Early humans adapted to extreme habitats. Researchers say it set the stage for global migration

WASHINGTON (AP) — Humans are the only animal that lives in virtually every possible environment, from rainforests to deserts to tundra.
This adaptability is a skill that long predates the modern age. According to a new study published Wednesday in Nature, ancient Homo sapiens developed the flexibility to survive by finding food and other resources in a wide variety of difficult habitats before they dispersed from Africa about 50,000 years ago.
'Our superpower is that we are ecosystem generalists,' said Eleanor Scerri, an evolutionary archaeologist at the Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology in Jena, Germany.
Our species first evolved in Africa around 300,000 years ago. While prior fossil finds show some groups made early forays outside the continent, lasting human settlements in other parts of the world didn't happen until a series of migrations around 50,000 years ago.
'What was different about the circumstance of the migrations that succeeded — why were humans ready this time?' said study co-author Emily Hallett, an archaeologist at Loyola University Chicago.
Earlier theories held that Stone Age humans might have made a single important technological advance or developed a new way of sharing information, but researchers haven't found evidence to back that up.
This study took a different approach by looking at the trait of flexibility itself.
The scientists assembled a database of archaeological sites showing human presence across Africa from 120,000 to 14,000 years ago. For each site, researchers modeled what the local climate would have been like during the time periods that ancient humans lived there.
'There was a really sharp change in the range of habitats that humans were using starting around 70,000 years ago,' Hallet said. 'We saw a really clear signal that humans were living in more challenging and more extreme environments.'
While humans had long survived in savanna and forests, they shifted into everything from from dense rainforests to arid deserts in the period leading up to 50,000 years ago, developing what Hallet called an "ecological flexibility that let them succeed.'
While this leap in abilities is impressive, it's important not to assume that only Homo sapiens did it, said University of Bordeaux archaeologist William Banks, who was not involved in the research.
Other groups of early human ancestors also left Africa and established long-term settlements elsewhere, including those that evolved into Europe's Neanderthals, he said.
The new research helps explain why humans were ready to expand across the world way back when, he said, but it doesn't answer the lasting question of why only our species remains today.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Verge

