Irreconcilable differences between stratigraphy and direct dating cast doubts upon the status of Tam Pa Ling fossil

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 109, Issue 51, 2012, Pages

  Pierret, Alain ^a   Zeitoun, Valéry ^b   Forestier, Hubert ^a  

^a INSTITUT DE RECHERCHE POUR LE DÉVELOPPEMENT   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE DETERMINATION; ARCHEOLOGY; BONE AGE; FOSSIL HUMAN; HUMAN; LAOS; LETTER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKULL; STRATIGRAPHY;

EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION; FOSSILS; HUMANS; SKULL;

EID: 84871385119     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1216774109     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Trinkaus E (2006) Modern human versus Neandertal evolutionary distinctiveness. Curr Anthropol 47:597-620.
2. Demeter F, et al. (2012) Anatomically modern human in Southeast Asia (Laos) by 46 ka. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(36):14375-14380.
3. Shen G, Michel V (2007) Position chronologique des sites de l'Homme moderne en Chine d'après la datation U-Th. L'Anthropologie 111:157-165.
4. Mijares AS, et al. (2010) New evidence for a 67,000-year-old human presence at Callao Cave, Luzon, Philippines. J Hum Evol 59(1):123-132.
5. Liu W, et al. (2010) Human remains from Zhirendong, South China, and modern human emergence in East Asia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(45):19201-19206.