New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Human Remains Double Known Rainforest Occupation Time

Physical remains in Sri Lanka show that people lived in rainforests 20,000 years ago, at least 10,000 years earlier than previous evidence showed. Cynthia Graber reports

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


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.


People have been living near rainforests for tens of thousands of years, but most available evidence has intense use of forest resources starting just 10,000 years ago. So scientists thought that the dense, tropical forests were so hard to navigate and find food in that humans would have mainly depended on open plains nearby.

But some researchers had doubts. Modern forest foragers do just fine in the rainforest. And some evidence in Africa pointed to humans in rainforests well before the 10,000 year mark.

Now there’s hard evidence, out of Sri Lanka, that people roamed and dined on rainforest offerings at least 10,000 years earlier than we’d thought. The finding is in the journal Science. [Patrick Roberts et al, Direct evidence for human reliance on rainforest resources in late Pleistocene Sri Lanka]

Researchers measured carbon and oxygen isotopes in the remains of 26 humans found in the Sri Lankan rainforest. The bodies were some 20,000 years old.

Isotope signatures differ for plants that live beneath the closed rainforest canopy than for plants from the open plains. Any animals that eat those plants then also carry those forest isotopes—as did the remains, showing that these humans subsisted on tropical forest vegetation.

The findings show that humans have been taking advantage of rainforests for at least 20 millennia. Whether our accelerated resource extraction will allow any substantial rainforests to exist even one thousand years from now is a very open question.

—Cynthia Graber

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

Cynthia Graber is a print and radio journalist who covers science, technology, agriculture, and any other stories in the U.S. or abroad that catch her fancy. She's won a number of national awards for her radio documentaries, including the AAAS Kavli Science Journalism Award, and is the co-host of the food science podcast Gastropod. She was a Knight Science Journalism fellow at MIT.

More by Cynthia Graber

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe