Editing Neanderthal extinction (section)

===Competitive replacement===
[[File:Neandertal vs Sapiens.jpg|thumb|180px|Sapiens and Neanderthal skulls]]

==== Species specific disadvantages ====

Slight [[natural selection|competitive advantage]] on the part of modern humans may have accounted for Neanderthals' decline on a timescale of thousands of years.<ref name="Wynnetal2016">{{cite journal |last1= Wynn |first1= Thomas |last2= Overmann |first2= Karenleigh A |last3= Coolidge |first3= Frederick L |date= 2016 |title= The false dichotomy: A refutation of the Neandertal indistinguishability claim |journal= Journal of Anthropological Sciences |volume= 94 |issue= 94 |pages= 201–221 |doi= 10.4436/jass.94022 |doi-broken-date= 2024-11-02 |pmid= 26708102 }}</ref><ref name=banks>{{cite journal |last1=Banks |first1=William E. |last2=d'Errico |first2=Francesco |last3=Peterson |first3=A. Townsend |last4=Kageyama |first4=Masa |last5=Sima |first5=Adriana |last6=Sánchez-Goñi |first6=Maria-Fernanda |date=24 December 2008 |editor1-last=Harpending |editor1-first=Henry |title=Neanderthal Extinction by Competitive Exclusion |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=3 |issue=12 |pages=e3972 |issn=1932-6203 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0003972 |pmid=19107186 |pmc=2600607 |bibcode=2008PLoSO...3.3972B|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Generally small and widely dispersed fossil sites suggest that Neanderthals lived in less numerous and socially more isolated groups than contemporary ''Homo sapiens''. Tools such as Mousterian flint stone flakes and [[Levallois technique|Levallois points]] are remarkably sophisticated from the outset, yet they have a slow rate of variability and general technological inertia is noticeable during the entire fossil period. Artifacts are of utilitarian nature, and symbolic behavioral traits are undocumented before the arrival of modern humans in Europe around 40,000 to 35,000 years ago.<ref name="Wynnetal2016"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://eol.org/pages/4454114/details |title=Homo neanderthalensis Brief Summary |publisher=EOL |access-date=September 26, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | title =Symbolic or utilitarian? Juggling interpretations of Neanderthal behavior: new inferences from the study of engraved stone surfaces | pmid=25020018 | doi=10.4436/JASS.92007 | volume=92 | issue=92 | journal=J Anthropol Sci | pages=233–55 | last1 = Peresani | first1 = M | last2 = Dallatorre | first2 = S | last3 = Astuti | first3 = P | last4 = Dal Colle | first4 = M | last5 = Ziggiotti | first5 = S | last6 = Peretto | first6 = C| year=2014 | doi-broken-date=2024-11-02 }}</ref>

