Hot topics                    

Wednesday 5 March 2008 (EMBARGO LIFTED AT 11.01am AEDT on Wed 5 March)

RAPID ROUNDUP: Is the 'hobbit' just a human with a nutritional deficiency? - Experts comment

The discovery by Australian and Indonesian researchers of the remains of small human-like creatures nicknamed the ‘hobbit’ is the subject of ongoing debate. Found on the Indonesian island of Flores in 2004, the discovery was announced as a new species of human known as Homo floresiensis, however some scientists believe that the ‘hobbit’ is not a new species of human at all but rather a modern Homo sapiens that is in some way diseases or deformed.

Researchers from RMIT University and the University of Western Australia have published a new theory in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B suggesting the primitive features are the result of environmental nutritional deficiency. The Australian authors believe their small stature and distinctive features are the result of a condition related to severe iodine deficiency. Below are comments from a range of experts.

If you would like a copy of this paper or you would like to speak to an expert about this research please don’t hesitate to contact us on (08) 8207 7415

NOTE TO JOURNALISTS: The authors of this paper have just taken part in an online briefing. Audio files from this briefing have been posted here.

Professor Peter Brown is Chair of Palaeoanthropology at the University of New England and was one of the original members of the team that discovered Homo floresiensis, the so-called 'hobbit'.

"The conclusions in this paper are not supported by the facts. The authors have not examined the original fossil, have little and no experience with fossil hominids and depend upon data obtained by others. Their argument hinges on LB1 (Homo floresiensis) having large pituitary fossa. If they had looked at the original, which I have, they would have seen that it does not. Similar for their reference to retained deciduous premolar teeth (the fossil only has adult premolars), and an unfused area on the frontal bone. The later is excavation damage, and the damaged fragment is in the collection in Liang Bua."

Professor Maciej Henneberg is Wood Jones Professor of Anthropological and Comparative Anatomy and Head of Anatomical Sciences in the Biological Anthropology and Comparative Anatomy Research Unit at the University of Adelaide

“The paper by Obendorf and colleagues is a welcome addition to the debate about Hobbits. I was the first to propose a hypothesis that LB1 was not a new species, but a pathological modern human.

“I was privileged to be able to study the original materials - LB1, LB6 and accompanying other fragmentary bones - in 2005 together with a group of colleagues. This study resulted in a major paper published in 2006 in PNAS (Jacob et al. 2006). The study of original materials confirmed my initial hypothesis while my colleagues provided a number of original supporting arguments.
We were, however, careful not to attribute pathological signs of LB skeletons to a particular single disease or syndrome, because there is a large number of possible diseases (some 180 syndromes producing microcephaly and reduced stature) while precise diagnosis from a skeletal material of limited quality may be not entirely reliable.

The hypothesis advanced by Peter Obendorf and his co-workers seems to be plausible, though, as the authors say, its confirmation would require further study of original skeletal materials and other considerations. Together with advanced earlier hypotheses of Laron Syndrome and MOPDII syndrome as explanations of LB1 characteristics, this paper ads to a growing body of the literature confirming that skeletal and dental manifestations of modern human malformations are compatible with the traits of LB skeletons. Thus these traits are not ‘unique’ characteristics of a new species as alleged by Peter Brown and Mike Morwood.”

Professor Colin Groves is Professor of Bioanthropology at the School of Archaeology & Anthropology at the Australian National University, Canberra.

"I regret to say that this paper cannot be regarded as a contribution to our understanding of the Flores hominin. Many of the claims lack evidence (i.e. they are sheer speculation), some even fly in the face of the evidence. I am very sorry indeed to see serious scientists involved in such a travesty."

Dr Jeremy Austin is Deputy Director of the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA at Adelaide University.

“The status of Homo floresiensis as a new species of human has been questioned by a number of researchers who argue that several pathological conditions can explain the unusual skeletal morphology. Genetic data could provide the "casting vote" in this debate, as it would clarify the evolutionary relationship between the hobbit and modern humans. To date, this genetic data, has not been forthcoming, mostly due to poor preservation of the Liang Bua material and the extensive contamination by modern human DNA of material recovered from the site. Collection of fresh, better preserved, hobbit remains using strict anti-contamination measures currently is the best hope for testing the status of Homo floresiensis using genetic data.”