DENTAL WORK?: The lower left first molar of the hobbit is claimed to have a filling--an observation that other hobbit researchers say is refuted by this photograph.
Image: PETER BROWN University of New England
-
Why Is the Penis Shaped Like That?
Why do testicles hang the way they do? Is there an adaptive function to the female orgasm? What does it feel like to want to kill yourself? Does “free will”...
Read More »
And you thought Frodo had it hard. In what is shaping up to be a battle of Tolkienian proportions, the tiny remains from Flores, Indonesia--paleoanthropology's hobbit--have once again come under attack.
Most paleoanthropologists believe that the hobbit belongs to a new species of human, Homo floresiensis. But now comes word that the specimen used to define the species--a largely complete female skeleton known as LB1--appears to have had some dental work. If so, it would mean that, rather than being an 18,000-year-old representative of a new species, the hobbit was just a modern human with a growth disorder that left it with a brain the size of a grapefruit, among other odd traits, which is what critics have argued all along.
Maciej Henneberg, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Adelaide in Australia contends on the basis of photographs that LB1 had a filling--and possibly a root canal--in its lower left first molar (technically known as the M1). He believes the tooth was drilled and the cavity filled with a kind of dental cement that was used by Indonesian dentists in the 1930s.
Henneberg shared the photos he studied with several fellow attendees at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists held recently in Columbus, Ohio. He pointed out the color of the alleged filling, which differed from that of the enamel. He also noted that the putative filling appeared to be more worn than the surrounding enamel.
Henneberg says he initially made these and other observations three years ago, but did not want to go public until he had a chance to verify them with the original remains. He has yet to see the bones, but decided to air his theory because it has become increasingly apparent that he may never get the opportunity. (A request to do so was denied.)
Hobbit defenders pooh-pooh the claim. Paleoanthropologist Peter Brown of the University of New England in Armidale, Australia, who led the initial analysis of LB1, says his own photograph of the occlusal (chewing) surface "shows there is no filling. There are no dental materials or dentists who can color match and hide a cavity in a molar to the degree that would be necessary."
Brown has also examined CT (computed tomography) scans of LB1's teeth, which reveal normal, bifurcating roots in the M1. "The CT scans, when combined with the detailed occlusal view, totally refute Henneberg's claim," Brown asserts.
Charles Hildebolt, a paleoanthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, has also been working on the Flores material and has obtained his own CT scans. "We think that it is highly unlikely that any type of filling material is in the mandibular left first molar," he said in an e-mail. "The defect in the mandibular left first molar does not have the appearance of a cavity preparation made by a dentist in that the defect is shallow, is nonretentive and is not extended in an apical direction interproximally. There is no indication of tooth decay in any of LB1's teeth."
He adds, "if for some reason, a temporary filling were placed in LB1's mandibular left first molar, we should be able to see some indication of it in the CT images, but we cannot--all that we can see is a defect that resembles other defects on LB1's teeth where the enamel has worn away and the dentine is exposed."
Paleoanthropologist John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who was present when Henneberg made his case, notes on his blog that Brown's CT scan "has rather poor resolution (typical of medical CT scans), and cuts through the lingual cusps of the lower M1, not the buccal (cheek) cusps which appear to have been most affected by the irregularity." He says an x-ray would be more convincing.
See what we're tweeting about
10 Comments
Add CommentHas there been any Radiometric dating done on the specinen? If one camp is saying that the female is only 70 years old, and the other is saying that it is 18,000 years old, it would seem to be a faily simple debate to settle.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh my gosh ! It now comes down to the state of the art of dentistry in Indonesia in the 1930s, and a root canal to boot! In logic, someone should refute the notion that this person would be a candidate for such a procedure, let alone her environment. "But leave no stone unturned." As usual, there is probably some "hidden agenda" going on here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo, those skeptical of the Hobbit discovery have moved from 'disease of the week' to crackpot theory. This really getting to be fringe stuff. Could Prof Henneberg please offer a theory as to how the dentally challenged micocephallic (as he has claimed) ended up being buried 6.5 metres deep below a solid 80 cm band of volcanic tuff postively dated by numerous techniques to >10,000 years old in the company of other small hominid creatures conclusively dated to represent an 80,000 year sequence? This claim, like the recent poorly written paper on cretinism, is so unlikely as to be non-scientific
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the remains were under the ash layer without a clear breach in it and that is 12,000 years old then this guy needs his head examined for a brain unless he is claiming the entire thing is a total fake.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis body has so many features that don't match up with anything expected outside of Africa and no where for over a million years that even if she were alive to today I'd have to say she was most likely a member of another species.
Perhaps the real story here is that our dating methods aren't quite as reliable as you've been led to believe. This is not the first time this has happened. SA had an article a couple of years back about a crater in Saudi Arabia that was dated radiometrically and geologically to hundreds of thousands of years old. Then they found written records of eyewitness accounts that put the impact at about 250 years back.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf Hennenberg and associates are referring to the white chalky look on the top of that tooth, It is also evident on at least two other teeth. Vitamin deficiency? A lot to infer by photo only. Annie
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWill you put the damn thing away before someone claims the teeth belong to his great aunt.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthe root canal(s) were made to extract DNA and filled in before they went to the Indonesians, DUH!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBefore I was thrown out of freshman logic in college, the prof talked about the falacy of trying to make general conclusions from specific samples, yet, this is what the science of paleowhatsis seems to do. I'm waiting to hear about a troodon with dentures. Won't that shake up a few martinis?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisP.S. Has anyone seen my great aunt? She went on a cruise. . .
--
Edited by jacomus d'paganus-fatuus at 06/04/2008 2:25 PM
--
Edited by jacomus d'paganus-fatuus at 06/04/2008 2:34 PM
Root Canal Prices Abroad I read that Root Canal is more affordable in Thailand than in the States. Ive heard both good and bad things about medical tourism. Is it safe?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this_____________________
http://www.healism.com