The noticeable morphological differences in skull shape between the two human species also have cognitive implications. These include the Neanderthals' smaller parietal lobes<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bruner |first1=Emiliano |date=2004 |title=Geometric Morphometrics and Paleoneurology: Brain Shape Evolution in the Genus ''Homo'' |journal=Journal of Human Evolution |volume=47 |issue=5 |pages=279–303 |doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.03.009 |pmid=15530349 |bibcode=2004JHumE..47..279B }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bruner |first1=Emiliano |date=2010 |title=Morphological Differences in the Parietal Lobes with the Human Genus: A Neurofunctional Perspective |journal=Current Anthropology |volume=51 |issue=1 |pages=S77–S88 |doi=10.1086/650729 |s2cid=146587487 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bruner |first1=Emiliano |last2=Manzi |first2=Giorgio |last3=Arsuaga |first3=Juan Luis |date=2003 |title=Encephalization and Allometric Trajectories in the Genus ''Homo'': Evidence from the Neandertal and Modern Lineages |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America |volume=100 |issue=26 |pages=15335–15340 |doi=10.1073/pnas.2536671100 |pmid=14673084 |pmc=307568 |bibcode=2003PNAS..10015335B |doi-access=free }}</ref> and cerebellum,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hublin |first1=Jean-Jacques |last2=Neubauer |first2=Simon |last3=Gunz |first3=Philipp |date=2015 |title=Brain Ontogeny and Life History in Pleistocene Hominins |journal=Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences |volume=370 |issue=1663 |pages=1–11 |doi=10.1098/rstb.2014.0062 |pmid=25602066 |pmc=4305163 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Weaver |first1=Anne |date=2005 |title=Reciprocal Evolution of the Cerebellum and Neocortex in Fossil Humans |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America |volume=102 |issue=10 |pages=3576–3580 |doi=10.1073/pnas.0500692102 |pmid=15731345 |pmc=553338 |bibcode=2005PNAS..102.3576W |doi-access=free }}</ref> areas implicated in tool use,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Orban |first1=Guy A |last2=Caruana |first2=Fausto |date=2014 |title=The Neural Basis of Human Tool Use |journal=Frontiers in Psychology |volume=5 |page=310 |doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00310 |pmid=24782809 |pmc=3988392 |doi-access=free }}</ref> visuospatial integration,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bruner |first1=Emiliano |last2=Iriki |first2=Atsushi |date=2016 |title=Extending Mind, Visuospatial Integration, and the Evolution of the Parietal Lobes in the Human Genus |journal=Quaternary International |volume=405 |pages=98–110 |doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2015.05.019 |bibcode=2016QuInt.405...98B |s2cid=127641606 }}</ref> numeracy,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Piazza |first1=Manuela |last2=Izard |first2=Véronique |date=2009 |title=How Humans Count: Numerosity and the Parietal Cortex |journal=Neuroscientist |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=261–273 |doi=10.1177/1073858409333073 |pmid=19436075 |s2cid=10271553 }}</ref> creativity,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vandervert |first1=Larry R |last2=Schimpf |first2=Paul H |last3=Liu |first3=Hesheng |date=2007 |title=How Working Memory and the Cerebellum Collaborate to Produce Creativity and Innovation |journal=Creativity Research Journal |volume=19 |issue=1 |pages=1–18 |doi=10.1080/10400410709336873 |s2cid=15247122 }}</ref> and higher-order conceptualization.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Balsters |first1=Joshua H |last2=Whelan |first2=Christopher D |last3=Robertson |first3=Ian H |last4=Ramnani |first4=Narender |date=2013 |title=Cerebellum and Cognition: Evidence for the Encoding of Higher Order Rules |journal=Cerebral Cortex |volume=23 |issue=6 |pages=1433–1443 |doi=10.1093/cercor/bhs127|pmid=22617850 |doi-access=free |hdl=2262/72974 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> The differences, while slight, would have possibly been enough to affect natural selection and may underlie and explain the differences in social behaviors, technological innovation, and artistic output.<ref name="Wynnetal2016"/>

[[Jared Diamond]], a supporter of competitive replacement, points out in his book ''[[The Third Chimpanzee]]'' that the replacement of Neanderthals by modern humans is comparable to patterns of behavior that occur whenever people with advanced technology clash with people with less developed technology.<ref>Diamond, J. (1992). ''The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal''. New York: Harper Collins, p. 45.</ref>

====Division of labour====
In 2006, it was posited that Neanderthal [[division of labour]] between the sexes was less developed than [[Paleolithic#Social organization|Middle Paleolithic ''Homo sapiens'']]. Both male and female Neanderthals participated in the single occupation of hunting big game, such as bison, deer, gazelles, and wild horses. This hypothesis proposes that the Neanderthal's relative lack of labour division resulted in less efficient extraction of resources from the environment as compared to ''Homo sapiens''.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Kuhn | first1 = Steven L. | last2 = Stiner | first2 = Mary C. | year = 2006| title = What's a Mother to Do? The Division of Labor among Neandertals and Modern Humans in Eurasia | journal = Current Anthropology | volume =  47| issue = 6| pages =  953–981| doi = 10.1086/507197 | s2cid = 42981328 }}</ref>

====Anatomical differences and running ability====
Researchers such as Karen L. Steudel of the [[University of Wisconsin]] have highlighted the relationship of Neanderthal anatomy (shorter and stockier than that of modern humans) and the ability to run and the requirement of energy (30% more).<ref>{{cite journal |first1=Karen L |last1=Steudel-Numbers |first2=Michael J |last2=Tilkens |year=2004 |title=The Effect of Lower Limb Length on the Energetic Cost of Locomotion: Implications for Fossil Hominins |journal=Journal of Human Evolution |volume=47 |issue=1 |pages=95–109 |doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.06.002|pmid=15288526 |bibcode=2004JHumE..47...95S }}</ref>

Nevertheless, in the recent study, researchers Martin Hora and Vladimir Sladek of [[Charles University in Prague]] show that Neanderthal lower limb configuration, particularly the combination of robust knees, long heels, and short lower limbs, increased the effective mechanical advantage of the Neanderthal knee and ankle extensors, thus reducing the force needed and the energy spent for locomotion significantly. The walking cost of the Neanderthal male is now estimated to be 8–12% higher than that of anatomically modern males, whereas the walking cost of the Neanderthal female is considered to be virtually equal to that of anatomically modern females.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Hora | first1 = M | last2 = Sládek | first2 = V | year = 2014 | title = Influence of lower limb configuration on walking cost in Late Pleistocene humans | journal = Journal of Human Evolution | volume =  67| pages =  19–32| doi = 10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.09.011 | pmid = 24485350 | bibcode = 2014JHumE..67...19H }}</ref>

