1930s 'Dragon Man' Finally Gives Elusive Ancient Human Species a Face

A 146,000-year-old skull known as the 'dragon man', thought to be the sole representative of an ancient human species, actually belongs to a larger group of our extinct relatives, the Denisovans, two new papers claim.
It's the first skull we have from that group, and it was right under our noses for years.
Paleontologist Qiaomei Fu, from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, specializes in early modern human settlement in Asia. She led two new studies that reveal the mistaken identity of this skull, using proteins and mitochondrial DNA her team found preserved in the fossil.
The 'dragon man' skull was discovered in the 1930s by a construction worker who was erecting a bridge over the Songhua River in Harbin, China, while the region was under Japanese occupation. The province is known as Longjiang, meaning 'dragon river', hence the skull's nickname.
The bridge builder kept the specimen to himself, hiding it at the bottom of a well. It was only when his family donated it to Hebei GEO University in 2018 that research on this unique find began.
In 2021, the skull was declared a new species of ancient human, Homo longi, but Fu's research rebukes this categorization. That initial description was based on comparative morphology, where paleontologists look at the physical appearance of different fossils to decide where they sit in the family tree.
But morphology can mislead: members of the same species often look very different depending on lifestyle and environment.
Trying to extract fragile molecular evidence from fossils – especially DNA to compare genetic similarity – is often a destructive and patchy task with no guarantee of payoff, but in this case, Fu and her colleagues had astonishing success.
The team was able to retrieve proteins from the skull's petrous bone – one of the densest in the body. They also got hold of mitochondrial DNA (which contains less detail than the DNA stored in a cell nucleus, but is still very useful) from plaque on the dragon man's teeth.
Dental plaque is not widely considered a source of DNA, perhaps because it's the result of a biofilm rather than a direct part of the host's body.
"The finding that the human DNA of the Harbin specimen is better preserved in the dental calculus than in dense bones, including the petrous bone, suggests that dental calculus may be a valuable source for investigating DNA in Middle Pleistocene hominins," Fu and her team write.
These molecules suggest the man is not as unique from other ancient humans as the skull's physical appearance suggests. That's partly because we don't actually have any other complete Denisovan skulls to refer to: until now, they were known only from teeth, one skull fragment, bits of jaw, and a few other body parts.
But the dragon man's mitochondrial DNA reveals a species-level relationship to at least five other Denisovan individuals known from fossil remains found in Siberia. And among the amino acid fragments of 95 proteins found within his skull, four were unmistakably Denisovan, and three were direct matches.
There are limitations to these sampling methods that leave some room for doubt, but Fu and team's findings are enough to place him among the Denisovans for now.
We may have lost a species of ancient human – farewell Homo longi, it was good while it lasted – but it seems we've gained the first ever complete Denisovan skull. Which is pretty wild, given that this missing puzzle piece, a frustrating gap in the paleoanthropologists' catalogue, has actually been in the hands of modern humans for nearly 100 years.
As they say, it's always in the last place you look.
The research is published in Science and Cell.
How Long Would Humans Survive Once The Last Baby Is Born?
Humans Have Smoked Meat For Almost 2 Million Years, Study Suggests
'As If Time Froze': France's Deepest Shipwreck Stuns Archaeologists

