times larger (for larger read 'more complex', in creationist terminology) than the human genome. In fact, the human genome is about average for the number of genes and size of the genome compared to other animals and very much smaller than that of many animals and plants.
Ten-year-old Tegan went looking for fossils on a South Wales beach with her mother, Clair, and found something completely unexpected - a set of footprints made by a massive dinosaur 200 million years ago.
These have been identified by dinosaur expert, Cindy Howells, from the National Museum Wales, as almost certainly the tracks of a sauropodomorpha. The tracks were in a red sandstone 'pavement' on the beach at Lavernock Point between Cardiff and Barry on a stretch of the Glamorgan Heritage Coast known to be a prehistoric hotspot.
If there is anything guaranteed to have creationists metaphorically, if not actually, screwing up their eyes, putting their hands over their ears and jumping up and down shouting "'Tisn't! 'Tisn't! 'Tisn't!" its news about the mass extinction 66 million years before 'Creation Week' that exterminated all but the non-avian dinosaurs and the early mammals and about 75% of all other species.
This event reminds them not only that Earth is very much older that their cult requires them to believe but also that Earth is not the 'finely-tuned' haven for life that their belief in a perfect creator requires them to believe. Instead, Earth is very old and subject to unpredictable catastrophes, not the least of which are cosmological events such as meteor strikes and the consequential mass extinctions.
News that a team of evolutionary biologists are reassessing what we thought we knew about the dodo, Raphus cucullatus, is a good excuse to look at what the dodo teaches us about evolution.
The dodo was a species of pigeon which had spread to the Indian Ocean island of Mauritius, where in common with many island birds had lost the ability to fly. In the context of an island with no mammalian predators, any advantage of flight is balanced against the greater disadvantage of occasionally being blown out to sea. Natural selection, with no foresight and no plan, results in a flightless bird, and, as events transpire, extinction.
The arrival of Europeans with their rats, cats and dogs and need for supplies for a long sea voyage, was an environmental change that the dodo could not adapt to because evolution has no reverse gear and rarely reinvents what was lost earlier. The ground-nesting dodo like its close relative, on a neighbouring island, the Rodriguez Island Solitaire, Pezophaps solitaria, were doomed. They were extinct by the late 17th century.
Evolution is an unintelligent process. This would not be so, if species like the dodo had been intelligently designed by an omniscient designer, who could have foreseen and prepared for the coming of Europeans with their rats, cats and dogs. It is not an intelligent act to design a species headed for inevitable extinction because it can't adapt to what can be anticipated.
What information do you have on the 'Oxford dodo' and it's role in literature and biology?
The "Oxford dodo" is a significant artifact in both biological and literary history. Here's an overview of its importance:
Historical Background
The Dodo: The dodo (Raphus cucullatus) was a flightless bird native to Mauritius, an island in the Indian Ocean. It became extinct in the late 17th century due to overhunting by humans and the introduction of non-native animals.
Oxford Dodo: The Oxford dodo refers to the most complete known specimen of the dodo, which is housed at the Oxford University Museum of Natural History. This specimen includes the only remaining soft tissue (a dried head and a foot) from any dodo in the world.
Role in Biology
Scientific Study: The Oxford dodo has played a crucial role in scientific studies on the species. Since it includes soft tissue, researchers have been able to extract DNA, providing insights into the dodo's genetic makeup and its relationship to other bird species.
Extinction Studies: The dodo is often cited as one of the earliest recorded examples of human-caused extinction. The Oxford specimen has contributed to studies on extinction, illustrating the impact of human activity on isolated ecosystems.
Role in Literature
Lewis Carroll's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland": One of the most famous literary references to the dodo is in Lewis Carroll's 1865 novel *Alice's Adventures in Wonderland*. The dodo in the story is believed to represent Carroll himself, who had a stammer and sometimes introduced himself as "Do-do-Dodgson" (Carroll's real name was Charles Dodgson). The character of the dodo in the story is depicted as a wise figure who proposes the "Caucus-race," where everyone wins and all must have prizes—a satire on political processes.
Symbol of Extinction: In literature and popular culture, the dodo has come to symbolize obsolescence and extinction, often representing something that is outdated or doomed to disappear. The Oxford dodo, as a physical reminder of a lost species, has reinforced this symbolism.
Cultural and Educational Impact
Exhibitions: The Oxford dodo has been featured in various exhibitions, not just as a scientific specimen but also as a cultural icon. It serves as a powerful educational tool about biodiversity loss and conservation.
Inspiration for Research and Art: The dodo has inspired a wide range of research, from studies in paleontology and conservation biology to its portrayal in art, literature, and even in discussions about colonialism and its impact on indigenous species.
Recent Developments
DNA Analysis: Advances in DNA technology have allowed scientists to conduct more detailed studies on the Oxford dodo's remains, leading to a better understanding of its biology and the causes of its extinction. These studies are crucial for understanding the dynamics of extinction and the evolution of island species.
Conservation Lessons: The story of the dodo, as illustrated by the Oxford specimen, is frequently used in discussions about conservation and the need to protect endangered species today. It serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of human activity on the environment.
In summary, the Oxford dodo is more than just a biological specimen; it is a symbol of extinction and a cultural icon that has influenced literature, conservation science, and our understanding of human impact on the natural world.
Is there any evidence for the story that it was rescued from a bonfire of 'rubbish' at either the Ashmolean or the Oxford University Natural History Museum?
The story that the Oxford dodo was rescued from a bonfire of "rubbish" at the Ashmolean Museum, or the Oxford University Museum of Natural History is a widely circulated anecdote, but its accuracy is somewhat debated. Here's what is known:
Origins of the Story
Historical Context: The story typically claims that the dodo specimen, or parts of it, were nearly discarded during a clean-up or reorganization at one of the Oxford museums, likely the Ashmolean Museum, where the dodo was initially housed. The account suggests that someone recognized the value of the remains just in time to save them from being burned as rubbish.
Attribution: This anecdote is often linked to John Tradescant the Younger, an early naturalist and collector, whose collection formed the core of the Ashmolean Museum's early holdings. It is also sometimes associated with Elias Ashmole, the museum's founder.
Supporting Evidence
Lack of Concrete Records: There is no definitive archival evidence or documentation to substantiate the bonfire rescue story. The tale seems to have been passed down through oral history and later written accounts, but without solid documentary support.
Museum Records: Some records suggest that by the late 18th century, parts of the dodo specimen were discarded because they had decayed. The surviving head and foot were kept, while the rest of the body, which had likely decomposed significantly, was disposed of. This might have contributed to the myth that the specimen was almost entirely lost.
Plausibility and Scholarly Opinions
Scholarly Views: Historians and museum curators generally agree that while the story is plausible, it is likely an exaggeration or a simplification of events. It is plausible that during a period of reorganization or decay of the specimen, parts of the dodo were discarded, and someone recognized the importance of preserving the head and foot.
