See the lifelike face of a Stone Age hunter-gatherer woman, revealed thanks to ancient DNA
Researchers and artists have created a striking facial reconstruction of a Stone Age woman who lived roughly 10,500 years ago in what is now Belgium.
The detailed depiction of the prehistoric hunter-gatherer, known as the "Margaux woman," is based on various scientific data, including the remains of her skeleton and ancient DNA, according to a statement from Ghent University in Belgium.
The reconstruction — which was produced by the university's interdisciplinary Regional Outlook on Ancient Migration (ROAM) project, in collaboration with Dutch artists and twin brothers Adrie and Alfons Kennis — reveals an intriguing set of features.
ROAM research has indicated that the hunter-gatherer likely had blue or light eyes and a surprising "medium-toned" skin complexion, project leader Isabelle De Groote, a professor in the Department of Archaeology at Ghent University, told Live Science in an email. This skin tone appears to be slightly lighter than that of most other Western European individuals from the Mesolithic period (or Middle Stone Age) that scientists have studied so far.
Related: 45 amazing facial reconstructions, from Stone Age shamans to King Tut
Comparing her to other individuals who lived in roughly the same time period, such as the iconic Cheddar Man from England, reveals this "subtle but important" difference that highlights the variation already present in post-ice age Western Europe, De Groote said. "The skin pigmentation of the Margaux woman points to greater complexity of skin pigmentation within these populations and that it was more heterogenous than previously thought."
Cheddar Man belonged to the same Western European hunter-gatherer population as the Margaux woman, according to the statement. Previous research has suggested that he also had blue eyes, although his skin complexion is thought to have been slightly darker. Other members of this hunter-gatherer population shared a similar combination of dark skin and pale eyes.
The remains of the female hunter-gatherer first came to light in 1988 during an excavation of the Margaux cave near Dinant, in Belgium's Meuse Valley region. At the time, the genetic analysis techniques that informed the new reconstruction were not available.The research team first scanned the woman's skull and created a 3D-printed reproduction, De Groote said. The Kennis brothers then used this printed version to model the muscle and skin of the head. They did this using anatomical standards for the region while taking into account the age of the woman. Based on features of her skull, the researchers estimated that she would have been between 35 and 60 years old when she died.
RELATED STORIES
—Neanderthal woman's face brought to life in stunning reconstruction
—Most ancient Europeans had dark skin, eyes and hair up until 3,000 years ago, new research finds
—Stunning reconstruction reveals warrior and his weapons from 4,000-year-old burial in Siberia
The team deduced her potential eye color and skin complexion using ancient DNA extracted from parts of her skull. They also considered the effect of suntanning to re-create her skin color, given that she likely lived a mobile, outdoor lifestyle.
Although facial reconstructions such as these can provide a fascinating window into the distant past, some elements are open to interpretation.
"Actual skin tone and eye colour is difficult to discern," De Groote said. "There is no exact answer in ancient DNA."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
The Reason Why Everyone's Confused About UPFs – and What the Current Science Actually Says
The term 'ultra-processed food' (or UPF, for short) has launched into the nutritional spotlight in recent years, with study after study linking the food group to obesity, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and a multitude of other chronic conditions. And in the UK, we eat a lot of ultra-processed foods. A recent landmark study showed that UPFs made up a whopping 53% of people's energy intake in the UK, coming second only to the US, where UPFs comprised 55%. This trend has led some researchers to claim that ultra-processed foods are 'a primary causal driver of the obesity pandemic'. But is the study of ultra-processed food actually a genuine scientific breakthrough in understanding diet and disease? Or is it just a fancy new label for foods we already knew were unhealthy? What we know now is there's a lack of a clear definition for ultra-processed foods – and we could sure use one. What Are Ultra-processed Foods? The definition of ultra-processed foods has shifted a bit since the term was first coined by Brazilian researchers in 2009, but now the term basically involves a food product meeting two specific criteria. The first is that the main components of the food are a result of multiple stages of industrial processing. Examples: white sugar, white flour, vegetable oil. The second is that the food has additives not commonly used in at-home cooking. This includes preservatives like BHT, emulsifiers like soy lecithin, stabilising agents like modified corn starch, food