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

2 hours ago

• Yahoo

Biotech industry faces off: US vs. China

China has become a significant player in the biotech space, potentially threatening the lead the US holds. EY Americas industry markets leader for health sciences and wellness Arda Ural sits down with Josh Lipton and Yahoo Finance Senior Reporter Anjalee Khemlani to discuss the dynamics between the US and China in the biotech industry. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime here According to a recent report from the Harvard Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, China has the most immediate opportunity to overtake the United States in biotechnology. For more, let's welcome in Arta Rawi America's industry markets leader and Health Sciences and wellness, as well as Yahoo Finance's very own Anjali Camlani. Welcome to you both. All right, I'll start with you. Uh, maybe it's just a big question, big picture question. Does the US have the investment power, in your opinion, to overtake China in biotech? Yeah, thanks for having me. Uh, the biotech is the innovation feeder to the big pharmaceuticals and it only uh nurtures well in an ecosystem. So to answer your question, what do you need in that ecosystem for that to nurture? Uh, investment capacity, which we have been having for the last, you know, decades, if you will, to kind of keep investing in that innovation to move on. NIH has been probably the world's largest VC over $40 billion in non-dilute funding into the entrepreneurial startups. Then you have talent who has been, you know, coming all these top universities and MDs and PhDs who are dedicated to advance it. And then you need this technology transfer system so that those intellectual property translate into a startup. And then with that investment capacity, it keeps growing and then through testing and going to the humans and then ultimately being developed for everyone's use. So, uh, yes, the US still has the capacity to invest, but it is not potentially the only game in town given the development coming from China. I'm curious, Arta, because we know, I know you've been tracking the deals and uh, we've seen the number of deals steadily increasing over the years. I saw, uh, one of the ones that you sent, which looks at the number of deals so far to date for 2025 is more than half of what we saw in 2024. So we can expect that to really outpace 2024. What does that mean though? Because I know that some of the deals that are happening are more, um, what you would call licensing deals, right? It's not necessarily that this money is going to from scratch investment and innovation, but it's more stuff that has already happened and is built up. Talk to me about that and why that matters. I mean, first of all, the numbers are pretty compelling. A couple years ago, we had pretty much like no deals under a billion dollars in 2016. And as of last year, there were $30 billion worth of licensing deals from Chinese assets into the US, and 2025 is a very strong start, so they're definitely going to beat that number. So the reason why this is happening is in 2015, Chinese Communist Party put a priority of investing in biotech and that was a priority sectors. And it was 10 years ago, and that 10 years of journey started to play out for their benefit because China historically has been known for this active product ingredients and excipients, which is like the chemicals that pharmaceuticals were using to make small molecule products. And that journey now is taking them to upstream to more advanced innovation. Probably we still have not seen a first in class, but clearly they are going for best in class, like those are the shots on goal if you are seeing more and more. Well, that's why, that would be my question because I know that we've seen sort of they're doing copycats or metoos in terms of the type of innovation coming out of China. Um, do we expect that they have the wherewithal to outdo the US then in that sense, in terms of coming up with the next blockbuster for the entire world? I mean, there are a couple examples, early examples that some of the Chinese based assets actually head-to-head comparisons, you know, beat or exceed, at least match the efficacy and safety profile of some of the Western developed compounds. But this is also a journey as the audio question. So what is it, what do they need more to get there? So they have the talent. I mean a lot of Western educated MDs and PhDs went back to China working on that. The government itself as a part of prioritization program have been investing in it. So then the question is, do they have an exit strategy for those entrepreneurs? And that I think is where they are lacking because there's no like an IPO market that is comparable to the Western standards. There's no like an M&A exit until recently. I think that's where the weakness kind of may be the opportunity for them to come up. But the deals we were talking about, they're because of the intellectual property concerns, because of the concerns of reliability and trust in the data because, you know, there's no such institution in the world like FDA that everyone trusts and hopefully continue to trust. And for that reason, the deals seem to be more asset purchases. So I'm not taking a risk by operating in China, but I'm buying the asset and in a licensing deal, and I'll continue to develop it, especially if you can make this cheaper and faster in China, which has been their competitive advantage over the Western companies, then you bring that into a human fast and then the human testing can be done, validations can be done in the more Western setting. I think that can be a winning formula for the industry. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Scientific American

4 hours ago

• Scientific American

First Near-Complete Denisovan Skull Reveals What This Ancient Human Cousin Looked Like