Interpretation: The bonfire story has become part of the dodo's lore, serving as a dramatic reminder of how close we came to losing this invaluable specimen. Whether or not it is literally true, the story underscores the precarious nature of historical artifacts and the importance of preservation.
Cultural Impact
Moral of the Story: The bonfire rescue tale is often used to highlight the fragility of historical artifacts and the importance of vigilance in preservation. It also serves to enhance the mystique of the dodo, a species already surrounded by a sense of loss and extinction.
In summary, while the story of the Oxford dodo being rescued from a bonfire at either the Ashmolean or the Oxford University Museum of Natural History is an intriguing one, it remains an anecdote with limited concrete evidence. The story has likely been embellished over time, though it reflects the real dangers historical specimens face when not properly cared for.
The extinction of the dodo on Mauritius had a long-lasting effect on the island's ecosystem of which the dodo was an essential part, but its contribution to the history of Oxford and it's literary heritage that is perhaps as interesting, coming as it does from the fact that the 'New' Ashmolean Museum became the depository of the only known remains of a dodo, which, when the collection in the Ashmolean was shared with the Oxford University Natural History Museum, and Pitt Rivers museum, was housed there, where it fascinated the Oxford Academic, Charles Ludwig Dodgson, aka Lewis Carroll (the Latinized form of Charles Ludwig).
Dodgson had a stammer and would introduce himself as Charles Do-Do-Dodgson, earning him the nickname Dodo Dodgson. When he wrote Alice in Wonderland, he based the Dodo on the 'Oxford dodo' and himself.
Part of the Oxford story concerning the Oxford dodo is probably apocryphal but serves to illustrate the importance of conservation, the fragility of specimens and recognising the importance of specimens which may not seem important at the time. The story is that it was saved from destruction at the last minute when it was destined for a bonfire of 'rubbish' that was being thrown out. The story varies as to who rescued it and whether it was the Ashmolean or the Natural History Museum that was about to burn it. What is probably true, and probably contributed to the story, is the fact that there was initially much more of the dodo but much of it decayed and was destroyed, leaving only the beak, feet and skin of the head and face.
The new study by researchers from the University of Southampton and Oxford University Museum is the subject of an open access paper in the Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, and a University of Southampton News release:
Rethinking the Dodo Researchers are setting out to challenge our misconceptions about the Dodo, one of the most well-known but poorly understood species of bird.
In a paper published today in the Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society researchers from the University of Southampton, Natural History Museum (NHM) and Oxford University Museum of Natural History have undertaken the most comprehensive review of the taxonomy of the Dodo and its closest relative, the Rodriguez Island Solitaire.
They’ve painstakingly gone through 400 years’ worth of scientific literature and visited collections around the UK to ensure this iconic species, embodying humanity’s destructive potential, is correctly classified.
The Dodo was the first living thing that was recorded as being present and then disappeared. Before this, it hadn’t been thought possible for human beings to influence God’s creation in such a way. This was a time before the scientific principles and systems we rely on to label and classify a species were in place. Both the Dodo and the Solitaire were gone before we had a chance to understand what we were looking at.
Dr Neil J. Gostling, co-corresponding author
School of Biological Sciences
Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences
University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Correcting the record
Much of what was written about the Dodo and the Solitaire was based on accounts from Dutch sailors, representations by artists, and incomplete remains.
The lack of a definitive reference point (type specimen) or convention to label species (zoological nomenclature) led to a series of misidentifications in the centuries following their extinction. New species such as the Nazarene Dodo, the White Dodo, and the White Solitaire were named, but the paper confirms that none of these creatures existed. Still, these erroneous ‘pebbles’ sent ripples through the waters of zoological literature.
By the 18th and early 19th centuries, the Dodo and the Solitaire were considered to be mythological beasts. It was the hard work of Victorian-era scientists who finally proved that the Dodo and the Solitaire were not mythological but were giant ground doves. Unfortunately, no one could agree how many species there had been. Throughout most of the 19th and 20th centuries, researchers thought there were three different species, although some people thought there had been four or even five different species.
Dr. Mark T. Young, co-corresponding author
School of Biological Sciences
Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences
University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
To unpick this confusion, researchers went through all the literature on the Dodo and Rodriguez Solitaire encompassing hundreds of accounts dating back to 1598 and visited specimens around the UK, including the world’s only surviving soft tissue from the Dodo, in the Oxford Museum.
More has been written about the Dodo than any other bird, yet virtually nothing is known about it in life. Based on centuries of nomenclatural confusion, and some 400 years after its extinction, the Dodo and Solitaire, continue to prompt heated debate. We’ve gone from where the first statements were made, seen how these have developed, and identified various rabbit holes to correct the record, as best we can.
Dr Julian Hume, co-author
Bird Group
Natural History Museum
Tring Hertfordshire, UK.
Through this work, researchers were able to confirm that both birds were members of the columbid (pigeon and dove) family.
Understanding its wider relationships with other pigeons is of taxonomic importance, but from the perspective of conservation, the loss of the dodo and the solitaire a few decades later means a unique branch of the pigeon family tree was lost. There are no other birds alive today like these two species of giant ground dove.
Dr Neil J. Gostling.
Challenging our misconceptions
The Dodo was an integral part of the ecosystem of Mauritius.
Artwork by Julian Pender Hume.
The researchers believe the popular idea of the Dodo as a fat, slow animal, predestined for extinction is flawed.
Even four centuries later, we have so much to learn about these remarkable birds. Was the Dodo really the dumb, slow animal we’ve been brought up to believe it was? The few written accounts of live Dodos say it was a fast-moving animal that loved the forest.
Dr. Mark T. Young.
Evidence from bone specimens suggests that the Dodo’s tendon which closed its toes was exceptionally powerful, analogous to climbing and running birds alive today. The dodo was almost certainly a very active, very fast animal. These creatures were perfectly adapted to their environment, but the islands they lived on lacked mammalian predators. So, when humans arrived, bringing rats, cats, and pigs, the Dodo and the Solitaire never stood a chance.
Dodos held an integral place in their ecosystems. If we understand them, we might be able to support ecosystem recovery in Mauritius, perhaps starting to undo the damage that began with the arrival of humans nearly half a millennium ago.
Dr Neil J. Gostling.
Learning ‘valuable lessons’
The study marks the beginning of a wider project to understand the biology of these iconic animals.
The mystery of the Dodo bird is about to be cracked wide open. We have assembled a fantastic team of scientists to uncover the true nature of this famous extinct bird. But we are not just looking back in time - our research could help save today's endangered birds too.
Using cutting-edge computer technology, we are piecing together how the Dodo lived and moved. This isn't just about satisfying our curiosity. By understanding how birds evolved in the past, we are learning valuable lessons that could help protect bird species today. It's like solving a 300-year-old puzzle, and the solution might just help us prevent more birds from going the way of the Dodo.
