Have we finally identified humanity’s direct ancestor? Controversial claim challenged

au sediba large
The reconstructed skull and mandible (far left) of Australopithecus sediba. Image: Lee R. Berger/University of the Witwatersrand

Humans evolved from a group of ape-like hominins known as Australopithecine, but scientists aren’t [sure] which species is our direct ancestor. A new statistical analysis has found it highly unlikely that one particular candidate, Australopithecus sediba, is ancestral to humans.

[A. sediba] featured ape-like characteristics combined with some modern, human-like features. Subsequently, its discovers, a team led by Lee Berger from the University of the Witwatersrand, argued—and continue to argue—that A. sediba is the direct, most proximate ancestral species from which the Homo genus emerged.

But there’s a problem with this hypothesis, and it has to with the timing. The oldest known Homo fossil—a jawbone from a still-to-be identified species of early human—is 2.8 million years old. That’s 800,000 years before A. sediba. It’s thus fair to ask: How is it possible that A. sediba spawned an entirely new genus given its presence so much later than the oldest evidence of humans?

Now, it’s entirely possible a prolonged period of overlap existed during which the two hominin species co-existed. But as new research published [May 8] in Science Advances suggests, this scenario—though theoretically possible—is exceptionally unlikely.

Read full, original post: New Analysis Debunks Controversial Claim About the Origin of Humanity

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-03-13-at-12.14.04-PM
The FDA wants to make many popular prescription drugs OTC—a great idea. Here’s why it’s unlikely to happen
Screenshot-2026-05-04-at-12.54.32-PM
How Utah became the country’s supplement capital  — and a haven for unregulated, ineffective and fake products
Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-2.26.27-PM
Viewpoint — Food-fear world: The latest activist scientists campaign: Cancer-causing additives
Screenshot-PM-24
Viewpoint: The herbicide glyphosate isn’t perfect. Banning it would be far worse.
images
The never-ending GMO debate: Pros and cons
Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-11.56.24-AM
‘Science moves forward when people are willing to think differently’: Memories of DNA maverick Craig Venter
Screenshot-2026-04-30-at-2.19.37-PM
5 myths about summer dehydration that could damage your health — or even kill you
Screenshot-2026-04-03-at-11.15.51-AM
Paraben panic: How a flawed study, media hype, and chemophobia convinced the public of the danger of one of the safest classes of preservatives
bigstock opioids on chalkboard with rol
GLP podcast: 'Safe injection sites': enabling drug addiction or saving lives?
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-02_20_13-PM
How RFK, Jr.’s false vaccine claims are holding up $600 million to fight diseases in poor countries
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.