A prominent brow ridge with a brain as large as modern humans and Neanderthals — that's what the archaic human group, the Denisovans, looked like, according to work published this week in Cell and Science. Palaeontologists used ancient molecules to identify a cranium found near Harbin in northeastern China as belonging to the group. It's the first time a near-complete skull has been definitively linked to the extinct people. The fossil, which is at least 146,000 years old, ends a decade and a half of speculation about the Denisovans' appearance. This had remained a mystery since scientists identified them from unique DNA taken from a finger bone found in a Siberian cave in 2010. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. 'It's really exciting to finally have Denisovan DNA from a nearly complete cranium,' says Janet Kelso, a computational biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. 'We finally have some insights into the cranial morphology of the Denisovans,' she says. 'It's really exciting to finally have Denisovan DNA from a nearly complete cranium,' says Janet Kelso, a computational biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. 'We finally have some insights into the cranial morphology of the Denisovans,' she says. Dragon Man The 'massive' cranium — the upper portion of the skull, lacking the lower jawbone — is one of the best preserved of all archaic human fossils, according to researchers who first described it in 2021. Qiang Ji, a palaeontologist at Hebei GEO University in Shijiazhuang, China, obtained the specimen from an unnamed man in 2018. The man — who Ji suspects discovered the artefact himself but failed to report it to authorities — claimed that his grandfather unearthed the fossil in 1933 during bridge-construction work over Long Jiang (which means dragon river), and buried it in an abandoned well, where it remained until a deathbed confession. In 2021, Ji and his colleagues determined that the 'Dragon Man' fossil represented a new archaic human species, which they crowned Homo longi 4. Molecular sleuthing When Ji published those findings, Qiaomei Fu, a geneticist at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, got in touch. Fu worked on the very first Denisovan DNA from the Siberian finger bone and wanted to see whether the Dragon Man fossil contained any ancient molecules. She and her team first attempted to extract ancient DNA from a part of the skull called the petrous bone — often a good source — and from an attached tooth. They didn't recover any genetic material but did extract and sequence fragments from 95 ancient proteins from the petrous samples. Fu compared these with Neanderthal, modern human and Denisovan sequences. One protein sequence from the Harbin fossil was identical to that of a protein from the Siberian finger bone, as well as from Denisovans uncovered in Tibet and Taiwan, but differed from proteins in modern humans and Neanderthals. That suggested the Dragon Man individual was a Denisovan. Fu's team identified two further, less conclusive, protein matches. It's the second time this year that researchers have used ancient proteins to identify a fossil as Denisovan. In April, Takumi Tsutaya, a bioarchaeologist at the Graduate University for Advanced Studies in Kanagawa, Japan, and his colleagues identified a Taiwanese jawbone as belonging to a Denisovan. Tsutaya says that he was amazed to learn that another Denisovan has already been identified. But Fu says that she wanted further evidence. She turned to a tiny chip of calcified dental plaque, or calculus. Fu looked for DNA from the host among the bacterial DNA in the sample. And she found it. Genetic sequences from the maternally inherited mitochondrial genome of the Dragon Man skull were most closely related to early Denisovans from Siberia, which were between 187,000 and 217,000 years old. Fu says that this is the first time that host DNA has been recovered from dental calculus from the Palaeolithic era, which ended 12,000 years ago. Rikai Sawafuji, a geneticist at Kyushu University in Fukoka, Japan, who worked on the Taiwanese fossil, was surprised that the team recovered human DNA from the calculus, given that no DNA was recovered from the petrous bone. She says this could spur other researchers to analyse ancient plaque from Palaeolithic fossils. 'If there is some dental calculus,' she says, 'people can extract human mitochondrial DNA from those samples' to learn more about prehistoric human migrations. Potentially more important is that scientists now have a Denisovan cranium that researchers can use to identify other Denisovan specimens in their collections, even if no ancient DNA or protein can be found.