Professor Marcus O Heller, co-author
Bioengineering Research Group
Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences
University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Palaeoartist Karen Fawcett’s Dodo sculpture
The project will include work with palaeoartist Karen Fawcett , who has created a detailed, life-size model of the Dodo to bring the words on the pages of books and journal articles to life.
This work has been the merging of science and art to achieve accuracy and realism so that these creatures come back from the dead, real and tangible for people to touch and see.
Karen Fawcett
Palaeoartist
The work is supported by the University of Southampton’s Institute for Life Sciences.
The Institute was delighted to support this exciting work which exemplifies Southampton’s strength in interdisciplinary research and advanced scholarship.
Professor Max Crispin.
Director
Institute for Life Sciences.
University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Creationists might want to ignore or prepare to lie about the following, especially the section on the terminology and nomenclature background, which contains a description of how taxonomy has adapted to the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory, cladistics, shared common ancestry and monophyletics as it will make distressing reading for those who have been fooled into believing that biologists are abandoning the TOE as not fit for purpose, since nothing could be further from the truth, as this paper shows:
Abstract
The Dodo and its extinct sister species, the Solitaire, are iconic exemplars of the destructive capabilities of humanity. These secondarily terrestrial columbids became extinct within a century of their first encounter with humanity. Their rapid extinction, with little material retained in natural history collections, led 18th and some early 19th century naturalists to believe that these aberrant birds were mythological. This meant that the nomenclatural publications in which their scientific nomina were established were based on accounts written before the species became extinct. As such, no type specimens were designated for either the Dodo or the Solitaire. Our in-depth historical overview of both species and associated family-group nomina found that the nominal authority of the Dodo-based family group is not what is reported in the literature. Moreover, our detailed review of the family-group nomina based on columbid genera ensures that the current columbid family-group systematization is valid. Changing nomenclatural norms between the 19th and 20th centuries had a profound impact on Dodo nomenclature; so much so that the Dodo is an example of how pervasive nomenclatural ‘ripples’ can be and a warning for our current world of multiple nomenclatural codes.
INTRODUCTION
The Mauritian Dodo, †Raphus cucullatus (Linnaeus, 1758) (Fig. 1), and the Rodrigues Solitaire, †Pezophaps solitaria (Gmelin, 1789) (Fig. 2), are textbook examples of evolutionary transitions and of human-made extinctions. Their morphologies were so aberrant that for a time, during the 18th and early 19th centuries, they were considered mythological (Duncan 1828, de Blainville 1835, Strickland 1844, 1848, Hume 2006; see Figs 1, 2). As said by Strickland (1848: 4): ‘So rapid and so complete was their extinction that the vague descriptions given of them [Dodo and Solitaire] by early navigators were long regarded as fabulous or exaggerated, and these birds, almost contemporaries of our great-grandfathers, became associated in the minds of many persons with the Griffin and the Phœnix of mythological antiquity’. The existence of the Solitaire, in particular, was long doubted, because for several decades it was known solely from the descriptions by Leguat (1708). Strickland (1844: 324) mentioned that the Solitaire had been considered either ‘fictitious, or to be founded on an imperfect description of the true Dodo’.
Dodo (†Raphus cucullatus) mounted composite skeleton [NHMUK S/1988.50.1 (PV A 3302)]. A, cranial view. B, left lateral view.
Solitaire (†Pezophaps solitaria) mounted skeletons (on display at the Royal College of Surgeons, London, UK in 2023). A, female individual. B, male individual. Note the difference in skeleton size and robusticity between the sexes.
A series of key papers during the early 19th century ‘resurrected’ the Dodo and the Solitaire from the realm of the mythological to the material (Duncan 1828, de Blainville 1835, Strickland 1844). The seminal work of Strickland (1848) and Melville (1848.1), in their shared volume, described in detail the anatomy of specimens still found in European collections at that time, in addition to giving an authoritative account of the history of the two species. However, it was not until new expeditions to the islands of Mauritius and Rodrigues during the 1860s that new incomplete skeletons of both species were discovered. The skeletal remains discovered in the ‘Mare aux Songes’ marsh during 1865 (Clark 1866, Hume et al. 2009) allowed the Dodo to be described more fully (Owen 1866.1), and the Solitaire was described by Newton and Newton (1868, 1869) after the Jenner excavations of 1865 discovered skeletal remains (Parish 2013: 234; Hume et al. 2015).
There has been renewed interest in the biology of the Dodo and the Solitaire in the 21st century. Studies have explored Dodo body mass (Brassey et al. 2016, van Heteren et al. 2017) and bone histology (Angst et al. 2017.1), and the endocranial anatomy of both species has been reconstructed digitally from computed tomography scans (Gold et al. 2016.1). New Dodo material has been discovered from Mare aux Songes, and the ecosystem of the Mare aux Songes Lagerstätte has been studied (see Rijsdijk et al. 2009.1, 2015.1, Meijer et al. 2012). The remarkable ‘Thirioux Dodos’ have been described in-depth, which includes the most complete Dodo skeleton known (Claessens and Hume 2015.2; Claessens et al. 2015.3). There have even been attempts to reconstruct digitally how these animals would have looked (Rodríguez-Pontes 2016.2). With each decade, our understanding of these aberrant birds is being revolutionized. To ensure that this work is on a firm basis, we need to ensure that the alpha and beta taxonomy (and accompanying nomenclature) of both species is stable. As we will show, there are no known type specimens for either species. Moreover, given that the use of Dodo-based (i.e. †Raphus) family-group nomina is now accepted within columbid systematics, we need to ensure that these names are themselves valid, in order to maintain the nomenclatural stability of extant pigeons and doves. To those ends, we provide an in-depth historical overview of the Dodo, the Solitaire, and the family-group nomina based upon them. We also establish a new nomen to unite both species: †Raphina.
Terminology and nomenclatural background
Before starting our historical overview, it is worth stating that the current rules of zoological nomenclatural are ‘relatively’ recent and have evolved from prior rules/suggestions made during the 19th century. We wish this to be clear from the outset, in order that readers will not mistake our comments hereafter as undue criticisms of past workers. There have also been dramatic shifts in both systematics (the paradigms and methods used to hypothesize clades) and nomenclature (the establishment of names for said clades, and the rules governing those names) between the 18th and 21st centuries. During the 18th and 19th centuries, the rules and norms of zoological nomenclature were being developed (e.g. Linnaeus 1758, Kirby 1815, Westwood 1836, 1837a, 1837.1b, Strickland 1837.2, 1878, Strickland et al. 1843, Dall 1878.1, Société Zoologique de France 1881, Douvillé 1882, American Ornithologists’ Union 1886, Blanchard 1889, Bütschli et al. 1893), prior to their widespread formulation and promulgation during the 20th century (ICZN 1905, 1961, 1964, 1985, 1999). Moreover, the paradigms used to hypothesize taxa were distinctly different, with the transition from a pre-evolutionary paradigm to an acceptance of paraphyletic groupings and groups united based on shared similarity, which then shifted to our current paradigm based on shared common ancestry and monophyletic groups (for a general overview of thought, see Mayr 1942, 1965, 1982, Hennig 1966, Nelson 1973, de Queiroz 1988, Mishler 2009.2; and for some clade-specific examples, see Allard et al. 1999.1, Dornburg and Near 2021, Cotterill et al. 2014 and the references therein).
The current International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (the Fourth Edition, ICZN 1999, 2003, 2012.1, 2016.3; ‘Zoological Code’ hereafter) is a direct descendent of ‘Blanchard’s Code’ (Blanchard 1889) via the Règles Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoologique [International Rules of Zoological Nomenclature] (ICZN 1905). Raphaël Blanchard, the ‘father of International Zoological Nomenclature’ (Bock 1994: 33), was the Chair of the nomenclatural committee of the International Congress of Zoology, the first President of the International Committee on Zoological Nomenclature, and the Editor of the French edition of the Règles Internationales. For the first International Congress of Zoology, he wrote an overview of zoological nomenclature and outlined what he believed would be an acceptable set of rules for the international corpus of zoologists (‘Blanchard’s Code’; Blanchard 1889). ‘Blanchard’s Code’ did not exist in a vacuum, because a plethora of nomenclatural codes for zoology had been proposed during the 19th century, with the earliest comprehensive code being proposed by the British Association for the Advancement of Science (‘Strickland’s Code’).
‘Strickland’s Code’ (Strickland et al. 1843) was formulated by a committee of British zoologists and palaeontologists (including famous individuals, such as Charles Darwin and Richard Owen, in addition to Hugh Strickland, who was pivotal in our understanding of the Dodo and the Solitaire), who set down many of the norms we recognize today; norms of the so-called ‘Linnean’ system of nomenclature, although this is perhaps more accurately called ‘Linnean–Westwoodian–Stricklandian’ nomenclature (sensuDubois 2011: 4–5). However, there were some important differences between ‘Strickland’s Code’ and the current Zoological Code (ICZN 1999), such as the proposed ‘start date’ for zoological nomenclature, which in ‘Strickland’s Code’ was 1766, beginning with the publication of the 12th edition of Systema Naturæ (Linnaeus 1766). The ensuing controversy over the ‘start date’ for zoological nomenclature cost ‘Strickland’s Code’ support amongst zoologists (Linsley and Usinger 1959: 41), with Dall (1878.1: 15) noting that the starting point used by the British Association had begun ‘admitting to recognition some ichthyological works printed between the dates of the tenth and twelfth editions [of Systema Naturæ]’. Other national societies began proposing their own nomenclatural codes, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science (Dall 1878.1), the Société Zoologique de France (Société Zoologique de France 1881), the American Ornithologists’ Union (American Ornithologists’ Union 1886), and the Deutsche Zoologische Gesellschaft (Bütschli et al. 1893), as did the Congrès international de géologie [International Congress of Geology] (Douvillé 1882). It was ‘Blanchard’s Code’ (Blanchard 1889) and the subsequent Règles Internationales (ICZN 1905) that would begin to bring international stability to zoological nomenclature (for further details, see Linsley and Usinger 1959, Bock 1994).
Zoological nomenclature of the 18th and early 19th centuries did not adhere to the quasi-legal system in place today. The renaming of pre-existing genera and specific epithets was commonplace (particularly up to the 1840s–1850s). Therefore, readers should not be surprised that the principal of priority with regard to nominal authority was not adhered to in Dodo nomenclature during this time period or that the formulation of names does not meet the requirements on the Zoological Code as we understand it today (ICZN 1999). It is also worth noting that when the Dodo and Solitaire were first named (Linnaeus 1766, Gmelin 1789), the concept of nomenclatural types did not exist. Witteveen (2016.4: 156) credited Westwood (1837a) as the originator of this concept, which then became incorporated into ‘Strickland’s Code’ (and subsequent nomenclatural codes). As such, type specimens were not designated for the Dodo or the Solitaire.
Before continuing, we also need to define the terminology we will be using. We will follow the suggestions and recommendations of Dubois and Fitzhugh. Dubois (2021.1: 39) noted that, ‘the term taxonomy is traditionally used in two distinct senses, to designate either a scientific discipline, or any scientific classification of organisms produced by this discipline and adopted as valid by taxonomists’. In order to distinguish between both meanings, Dubois (2005: 406) erected the term ergotaxonomy for the latter (‘classification used by a given author in a given work’, Dubois 2006.1: 250). To remove any ambiguity, we use the term ergotaxonomy to refer to any ‘taxonomic framework’ considered valid by their proposer.
We will use the term ‘systematics’ rather than ‘taxonomy’ throughout. There is disagreement within the field of evolutionary biology regarding whether taxonomy and systematics are different subfields (e.g. Simpson 1961.1, Wiley and Lieberman 2011.1), whether taxonomy is a subdiscipline within systematics (e.g. Michener et al. 1970, Dubois 2006.1, Pavlinov 2013.1, Winsor 2023 and the references therein), or whether systematics is a subfield of taxonomy (e.g. Toepfer 2011.2). However, others, such as Mayr and Ashlock (1991) and Fitzhugh (2008), have proposed that taxonomy is a synonym of systematics. We will follow Fitzhugh (2008: 54) and use the term ‘systematics’ throughout.
We also use the term ‘systematization’ in preference to ‘classification’ following Fitzhugh (2008). Fitzhugh (2008: 54) defined classification as the ‘segregation of objects into classes based on specified properties’, whereas systematization is ‘the organization of observations into a system of concepts, in the form of hypotheses, according to theory’ (the definitions of these terms given by de Queiroz 1988: 241 was similar). We consider the latter to be the best description of systematics, because both species and ‘higher-level’ clades are explanatory hypotheses rather than objects (e.g. see Fitzhugh 2005.1, 2008, Mortimer et al. 2021.2).
Herein, we follow ornithological convention and capitalize English vernacular names of species (Parkes 1978; and the International Ornithological Committee World Bird List v.13.2; https://www.worldbirdnames.org/english-names/spelling-rules/). Moreover, we use the English vernacular names for columbid species that appear in the International Ornithological Committee World Bird List v.13.2 (https://www.worldbirdnames.org/new/bow/pigeons/), but with the following exceptions: (i) Didunculus strigirostris (Jardine, 1845) is referred to as the Samoan Tooth-billed Pigeon, because another species (†Didunculus placopedetesSteadman, 2006.2) was present throughout the islands that constitute the Kingdom of Tonga until ~2850 years ago (Steadman 2006.2; Worthy and Burley 2020) and was also present on Efate Island, Vanuatu (Worthy et al. 2015.4); and (ii) we generally refer to †Pezophaps solitaria as the Solitaire rather than the Rodrigues Solitaire, in order that it is consistent with the use of ‘the Dodo’ for †Raphus cucullatus (i.e. not using Mauritian Dodo). We follow Dubois (2000: 39) in using the term nomen (plural nomina) for any ‘scientific name’ that is formulated in compliance with a nomenclatural code, which, in this case, is the Zoological Code (ICZN 1999, 2003, 2012.2, 2016.5).