Other researchers, like Yoel Rak, from [[Tel-Aviv University]] in [[Israel]], have noted that the fossil records show that Neanderthal [[pelvis]]es in comparison to modern human pelvises would have made it much harder for Neanderthals to absorb shocks and to bounce off from one step to the next, giving modern humans another advantage over Neanderthals in running and walking ability. However, Rak also notes that all archaic humans had wide pelvises, indicating that this is the ancestral morphology and that modern humans underwent a shift towards narrower pelvises in the late Pleistocene.<ref>{{cite web | title = Science: Neanderthals puzzle the anthropologists | publisher = New Scientist | date = 27 April 1991 | first = Roger | last = Lewin | access-date = January 1, 2011 | url = https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13017664.500-science-neanderthals-puzzle-the-anthropologists-.html
}}</ref>

====Modern humans and alliance with dogs ====
Pat Shipman argues that the [[domestication of the dog]] gave modern humans an advantage when [[hunting]].<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Shipman | first1 = P | year = 2012 | title = Dog domestication may have helped humans thrive while Neandertals declined | url = http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/do-the-eyes-have-it/1 | journal = American Scientist | volume = 100 | issue = 3| page = 198 | doi = 10.1511/2012.96.198 | url-access = subscription }}</ref> Evidence shows the oldest remains of domesticated dogs were found in [[Belgium]] (31,700 BP) and in [[Siberia]] (33,000 BP).<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Ovodov | first1 = ND | last2 = Crockford | first2 = SJ | last3 = Kuzmin | first3 = YV | last4 = Higham | first4 = TFG | last5 = Hodgins | first5 = GWL | display-authors = etal   | year = 2011 | title = A 33,000-Year-Old Incipient Dog from the Altai Mountains of Siberia: Evidence of the Earliest Domestication Disrupted by the Last Glacial Maximum | journal = PLOS ONE | volume = 6 | issue = 7| page = e22821 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0022821 | pmid=21829526 | pmc=3145761| bibcode = 2011PLoSO...622821O | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Germonpré | first1 = M. | last2 = Sablin | first2 = M.V. | last3 = Stevens | first3 = R.E. | last4 = Hedges | first4 = R.E.M. | last5 = Hofreiter | first5 = M. | last6 = Stiller | first6 = M. | last7 = Jaenicke-Desprese | first7 = V. | year = 2009 | title = Fossil dogs and wolves from Palaeolithic sites in Belgium, the Ukraine and Russia: osteometry, ancient DNA and stable isotopes | journal = [[Journal of Archaeological Science]] | volume = 36 | issue = 2| pages = 473–490 | doi=10.1016/j.jas.2008.09.033| bibcode = 2009JArSc..36..473G }}</ref>  A survey of early sites of modern humans and Neanderthals with faunal remains across [[Spain]], [[Portugal]] and [[France]] provided an overview of what modern humans and Neanderthals ate.<ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.01.002 | pmid=23422239 | volume=64 | issue=4 | title=Rabbits and hominin survival in Iberia | year=2013 | journal=Journal of Human Evolution | pages=233–241 | last1 = Fa | first1 = John E. | last2 = Stewart | first2 = John R. | last3 = Lloveras | first3 = Lluís | last4 = Vargas | first4 = J. Mario| bibcode=2013JHumE..64..233F }}</ref> [[Rabbit]] became more frequent, while large [[mammal]]s – mainly eaten by the Neanderthals – became increasingly rare. In 2013, DNA testing on the "Altai dog", a [[Paleolithic]] dog's remains from the Razboinichya Cave ([[Altai Mountains]]), has linked this 33,000-year-old dog with the present lineage of ''[[Canis familiaris]]''.<ref name=altai-dog-dna>{{cite journal | last1 = Druzhkova | first1 = AS | last2 = Thalmann | first2 = O | last3 = Trifonov | first3 = VA | last4 = Leonard | first4 = JA | last5 = Vorobieva | first5 = NV | display-authors = etal   | year = 2013 | title = Ancient DNA Analysis Affirms the Canid from Altai as a Primitive Dog | journal = PLOS ONE | volume = 8 | issue = 3| page = e57754 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0057754 | pmid=23483925 | pmc=3590291| bibcode = 2013PLoSO...857754D | doi-access = free }}</ref>