dyes, thickening agents, and the ever mysterious 'artificial flavours'. That's a tough definition for the average person to remember, understand, and apply to their food choices. Research actually bears this out. Even people who claim to know what ultra-processed foods are often misidentify which foods are actually ultra-processed. To make things even more confusing, some foods fall into an ultra-processed grey area. Let's take bacon, for example. While bacon certainly has additives thanks to its preservatives, whether it undergoes multiple stages of industrial processing is more nebulous. As a result, bacon has been classified as ultra-processed in some scientific papers, but not ultra-processed in others. Whole-grain bread, certain aged cheeses, and tomato sauce – healthy by most definitions – have also been slapped with an ultra-processed label, only adding to consumer confusion. The (New) Science for Ultra-processed Foods Not only is the definition of ultra-processing a bit fuzzy, there's also some debate as to why ultra-processed foods promote worse health outcomes in the first place. Because not all ultra-processed foods are harmful (see whole-grain bread and tomato sauce, but also yoghurt and dark chocolate), researchers have tried to explain why only some foods categorised as ultra-processed are linked to disease. One hypothesis is that (of all things) eating speed is a central factor. Due to their processing, ultra-processed foods are often softer and easier to chew (think peanut butter vs. peanuts), which makes people eat them faster. Rapid consumption may outpace the brain's ability to signal fullness, causing people to overeat, which may eventually lead to obesity and its associated diseases. But this is only a guess. The science that has been done on eating speed as a major factor in overeating tends to be underwhelming. Another hypothesis is that food additives are the key. Some research suggests that emulsifiers commonly found in UPFs (including polysorbate 80 and carboxymethylcellulose) might harm gut health and set off a cascade of inflammation leading to disease, or that taste enhancers, like MSG and added flavours, might override satiety signals and promote overeating. But the existing evidence for these claims is weak. Plus, given that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of food additives in use, studying the long-term effects of individual additives is challenging. But here's another take: The problem with ultra-processed foods might not be due to ultra-processing at all. The (Old) Science Behind Ultra-processing and Health Before ultra-processed food was ever a buzzword, research had established that certain processed foods were low in beneficial nutrients (fibre, potassium) and high in other not-so-great-for-you things like saturated fat, sugar, and salt. This nutritional imbalance alone could explain why ultra-processed foods are dangerous for our health – with no need to bring processing into the discussion. In fact, when studies have actually analysed ultra-processed foods separately, the biggest offenders for health tend to be soda, processed meat products like hot dogs, take-out style foods like pizza and french fries, and refined grains. These are foods that most dietary guidelines and health professionals have long recommend limiting. Given this, perhaps avoiding ultra-processed foods is just a modern repackaging of the same dietary advice we've heard a million times before. So where does that leave us now –and for the future? The Path Forward for Ultra-processed Food There's a real concern over the lack of clear definition for 'ultra-processed foods'. We've seen it before with health buzzwords like 'healthy', 'all-natural', and 'plant-based'. If ultra-processed food means many different things, does it mean anything at all? After decades of fixating on individual nutrients – from fat and cholesterol to carbohydrates and gluten – it's certainly refreshing that the discussion around ultra-processed foods is a more top-down approach to figuring out what makes us sick. But it's far from perfect right now. You Might Also Like The 23 Best Foods to Build Muscle 10 of the Best Waterproof Boots to Buy in 2019 6 Ways to Improve Your Mental Health
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
New Genetic Test Predicts Children With Future Risk of High BMI
A new test helps predict which kids face the largest genetic risk of a high body mass index (BMI) later in life. That could help parents establish healthy habits early on. The new test, put together by a large team of international researchers, is what's known as a polygenic score or PGS. These scores are used to group genetic variations to predict a certain characteristic, which in this case is BMI. Related: "What makes the score so powerful is its ability to predict, before the age of five, whether a child is likely to develop obesity in adulthood, well before other risk factors start to shape their weight later in childhood," says genetic epidemiologist Roelof Smit, from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. "Intervening at this point can have a huge impact." It's important