Our open nomenclature and synonymy lists follow the recommendations of Richter (1948) (see: Matthews 1973.1, who outlined them in English, and Becker 2001, who gave a recent overview in German), Sigovini et al. (2016.6), and Horton et al. (2021.3). Finally, we use the dagger (†) symbol in front of nomenclatural nomina that denote extinct taxa (except when they appear in quotations).
The dodo was named before biologists understood about evolution and believed species were created without ancestors, so the idea of a systematic nomenclature which reflected the evolutionary relationships between species had not occurred to them, so the dodo and its close relative, the Rodriguez Island Solitaire, were given different family names. This new study proposes a new family name, Raphina, for both species which reflects their evolutionary relationship and puts them in their correct position in the evolutionary tree of the pigeons and doves (the columbids) based on a DNA analysis.
The fact that human agency could drive a species to extinction was a shock to the early biologists who subscribed to the 'creation' mythos and assumed that what God had created mankind would be unable to destroy. We now know that both parts of the superstition were wrong and disastrously so. Not only are species the product of their environment but can be destroyed simply by changing that environment. There is no god playing any part in the process and least of all protecting its 'creation'.
This realisation made the Oxford dodo an object of fascination especially for academics like Do-Do-Dodgson who saw in it a metaphor for revealed wisdom about the nature of reality and the difference between it and human expectations, based on religious mythology.
Creationists might find it distressing to read how modern taxonomy has been revised to reflect the modern evolutionary synthesis, recognising that species can be arranged in clades and family trees based on how they evolved and diversified from common ancestors which themselves were the result of diversification from earlier common ancestors. They will probably find it distressing too how a DNA analysis of an extinct species like the dodo is confirming that view of the origins of biodiversity and no sign of that impending abandonment of the Theory of Evolution that their cult leaders have been assuring them is about to happen, any day now, real soon.
Just as amputees can't regrow a lost limb, so spine-injured patients can't repair a damaged spine, and yet, several species of amphibian can grow new limbs and Zebra fish can grow a new spinal cord.
Which leaves intelligent [sic] design creationists to explain why, if their putative designer can give some species the ability to regrow a lost limb or repair a transected spinal cord, he chose not to give that ability to his supposedly favourite, 'special' creation, humans.
But of course, those are not the only abilities and systems that could have been better in humans if the same designer designed other animals with superior abilities and systems:
Birds of prey have a vastly superior visual acuity to humans; birds in general have a much more efficient respiratory system which enables then to fly at heights at which we would be unconscious for lack of oxygen. Many animals have a vastly superior sense of hearing to what we have, and bats have a better immune system. Elephants and sharks both rarely get cancer, and so the list goes on.
Fusarium wilt of banana is currently decimating the Cavendish banana—the world’s most popular commercially available banana. Once present in a banana field, the fungus cannot be eradicated, making future production of Cavendish bananas almost impossible.
The soil-borne fungus Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Cubense is a specialised form of F. oxysporum which parasitized banana plants (Mussa sp.), causing Panama disease or Fusarium wilt. Entire plantations can be wiped out in a year.
It is believed to have originated in Southeast Asia and was first reported in Australia in 1876. Since then, it has spread to almost all banana-producing parts of the world. One method of spread is by infected rhizomes which appear normal. Cultivated bananas are seedless so need to be reproduced asexually with offshoots or rhizomes.
The fungus kills the plant by triggering a self-defence mechanism that produced first a gel, then tylose which block the conductive tissues and prevent water and nutrients from travelling up from the roots.
By the mid-20th Century, resistant cultivars of the ‘Cavendish’ banana had been developed. However, the fungus has managed to overcome this resistance in the Eastern Hemisphere, and this is expected to spread to the Western Hemisphere. Currently, there are no other resistant cultivars available. There is now a real possibility that this economically and nutritionally important crop could become extinct!
Creationism’s putative intelligent designer appears to have a down on bananas and has twice modified a soil-born fungus to kill them. Firstly before 1876 and then again in the 20th Century, to overcome resistance in the ‘Cavendish’ cultivar. It doesn’t just stop at bananas, either. F. oxysporum also affects the plantain, Mussa acuminata × balbisiana, which is a staple crop in tropical regions.
An outcrop called ‘the Bubble’ on Eileach an Naoimh (Holy Isle). It shows a huge white rock fragment, tens of metres across, which was originally part of the underlying rock sequence. The layering in the carbonate rock has been squeezed tightly under immense pressure and transported by thick ice sheets to its final resting as one of many different rock fragments within a moraine.
Credit: Professor Graham Shields
In the foreground are limestone beds of the pre-glacial Garvellach Formation. The image looks north from Garbh Eileach over to Dun Chonnuil. Due to tectonic tilting, the sedimentary layers get younger, and closer to the onset of glaciation, as you move to the right.
Creationism continues to be overwhelmed by a deluge of science papers that incidentally refutes it. In fact, with the latest refutation, being buried beneath an avalanche or crushed under a glacier would probably be better metaphors.
All that remains to sweep it away as surely as a glacier sweeps all before it, is for creationists to find the honesty, humility and intellectual integrity to stop believing their superstitions trump reality and accept that they are not as important as they like to imagine they are.
The latest refutation comes in the form of an open access paper just published in the Journal of the Geological Society which presents evidence of a sudden transition from relatively warm climate to a period of intense cold that resulted in 'snowball Earth' between 660 and 720 million years ago - a period known as the 'Sturtian Glaciation'.
The flood of science papers that casually and unintentionally refute creationism shows no signs of slackening; if anything, it's reaching the status of a tsunami. This is of course a function of the fact that with 99.9975% of the history of Earth occurred before creationists believe Earth was magically created out of nothing, which gives a very high probability that anything about the geological or biological history of Earth will have occurred in that long pre-'Creation Week' period.
So, it shouldn't surprise anyone that a Team Led by researchers from the Australian National University and the Autonomous University of Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain, have uncovered evidence of Neanderthal habitation of a rock shelter known as the Abric Pizarro in the Pyrenean foothills, in south-western France. The discovery challenges the belief that Neanderthals lived by hunting large animals. The evidence is that that community of Neanderthals consumed a wide variety of small animals and plants.
What can you tell me about the Abric Pizarro in the Pyrenean foothills, and the Neanderthal community who lived there between 100,000 and 65,000 years ago?
The Abric Pizarro is an archaeological site located in the Pyrenean foothills of southwestern France. This site has gained significant attention for its well-preserved evidence of Neanderthal habitation, particularly during the Middle Paleolithic period, between roughly 100,000 and 65,000 years ago. The site provides crucial insights into the lives of the Neanderthals who occupied this region, offering a window into their daily activities, environmental adaptation, and survival strategies.