an hour ago

• The Verge

You sound like ChatGPT

Join any Zoom call, walk into any lecture hall, or watch any YouTube video, and listen carefully. Past the content and inside the linguistic patterns, you'll find the creeping uniformity of AI voice. Words like 'prowess' and 'tapestry,' which are favored by ChatGPT, are creeping into our vocabulary, while words like 'bolster,' 'unearth,' and 'nuance,' words less favored by ChatGPT, have declined in use. Researchers are already documenting shifts in the way we speak and communicate as a result of ChatGPT — and they see this linguistic influence accelerating into something much larger. In the 18 months after ChatGPT was released, speakers used words like 'meticulous,' 'delve,' 'realm,' and 'adept' up to 51 percent more frequently than in the three years prior, according to researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, who analyzed close to 280,000 YouTube videos from academic channels. The researchers ruled out other possible change points before ChatGPT's release and confirmed these words align with those the model favors, as established in an earlier study comparing 10,000 human- and AI-edited texts. The speakers don't realize their language is changing. That's exactly the point. One word, in particular, stood out to researchers as a kind of linguistic watermark. 'Delve' has become an academic shibboleth, a neon sign in the middle of every conversation flashing ChatGPT was here. 'We internalize this virtual vocabulary into daily communication,' says Hiromu Yakura, the study's lead author and a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Human Development. ''Delve' is only the tip of the iceberg.' But it's not just that we're adopting AI language — it's about how we're starting to sound. Even though current studies mostly focus on vocabulary, researchers suspect that AI influence is starting to show up in tone, too — in the form of longer, more structured speech and muted emotional expression. As Levin Brinkmann, a research scientist at the Max Planck Institute of Human Development and a coauthor of the study, puts it, ''Delve' is only the tip of the iceberg.' AI shows up most obviously in functions like smart replies, autocorrect, and spellcheck. Research out of Cornell looks at our use of smart replies in chats, finding that use of smart replies increases overall cooperation and feelings of closeness between participants, since users end up selecting more positive emotional language. But if people believed their partner was using AI in the interaction, they rated their partner as less collaborative and more demanding. Crucially, it wasn't actual AI usage that turned them off — it was the suspicion of it. We form perceptions based on language cues, and it's really the language properties that drive those impressions, says Malte Jung, Associate Professor of Information Science at Cornell University and a co-author of the study. This paradox — AI improving communication while fostering suspicion — points to a deeper loss of trust, according to Mor Naaman, professor of Information Science at Cornell Tech. He has identified three levels of human signals that we've lost in adopting AI into our communication. The first level is that of basic humanity signals, cues that speak to our authenticity as a human being like moments of vulnerability or personal rituals, which say to others, 'This is me, I'm human.' The second level consists of attention and effort signals that prove 'I cared enough to write this myself.' And the third level is ability signals which show our sense of humor, our competence, and our real selves to others. It's the difference between texting someone, 'I'm sorry you're upset' versus 'Hey sorry I freaked at dinner, I probably shouldn't have skipped therapy this week.' One sounds flat; the other sounds human. For Naaman, figuring out how to bring back and elevate these signals is the path forward in AI-mediated communication, because AI is not only changing language — but what we think. 'Even on dating sites, what does it mean to be funny on your profile or in chat anymore where we know that AI can be funny for you?' Naaman asks. The loss of agency starting in our speech and moving into our thinking, in particular, is what he is worried about. 'Instead of articulating our own thoughts, we articulate whatever AI helps us to articulate…we become more persuaded.' Without these signals, Naaman warns, we'll only trust face-to-face communication — not even video calls. We lose the verbal stumbles, regional idioms, and off-kilter phrases that signal vulnerability, authenticity, and personhood The trust problem compounds when you consider that AI is quietly establishing who gets to sound 'legitimate' in the first place. University of California, Berkeley research found that AI responses often contained stereotypes or inaccurate approximations when prompted to use dialects other than Standard American English. Examples of this include ChatGPT repeating the prompt back to the non-Standard-American-English user due to lack of comprehension and exaggerating the input dialect significantly. One Singaporean English respondent commented, 'the super exaggerated Singlish in one of the responses was slightly cringeworthy.' The study revealed that AI doesn't just prefer Standard American English, it actively flattens other dialects in ways that can demean their speakers. This system perpetuates inaccuracies not only about communities but also about what 'correct' English is. So the stakes aren't just about preserving linguistic diversity — they're about protecting the imperfections that actually build trust. When everyone around us starts to sound 'correct,' we lose the verbal stumbles, regional idioms, and off-kilter phrases that signal vulnerability, authenticity, and personhood. We're approaching a splitting point, where AI's impacts on how we speak and write move between the poles of standardization, like templating professional emails or formal presentations, and authentic expression in personal and emotional spaces. Between those poles, there are three core tensions at play. Early backlash signals, like academics avoiding 'delve' and people actively trying not to sound like AI, suggests we may self-regulate against homogenization. AI systems themselves will likely become more expressive and personalized over time, potentially reducing the current AI voice problem. And the deepest risk of all, as Naaman pointed to, is not linguistic uniformity but losing conscious control over our own thinking and expression. The future isn't predetermined between homogenization and hyperpersonalization: it depends on whether we'll be conscious participants in that change. We're seeing early signs that people will push back when AI influence becomes too obvious, while technology may evolve to better mirror human diversity rather than flatten it. This isn't a question about whether AI will continue shaping how we speak — because it will — but whether we'll actively choose to preserve space for the verbal quirks and emotional messiness that make communication recognizably, irreplaceably human.

Yahoo

2 hours ago

• Yahoo

New study makes startling discoveries after studying birds' feathers: 'It's a slower and more meandering process'

A recent University of Utah study found that birds are molting at earlier dates. The underlying reason? Our planet's warming. Researchers used 13 years' worth of data on 134 bird species to come to their conclusion. They studied molting patterns from 2011 to 2024 and found that fall migratory birds consistently molted a day earlier than in the previous year. Molting is a crucial precursor to migration and, consequently, breeding. Old feathers could negatively impact both their flight and mating capabilities, Kyle Kittelberger, research team lead, told Spring migratory birds, however, were a different story. "We didn't see any shift at the community level for spring body molt," Kittelberger said. "Some of the reasons for that might be birds tend to migrate much faster in the spring … whereas in the fall, it's a slower and more meandering process." The specific reason isn't entirely clear yet. Kittelberger suggests that earlier breeding or later migration times — both of which result from the warming planet — are viable options. If molting overlaps with either breeding or migration, it could sap birds' energy, damaging species' survival in the long run. If that is the case here, it could spell bad news for migratory birds — and humans. Different bird species provide different benefits to humanity. Take hummingbirds, for example. Most hummingbird species migrate and are excellent pollinators. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, about 35% of the entire world's food supply depends on pollinators to reproduce. The extinction of hummingbird species will globally jeopardize human food supplies. And that's just one example out of many. On the whole, every bird plays a part in their local ecosystem, spreading seeds, scavenging carcasses, and keeping pests at bay. Without them, the world will be thrown out of balance. Kittelberger already has the next steps in mind. He told that he plans to research birds in their breeding and/or post-breeding grounds. "That is the next element of this kind of research," he said, "to not only look at what's going on in the summer when they're beginning to molt but to see if that overlaps with anything like breeding." If you'd like to help on an individual level, there are a couple of things you can do. Converting just a portion of your yard to a native lawn can give pollinators, like hummingbirds, crucial food sources. You can also consider donating to climate causes that research birds and conserve their habitats, like the National Audubon Society. Do you think America could ever go zero-waste? Never Not anytime soon Maybe in some states Definitely Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