to note that the test isn't quite as straightforward as it might sound. For one, genetics only accounts for a relatively small proportion of risk for high BMI. And secondly, a growing body of research is suggesting we move away from BMI as a measure of obesity and health in general. Still, the researchers claim the new PGS test is up to twice as accurate as others of its type. It was built from a database of genetic information collected from more than 5.1 million people. After compiling the test, the researchers then tried it out on several separate health databases, covering hundreds of thousands of individuals. In these datasets, both genetic data and BMI over time had been recorded. The researchers added the PGS to other predictors of BMI, and found that higher PGS scores were associated with greater adult weight gain. The accuracy of the PGS at predicting BMI variation depended on age and ancestry. PGS scores at the age of 5 explained 35 percent of the BMI variation at age 18. For middle-aged Europeans, it accounted for 17.6 percent of the variation. In other groups it was much lower: just 2.2 percent for rural Ugandans, for example. This is probably down to underrepresentation in the training data, and the greater genetic diversity in African populations, the researchers say. Another interesting finding from the study: those with stronger genetic predisposition towards having a higher BMI actually lost more weight during the first year of weight loss programs, although they were also more likely to regain weight later. "Our findings emphasize that individuals with a high genetic predisposition to obesity may respond more to lifestyle changes and, thus, contrast with the determinist view that genetic predisposition is unmodifiable," write the researchers in their published paper. The thinking is that if BMI can be predicted more accurately at an early age, that gives those kids and their parents a bigger window of time to instill healthier habits regarding diet or activity levels, which have the potential to influence BMI. "This new polygenic score is a dramatic improvement in predictive power and a leap forward in the genetic prediction of obesity risk, which brings us much closer to clinically useful genetic testing," says geneticist Ruth Loos, from the University of Copenhagen. The research has been published in Nature Medicine. Related News This Diet Helps Lower Dementia Risk, And We May Finally Know Why A Signal of Future Alzheimer's Could Hide in The Way You Speak Something Inside Your Gut Could Be Like a Natural Ozempic Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make key breakthrough that could solve major issue with EV batteries: 'The idea is to keep it simple'
Czech researchers have developed a new method for recycling rare earth minerals from electric vehicle batteries using just water and basic laboratory conditions, according to a recent report from Radio Prague International. The Institute of Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry focused its research on neodymium magnets, the strongest permanent magnets known to man. These powerful components drive EVs, smartphones, and wind turbines — but their production creates massive environmental challenges. Traditional mining and refining processes require hundreds of reactors, generate radioactive waste, and produce enormous amounts of acids and toxic byproducts. "The idea is to keep it simple, something that doesn't require extremely difficult conditions that would be hard to reproduce on an industrial scale," IOCB researcher Kelsea Jones explained, per Radio Prague International. The team's method uses water as a solvent and operates at room temperature, eliminating the need for harsh chemicals or extreme conditions. The process employs chelating agents, or organic molecules that bond with metal ions. Scientists add these agents to dissolved magnets, creating compounds with individual rare earth elements that can then be filtered by weight. The team processed magnets through several separation cycles and obtained neodymium with 99.7% purity, more than enough to produce new magnets. Reusing battery materials will reduce the risk of toxins leaching into soil and groundwater, and it will decrease resource depletion — a problem that often creates unsafe mining operations. EVs already help to improve air quality in our cities and reduce pollution compared to gas-powered cars, and more accessible battery recycling could help to accelerate EV adoption by making them more cost-effective. The Czech researchers have secured patents for their EV battery recycling method and are seeking commercial partners to bring this technology to market. Their breakthrough is a great example of the innovation needed to build a cleaner, more sustainable future — one that benefits both people and the planet. For those looking to make their next car an EV, this new recycling technology could also mean that even more affordable options are ahead. Should America invest more in EV battery tech? Absolutely No way Only if it brings down prices Only if it helps us compete with China Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