Geographic and Environmental Context
The Abric Pizarro site is a rock shelter situated within a broader landscape that would have been rich in resources for the Neanderthals. The Pyrenean foothills offered a diverse environment with access to water sources, varied vegetation, and an abundance of game. This location would have been ideal for the seasonal movement of hunter-gatherer groups, providing shelter from the elements and proximity to essential resources.
Neanderthal Habitation and Activities
The archaeological evidence at Abric Pizarro indicates that Neanderthals used this site repeatedly over thousands of years. The layers of sediment found in the rock shelter contain numerous artifacts, including stone tools, animal bones, and other material remains that suggest a range of activities took place here.
Stone Tools: The lithic assemblage from Abric Pizarro is characteristic of the Mousterian tradition, which is associated with Neanderthals across Europe. These tools were primarily made from locally available stone and include hand axes, scrapers, and points. These implements were used for various purposes, including hunting, butchering animals, and processing plant materials.
Hunting and Subsistence: The faunal remains discovered at the site provide evidence of the Neanderthal diet, which was heavily reliant on large game such as deer, horses, and possibly even smaller mammals. The presence of cut marks on bones suggests that the Neanderthals at Abric Pizarro were proficient hunters and that they butchered animals on-site for food.
Seasonal Occupation: Some researchers believe that the site was likely used seasonally, with Neanderthals returning to the shelter at certain times of the year when game was more plentiful or when the weather made other areas less hospitable. This seasonal occupation would have been part of a broader pattern of movement across the landscape, typical of Neanderthal groups who adapted to changing environments over time.
Social Organization: While direct evidence of social structure is difficult to ascertain from a single site, the repeated use of Abric Pizarro over many millennia suggests that it may have been a significant location for the Neanderthal community. The organization of space within the shelter, as inferred from the distribution of artifacts, indicates that different areas may have been designated for specific activities, reflecting a level of social organization.
Significance of Abric Pizarro
The importance of Abric Pizarro lies in its contribution to the broader understanding of Neanderthal life in Europe. The site provides a snapshot of how these early humans adapted to the challenging environments of the Pyrenean foothills. It also highlights the technological skills of Neanderthals, particularly in stone tool production and hunting.
Moreover, the long duration of occupation at Abric Pizarro offers valuable data for understanding the changes in Neanderthal behavior over time, including how they responded to climatic shifts and environmental changes during the Middle Paleolithic. This site is a key part of the mosaic of Neanderthal archaeology in Europe, helping to build a more complete picture of their way of life.
In summary, Abric Pizarro is a significant archaeological site that sheds light on the lives of Neanderthals in the Pyrenean foothills, revealing aspects of their subsistence strategies, technological abilities, and social organization during a crucial period in prehistory.
The Australian National University and Autonomous University of Barcelona team, led by Dr. Sofia C. Samper Carro, have just published their findings in the Journal of Archaeological Science. It is also explained in an Australian National University Press release:
Rare archaeological site reveals ‘surprising’ Neanderthal behaviour at Pyrenees foothillsAn unchartered area in the foothills of the Southern Pyrenees in Spain is providing insights into a poorly known period of Neanderthal history, offering clues that could help archaeologists uncover the mystery of their downfall, according to new research from The Australian National University (ANU) and the Autonomous University of Barcelona (CEPAP-UAB).
Abric Pizarro is one of only a few sites worldwide dating from 100,000 to 65,000 years ago during a period called MIS 4. The researchers have gathered hundreds of thousands of artefacts, including stone tools, animal bones and other evidence, providing significant data about the Neanderthal way of life during that time — largely unknown in human history until now.
The findings reveal Neanderthals were able to adapt to their environment, challenging the archaic humans’ reputation as slow-footed cavemen and shedding light on their survival and hunting skills.
Lead author and ANU archaeologist, Dr Sofia Samper Carro, said that the findings show that Neanderthals knew the best ways to exploit the area and territory and were resilient through harsh climate conditions.
Our surprising findings at Abric Pizarro show how adaptable Neanderthals were. The animal bones we have recovered indicate that they were successfully exploiting the surrounding fauna, hunting red deer, horses and bison, but also eating freshwater turtles and rabbits, which imply a degree of planning rarely considered for Neanderthals.
Dr Sofia C. Samper Carro, lead author
School of Culture, History and Language
College of Asia and the Pacific
Australian National University, Australia.
According to the researchers, these new insights challenge widespread beliefs that Neanderthals only hunted large animals, such as horses and rhinoceros.
Through the bones that we are finding, which display cut marks, we have direct proof that Neanderthals were capable of hunting small animals. The bones on this site are very well preserved, and we can see marks of how Neanderthals processed and butchered these animals. Our analysis of the stone artefacts also demonstrates variability in the type of tools produced, indicating Neanderthals’ capability to exploit the available resources in the area.
Dr Sofia C. Samper Carro.
Shedding light on this crucial transitional period helps archaeologists edge closer to solving a mystery that has plagued researchers for decades: what drove the Neanderthals to extinction?
According to the researchers, finding sites like Abric Pizarro, from this specific and not well-recorded period, gives information about how Neanderthals lived when modern humans were not in the area yet and shows that they were thriving.
ANU archaeologist Dr Sofia Samper Carro says the insights found at Abric Pizarro challenge widespread beliefs that Neanderthals only hunted large animals.
Photo: Dr Sofia Samper Carro.
The unique site at Abric Pizarro gives a glimpse of Neanderthal behaviour in a landscape they had been roaming for hundreds of thousands of years. Neanderthals disappeared around 40,000 years ago. Suddenly, we modern humans appear in this region of the Pyrenees, and the Neanderthals disappear. But before that, Neanderthals had been living in Europe for almost 300,000 years. They clearly knew what they were doing. They knew the area and how to survive for a long time.
This is one of the most interesting things about this site, to have this unique information about when Neanderthals were alone and living in harsh conditions and how they thrived before modern humans appeared.
Dr Sofia C. Samper Carro.
Thanks to modern excavation techniques, Abric Pizarro and other nearby Neanderthal sites provide fine-grain data to understand Neanderthal behaviour.
We 3D plot every single remain found larger than one to two centimetres. This makes our work slow, and we have been excavating some of these sites for over 20 years, but it turns into a uniquely precise recording of the sites. We are interested in how the different data relates to each other, from stone tools to bones and hearths. This more thorough excavation gives archaeologists information on how Neanderthals lived and how long they were in an area. It’s not only the individual materials that give us clues, but also where exactly they are found in relation to other materials on the site that helps us understand how and when Neanderthals were visiting these sites. Were they settled there or just passing through?
Dr Sofia C. Samper Carro.
Excavation and research in Abric Pizarro are part of Dr Samper Carro’s DECRA project. It also consists of one of the field schools offered by the ANU School of Culture, History and Language.
Research in the Catalan Pre-Pyrenees is supported by local collaborators from CEPAP-UAB, The Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the Culture Department of the Catalan Government.
The research is published in the Journal of Archaeological Science.
Highlights
New archaeological site in the Pre-Pyrenees to study Neanderthal lifeways.
Chronometric ages from Abric Pizarro confirm its MIS 4 chronology.
Palaeoenvironmental data contribute to MIS 4 climatic interpretations.
Faunal and lithic assemblages indicate Neanderthal adaptability and resilience.
Abstract
Extensive research carried out during the last 30 years in the lowermost foothills of the Southern Pyrenees has revealed the significance of this area for studying Neanderthal lifestyle and settlement histories in the Iberian Peninsula. With a large number of cave and rock shelter sites, broad-ranging chronologies, and relatively well-known sedimentation rates and environmental conditions, this enclave continues to improve our knowledge about Neanderthal behaviour in Western Europe.
Here we present the chronostratigraphic, technological, faunal, and palaeoenvironmental results from Abric Pizarro, a recently discovered site from the region. Its archaeological sequence is centred on MIS 4, a poorly known period in Neanderthal history. The application of three different dating methods (newly obtained single-grain optically stimulated luminescence and U-series fossil teeth ages, in addition to previously published thermoluminescence ages) provides an accurate chronology for a site where the exceptional preservation of faunal remains leads to significant interpretations of Neanderthal hunting abilities and adaptability. Moreover, analysis of the lithic assemblage, as well as preliminary palaeoenvironmental data, are used to provide insights into the degree to which chronocultural or palaeoenvironmental factors were responsible for some of the significant differences observed among the four archaeological units explored in Abric Pizarro to date. Our results contribute to discussion about Neanderthal resilience and their livelihood before their disappearance from the archaeological record.
1. Introduction
Since the discovery of the first Neanderthal fossils in the 19th century, these hominins have been a sustained focus of study. Researchers have strived to identify anatomical and physiological similarities and differences between our closest relatives and anatomically modern humans (AMHs), their phylogenetic position, as well as suggesting factors that contributed to their demise around 40ka years ago (e.g. Bailey and Lynch, 2005; Bocherens and Drucker, 2006; Banks et al., 2008; Churchill, 2014; Villa and Roebroeks, 2014.1; Agustí and Rubio-Campillo, 2017; Banks et al., 2021; Romagnoli et al., 2022; Gonzalez et al., 2023). This information has been mainly gained from archaeological deposits dated to the Last Interglacial cycles during the Late Pleistocene -MIS 5 (ca. 130-71ka) and MIS 3 (57-30ka)-. However, to fully understand Neanderthal ways of life in the millennia before their extinction, further research is needed to characterize the preceding glacial maxima (MIS 4; 71-57ka), at both regional and local scales.
MIS 4 is generally characterized as a sub-continental scale glaciation over northern Europe, coupled with dry conditions in continental eastern Europe (Helmens, 2014.2). The ice volume maximum, centred at 65 ka, was preceded by a progressive increase in ice volume through MIS 5 and a decrease in summer insolation (e.g. Sánchez-Goñi, 2022.1). Although these global environmental conditions are relatively well-known from environmental records in central and northern Europe and the Levant, there are few site-specific palaeoclimatic proxies in the Iberian Peninsula and western Europe, with scarce data available to understand local environmental conditions in these regions during MIS 4 (Fig. 1). Nonetheless, research on glacial and fluvioglacial deposits in river valleys in NE Spain provide data to interpret glacial-interglacial cycles in this region from ca. 70ka onwards. In the Aragon Valley glacier, evidence from moraine M2 dated the Last Maximum Ice Extent (LMIE) around 68 ± 7 ka (García-Ruiz et al., 2013), also identified in the Cinca and Gállego Rivers and associated to a strong increase in fluvial discharge and sediments availability related to the transition to deglaciation (Peña et al., 2004; Lewis et al., 2009). Other nearby moraines also confirm evidence for a LMIE event in the central Pre-Pyrenees during the MIS 4 (Sancho et al., 2003, 2018; Turu et al., 2023.1).
Fig. 1. Map of the Iberian Peninsula with location of the sites mentioned in the text. 1) Abric Pizarro; 2) Estret de Tragó; 3) Cova Gran de Santa Linya; 4) Roca dels Bous; 5) Abric Romaní; 6) Arlampe; 7) Padul; 8) Villarquemado; 9) Lezetxiki; 10) Atxagakoa; 11) Covalejos; 12) Roca San Miguel; 13) Fuente del Trucho; 14) Fuente de San Cristóbal; 15) Moros de Gabasa; 16) Abric del Pastor, 17) Teixoneres; 18) Cova del Toll.
Moreover, some recent reviews of palaeobotanical data from archaeological sites in the Iberian Peninsula include sites with records dating to MIS 4 located in mediterranean (Abric Romani and Abric Pastor) and Atlantic/Euro-siberian (Axlor) bioregions (Ochando et al., 2022.2; Revelles et al., 2022.3). In Abric Romaní (Capellades, Barcelona), there is a dominance of Pinus throughout the sequence, with a phase of climate warming identified around 70–67 ka, characterized by higher percentages of arboreal pollen and thermophilic taxa (evergreen Quercus and Olea-Phillyrea), This phase was interrupted by a period of cooling between 66 and 59ka characterized by an increase in steppic taxa (Poaceae and Artemisia), followed by an increase in meso and thermophilic taxa (e.g. Burjachs et al., 2012; Revelles et al., 2022.3). Multiproxy analyses conducted from the MIS 4 occupations at Abric del Pastor (Alcoy, Alicante) indicate a mosaic of biotopes, with predominantly cold conditions (Connolly et al., 2019). In the site of Axlor (Biscay) in northern Spain, pollen studies indicate that during MIS 4, the landscape surrounding the site was dominated by grasses and heather, with patchy evergreen-boreal forest (Demuro et al., 2023.2).
In addition to pollen data from archaeological sites, the pollen cores extracted from the Padul wetland (Granada) and the Villarquemado palaeolake (Teruel) provide significant pollen reference sequences from mediterranean bioregions. The Padul 15-05 sediment core contains a continuous sedimentary and palaeoenvironmental record of the last ca. 200,000 ka, with two pollen zones attributed to MIS 4 (Zones 3a and 2c) (Camuera et al., 2019.1; Ochando et al., 2022.2). Zone 3a shows a decline in arboreal pollen relative to the previous zone, with an average of ca. 10% in Quercus total, with some peaks for Alnus, Abies and Cedrus (1.5%) and Pinus averaging 57%. There is a significant pollen change in Zone 2c (60-43ka), with relatively high Mediterranean forest values until ca. 51ka BP, when the last occurrence of Abies is recorded and Pinus show a similar average percentage as the previous zone (ca. 53%). An interesting ecological change from zone 3a to 2c at Padul is the loss of heathland taxa (Ericacea and Cistaceae) and their replacement with xerophytes (Artemisia and Amaranthaceae) (Camuera et al., 2019.1).