Associated Press

5 hours ago

• Associated Press

mRNA Technology Transfer Programme's Phase 2.0 discussed with partners on the sidelines of G20 Summit

With the G20 Health Working Group, global health leaders are coming together to set the foundation for a new phase of the mRNA Technology Transfer Programme 'This is a unique opportunity, driven by the pandemic. The foundations are in place — but without sustained political will, the promise of equitable mRNA access could slip through our fingers.'— Charles Gore, Executive Director of the Medicines Patent Pool JOHANNESBURG, GAUTENG, SOUTH AFRICA, June 20, 2025 / / -- In parallel with the G20 Health Working Group, global health leaders are coming together in Johannesburg to set the foundation for a new phase of the mRNA Technology Transfer Programme – a pioneering initiative transitioning from proof of concept to sustainable, commercially viable manufacturing, while enhancing pandemic preparedness and regional health security. Launched in 2021 by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP), with the support of the Government of South Africa, France, Belgium, Canada, the European Union, Germany and Norway, the Programme has successfully enabled 15 Partners across Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia to receive foundational mRNA technology. Now, it is moving into Phase 2.0 (2026–2030), with the aim of empowering regional manufacturers to scale up commercially sustainable production of mRNA-based vaccines and therapeutics at Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)-grade. 'The mRNA Technology Transfer Programme is delivering on its promise to build capabilities in low- and middle-income countries,' said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. 'The Pandemic Agreement adopted by the World Health Assembly also includes legally-binding commitments to strengthen local production. We must now translate those commitments into capacity on the ground, so that when the next pandemic strikes, we meet it more equitably and more effectively.' 'This is a unique opportunity, driven by the pandemic. The foundations are in place — but without sustained political will, the promise of equitable mRNA access could slip through our fingers.' said Charles Gore, Executive Director of the Medicines Patent Pool. 'What we need now is the courage to build on our investment to date, to align, and to realise the full value and impact of what we started.' From technology access to market-ready solutions The Programme is moving from focus on technology acquisition to defining how each partner will translate it into real-world impact. Each manufacturer is now focused on developing an economic case for long-term, flexible, and commercially viable manufacturing — with the capacity to produce mRNA vaccines in inter-pandemic periods and pivoting rapidly in response to future health emergencies. Product focus areas include: mRNA vaccines – for pandemic and priority diseases (e.g., influenza, TB, HIV, malaria, dengue, leishmaniasis); mRNA therapeutics – such as oncology and monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatments; and Biologicals beyond mRNA – including near-term commercial products to support facility viability. 'We have successfully progressed with the technology transfer to eight Partners — a testament to the strength and openness of this platform,' said Prof. Petro Terblanche, CEO of Afrigen Biologics. 'What comes next is even more exciting: Afrigen is on the cusp of receiving GMP accreditation, positioning us not only as a technology originator but as a sustainable manufacturing and innovation partner for the Global South. We will continue to work with local and global partners on the development of new vaccines prioritizing the burden of disease in LMICs.' A diversity of models, one global goal The Programme's Phase 2.0 recognises that there is no one-size-fits-all model. Manufacturers will develop tailored business strategies based on national health needs and policy, regulatory maturity and regional market dynamics. Some, like Bio-Manguinhos and Sinergium in Latin America, BioFarma in Indonesia, and Biovac in South Africa, are already piloting investment roadmaps with detailed market, regulatory, and COGS (cost of goods sold) modelling. Others will receive bespoke support to develop their investment cases. Crucially, sustainability will depend on country and regional-level procurement commitments, pooled purchasing mechanisms, and cross-border alignment — especially in Africa and Asia, where national markets alone may be insufficient to support GMP-level manufacturing scale. 'We need to back science with smart policy,' said Dr Mmboneni Muofhe of South Africa's Department of Science, Technology and Innovation. 'This is about creating a new ecosystem for public health security, grounded in regional ownership, long-term strategy and investments.' Rising demand meets structural barriers While market opportunities for mRNA vaccines and therapeutics are growing — from seasonal influenza and HPV to innovative cancer treatments — the Programme acknowledges structural hurdles: Misinformation and vaccine hesitancy; Shifting donor funding priorities that reduce funding availability; High clinical trial costs; and Need for supportive policies and well-defined procurement pathways. The mRNA Programme highlights both the growing interest in regional R&D consortia focused on target diseases of regional relevance like leishmaniasis and malaria, and the drive to advance next-generation technologies focusing on dose sparing, reduced cost of goods and thermostability. Edwin Reichel Flow Communications +27 114404841 email us here Legal Disclaimer: EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.