New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Humans off the Hook for Alaskan Mastodon Extinction

A reexamination of museum mastodon specimens provides evidence that that last ones were gone from what's called the Beringia region well before any humans showed up. Emily Schwing 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.


It’s long been thought mammoths and mastodons rambled over North America’s arctic and subarctic realms between 75,000 and 100,000 years ago, and were made extinct by hungry new arrivals on the scene: human beings. But new evidence indicates mastodons probably roamed the region as far back as 120,000 years ago—and they were gone before the first people showed up.

“For at the least the story of the mastodon, we now know for what we call Beringia—Alaska, parts of Yukon and over into northeastern Asia—they were wiped out in those areas for things that had nothing to do with humans, because they all died out before there were humans there.” Pat Druckenmiller is the Curator of Earth Science at the University of Alaska Museum of the North. “Humans could not have been part of the story and that’s pretty interesting.”

The research is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Grant D. Zazula et al, American mastodon extirpation in the Arctic and Subarctic predates human colonization and terminal Pleistocene climate change]

Druckenmiller and co-authors were led to these conclusions after colleagues at the Yukon Paleontology Program in Canada decided to redate nearly 40 specimens, because American mastodons are often mistaken for their much hairier wooly mammoth cousins, who hung around the area later.
 
“A mammoth and a mastodon can be immediately distinguished on the basis of their teeth, their big cheek teeth.” The surface of a mammoth tooth looks like a washboard, perfect for grinding grasses that grew during the last ice age. But mastodon teeth have much lumpier, bumpier cusps: ideal for chewing twigs and leaves.
 
“People in the past when they found these teeth and bones, they put glue and other kinds of strange things on them, and that glue can mess up the dates, gives you a wrong date. In fact, it gives you a date that’s too young.”
 
The new dates corroborate what mastodon teeth show: They ambled over Beringia when the region was warmer and forested, long before mammoths and earlier than humans. So, if humans didn’t wipe out the mastodon, what did? That mystery remains for scientists to sink their teeth into.
 
—Emily Schwing
 
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

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