The Villarquemado core is an interesting case study to address palaeoenvironmental conditions in continental areas influenced by climatic extremes, similar to those observed in the southeastern Pre-Pyrenees. In Villarquemado, the pollen zone VIL-10 (71–57.5 ka) is characterized by the absence of Mediterranean taxa, with evergreen Quercus and Juniperus disappearing from the record, while aquatics and hygrophytes fluctuate, likely indicating intense environmental changes (González-Sampériz et al., 2020). This replacement of Mediterranean woody elements with mesophytic ones is similar to that observed in sites like Abric Romani, coupled with an abrupt contraction in Juniperus and an expansion of Pinus (Burjachs et al., 2012). Other persistent trees are deciduous Quercus at the beginning of the MIS 4 and cold-tolerant species such as Betula and Alnus. In general, the MIS 4 assemblage from Villarquemado suggests cold and relatively humid conditions (González-Sampériz et al., 2020). These local analyses remark the complexity of environmental responses to climatic changes observed in these sites, while highlighting gaps in our current knowledge about regional palaeoenvironmental conditions during MIS 4 in the Iberian Peninsula.
Focusing on Neanderthal subsistence, the few faunal assemblages documented in Iberian sites dated to the MIS 4 display a relatively wide range of species, with variations in the taxonomic representation likely to be related to the orographic location of the sites as well as biogeographic conditions (Fig. 1). In the north of the Iberian Peninsula, the fauna assemblages from levels B, C and D (50.7 ± 3.5–70.4 ± 5.3ka) of Axlor (Biscay) show a diversified fauna, with a progressive decrease of cervids, stability in the number of caprids (wild goat), and an increase in the number of large animals, especially equids (González et al., 2005.1; Demuro et al., 2023.2). In Arlampe (Biscay), faunal assemblages dated to the MIS 5/4 transition (70.6ka) are dominated by caprines (Capra pyrenaica and Rupicapra pyrenaica), low number of cervid remains, and no equids (Arceredillo et al., 2013.1; Rios-Garaizar et al., 2015). The faunal assemblage for level V from Lezetxiki (Gipuzkoa; 57 ± 2–70±9ka), disregarding the large number of ursids likely related to natural accumulations, yielded large numbers of Cervus elaphus remains, followed by Bos/Bison (Falguères et al., 2005.2; Lazuén and Altuna, 2012.1). In Atxagakoa (Biscay), deposits dated to MIS 4 show deer as the main taxon (Castaños et al., 2004.1; Yravedra and Cobo-Sánchez, 2015.1). In Covalejos cave (Cantabria), the faunal assemblage throughout the sequence is equally dominated by cervids (ca. 90%), with indicators of a specialisation for hunting juvenile individuals (Castaños, 2021.1). In the central plateau, chamois and ibex are represented from MIS 5 to MIS 3, with an increase in their representation after 70ka, although the presence of large bovids (Bos/Bison) and cervids is also recorded (e.g. Díez, 2007; Arceredillo and Díez, 2009.1; Yravedra and Cobo-Sánchez, 2015.1).
One of the reasons for the gaps in our knowledge about Neanderthal behaviour during MIS 4 is the scarcity of sites across the European continent dated to this period, which contrasts with the remarkable number of sites dated to MIS 5 and MIS 3. The limited number of MIS 4 sites has been attributed to population shrinkage, as well as a contraction and shift in the range of suitable habitats exploited by Western European Neanderthal populations (Stewart, 2005.3; Banks et al., 2021), although other factors, such as poor preservation of sites from this period should not be disregarded.
During the last few decades, research on several sites located in the Southern Pre-Pyrenees have revealed the significance of this region for studying Neanderthal lifestyles (Fig. 1). In the Pre-Pyrenees of Huesca, the oldest Neanderthal site yet identified consists of Roca San Miguel, with a chronology ranging from MIS6d to MIS5a, and evidence of site abandonment during the MIS 4 (Montes et al., 2021.2; Peña-Monné et al., 2021.3). In the same region, the younger sites of Fuente del Trucho (Mir and Salas, 2000; Montes et al., 2006.1), Fuentes de San Cristóbal (Rosell et al., 2000.1; Menéndez et al., 2009.2) and Gabasa (Montes et al., 2006.1 Santamaría et al., 2010) provide evidence of Neanderthal presence during MIS 3 (Fig. 1). In the Noguera county (Lleida), the earliest Neanderthal occupations documented comprise the lower units from Estret de Tragó, dated to the MIS 5 (130-90ka), followed by MIS 3 occupations documented in Tragó upper units, Roca dels Bous and Cova Gran de Santa Linya (Casanova et al., 2009.3; Martínez Moreno et al., 2010.1; Mora et al., 2011, 2018.1; de la Torre et al., 2012.2). Since 2007, field prospection programs have identified several other prehistoric and historical settlements in the eastern Pre-Pyrenees region (Pizarro et al., 2013.2). Among the new prehistoric sites identified, Abric Pizarro has yielded Middle Palaeolithic techno-complexes that indicate this site could contain occupations predating MIS 3, thereby representing a unique site for understanding the chronostratigraphy of Neanderthal presence in the southeastern Pre-Pyrenees.
An introduction to the geochronology and a preliminary analysis of the fauna and stone artefacts documented in the more recent archaeological units from Abric Pizarro was recently published (Vega Bolivar et al., 2018.2). However, validation of the site geochronology, as well as the development of new research lines, comprising palaeoenvironmental and biomolecular data, triggered new excavation seasons and analyses. Here we present the results from the new chrononometric and palaeoenvironmental data obtained from Abric Pizarro, as well as the preliminary analysis of the complete fauna and lithic assemblage from the site.
Fig. 2. A) General view Abric Pizarro rockshelter; B) Map of the area of study with nearby archaeological sites; C) Lithostratigraphic column of Abric Pizarro with approximated location of samples taken for OSL and U-Th new ages. Ground surface refers to the original surface of the deposit before excavation began. A description of the profile is provided in section 2.1. D) Photograph of the west section of the deposit, with vertical distribution of the archaeological units identified superimposed.
Creationists might like to ignore the fact that the archaeological evidence shows how Neanderthals adapted to climate changes and resulting changes in local flora and fauna over the 35,000 or so years that they inhabited the site, and how well this evidence meshes with other evidence of climate change. These multiple strands of converging evidence are of course commonplace in Archaeology and are exactly as we would expect of a record of actual events.
Creationists might also like to ignore the fact that the site shows no evidence of submergence under thousands of feet of water either during or after the Neanderthal occupation. In fact, the evidence shows that there never was such an inundation, which, had it happened, would have swept away much of the evidence now being revealed and covered the rest of it in a thick layer of silt containing the jumbled remains of animals and plants from disconnected land masses that would inevitably result from a global genocidal flood and which is conspicuous by its complete absence, not just in the foothill of the Pyrenees, but everywhere else on Earth.