Forbes

10 hours ago

• Forbes

Dyeing for change: Why microbes could clean up fashion's toxic mess

Three different microbial pigments Colorifix What comes to mind first when you think about the environmental cost of what we wear every day? Fossil-fuel fabrics, overflowing landfills and underpaid labour are often front and centre of the conversation, and rightly so. But what rarely makes it into the headlines - is dye - the stuff that makes our clothes colourful. Textile dyeing is actually one of the most chemically intensive and polluting elements of garment production, accounting for roughly 20% of global industrial water pollution. The vast majority of dyes in use today are made from petrochemicals, derived from crude oil. And the amount of water required in the process is staggering. A single pair of blue denim jeans can take up to 7,000 litres of water to produce. Plus, the indigo hue is synthetic and involves toxic chemicals and heavy metals in its manufacturing. In factories all over the world, from China to Bangladesh, these pollutants are dumped untreated into rivers, poisoning ecosystems and endangering communities. It's a problem that sits in plain sight, literally on our backs, yet remains largely missing from the sustainable fashion discourse. Synthetic dyes are cheap, efficient and industrially embedded. They provide a wide colour spectrum, which brands like, and deliver predictable results - perhaps why no viable solution has been able to compete. Natural dyes made out of plants have been used for centuries, but their problem? The colours tend to be earthy and dull and, crucially, don't stick to the fabric and eventually fade. One British breakthrough may have solved the problem, by inventing a 'green' dye (not literally) that meets the industry's rigorous expectations. It's scaleable - and that means there is potential to disrupt the status quo. Instead of mining oil or boiling vats of chemicals, Colorifix uses engineered microorganisms, (essentially programmable microbes) to grow colours in the lab. Fed with sugar and salt to create a specific pigment, these microbes act like miniature factories, brewing vibrant dyes that are transferred directly onto fabric using a fraction of the water and none of the toxic additives. Fed with sugar and salt to create a specific pigment, the microbes act like miniature factories, brewing vibrant dyes. The idea first emerged from a very different kind of lab, out in nature. In 2012, two University of Cambridge researchers were studying polluted drinking water in rural Nepal. They used bacteria to detect contaminants in water, which had been engineered to change colour in the presence of specific chemicals - a simple, visual indicator for unsafe water. But as they spoke with local communities about the root causes, the answer kept circling back to the same culprit: textile dye. So instead of building tools to detect pollution, they pivoted to tackling the source of it directly, by using DNA sequencing found in our natural world. Say, the genetic code for blue in a butterfly wing, or the pink of a flower petal. By using DNA sequencing, they can copy the genetic code for a blue butterfly wing. 'Synthetic dyes are very well studied and substantiated in the textiles industry - but we're doing our own analysis from scratch,' explains co-founder Jim Ajioka. 'Growing the microorganism is a natural process, but we have modified it, to make the colours of other living organisms.' 'We get inspiration from nature - rather than extracting from nature,' says the other co-founder Orr Yarkoni. Their approach is so radical that it has been recognised royally in the UK. Colorifix became a finalist for the Earthshot Prize in 2023, a yearly contest led by Prince William to find the world's most promising environmental solutions. The Prize is often said to have been inspired by JFK's 'Moonshot' and was designed to incentivise tipping-point innovations. It has five categories, nature protection, clean air, oceans, climate and the one Colorifix competed in, waste-free solutions. Finalists receive mentorship and access to a network of global businesses, investors, and environmental organisations ready to help scale their ideas. The Prince visited the lab this week to praise founders Yarkoni and Ajioka on their science-led approach. 'It's really exciting and I know you're going to push into the industry very quickly,' he told the team. 'It's really exciting and I know you're going to push into the industry very quickly.' The microbial dye solution is already moving beyond the lab. In the last few years, it has received significant funding from highstreet brand H&M (here's a t-shirt dyed by Colorifix). H&M's innovation arm has invested in pilot dyeing projects in Portugal, where the startup's biologically grown pigments were used on items produced for both H&M and Pangaia. This marked one of the first real-world commercial applications of the technology. Today, Colorifix has just closed a $18 million Series B2 round, led by Inter IKEA Group, to fuel global commercial expansion. 'This investment marks a critical milestone as we shift from proving our technology to delivering it at industrial scale,' Yarkoni tells me. Colorifix has just closed a $18 million investment from IKEA to fuel global commercial expansion. Linn Clabburn from IKEA's innovation arm agrees. 'Colorifix is addressing one of the toughest sustainability challenges in textiles,' she says. Their progress in scaling this tech and entering new markets 'aligns well' with IKEA's ambitions to improve sustainability in the value chain, she adds. It's a vote of confidence not just in the science, but in the market's readiness for a pioneering solution. Unlike other sustainable alternatives that require entire factories to be revamped, Colorifix's process is essentially plug-and-play and compatible with existing industrial dyeing equipment. That means factories don't need to overhaul infrastructure to adopt it, which removes one of the biggest barriers to sustainable innovation: cost and complexity. The potential ripple effect is huge. If Colorifix can roll out its microbial dyeing process across fashion and homeware with some of the biggest household names, it could help detoxify one of the most water and chemical-intensive elements of garment production. Transforming a $2 trillion-dollar supply chain does not come without its challenges. Colorifix's technology may be simple to implement, but scaling it globally means convincing the big names this is the right idea for them, never mind navigating strict regulatory frameworks. Textile manufacturers, often operating on razor-thin margins, can be slow to adopt new methods - especially in regions where environmental protocols are lax and synthetic dyes remain cheap and abundant. Yet, momentum is building. Colorifix is already working with mills in Portugal, India and Brazil, with plans to expand into Southeast Asia, one of the largest dyeing hubs in the world. 'We are sure to make a difference.' And the prospects don't stop at fabric. The founders say their microbial process could one day be adapted for other industries like cosmetics and hair dye. When Prince William comes to visit a project like this, he isn't just there to tick a box. The Earthshot Prize was clearly designed to elevate this kind of bold, science-based solution with the power to transform entire systems. In fashion, that means anywhere we use colour, microbes could one day replace petrochemicals. 'Over the last few years, we have gone from grammes to tonnes of fabric per week,' says Yarkoni. 'We are sure to make a difference.'