Fossilized feces found in Oregon suggest earliest human presence in North America

By Sandi Doughton - Seattle Times science reporter

Hold the potty humor, please, but archaeologists digging in a dusty cave in Oregon have unearthed fossilized feces that appear to be the oldest biological evidence of humans in North America.

The ancient poop dates back 14,300 years. If the results hold up, that means the continent was populated more than 1,000 years before the so-called Clovis culture, long believed to be the first Americans.

"This adds to a growing body of evidence that the human presence in the Americas predates Clovis," said Michael Waters, an anthropologist at Texas A&M University who was not involved in the project.

DNA analysis of the dried excrement shows the people who lived in the caves were closely related to modern Native Americans. Their genetic roots reach across the Bering Strait to Siberia and eastern Asia.

"These are probably the ancestors of some of the Native Americans living in America now," said Eske Willerslev, director of the Centre for Ancient Genetics at the University of Copenhagen. He co-authored the report that appears in today's online Science Express.

The age of the finding also calls into question the theory that people who crossed the Bering Land Bridge to Alaska migrated south through ice-free corridors as glaciers began to break up. Geological evidence suggests the corridors weren't open 14,300 years ago, though the glaciers had pulled back from the coasts.

"People probably came either by boat or maybe even walking along the West Coast," Willerslev said.

Before the Oregon discovery, the oldest human remains in North America were two sets of bones about 13,000 years old from California and Nevada. Kennewick Man, the skeleton found on the banks of the Columbia River in Eastern Washington, dates to 9,400 years ago.

Willerslev acknowledged that working with feces lacks the cache of studies on skulls or spear-tips. He and his collaborators say their subject matter drew jokesters like flies are drawn to ... well, you know.

"I've heard it all," said Dennis Jenkins, the University of Oregon archaeologist who led the excavations. "My colleagues call me Dr. Poop."

But coprolites, as fossil dung is called in polite scientific society, can be a trove of information on diet and genetics.

Jenkins and his students uncovered hundreds of coprolites in their six years of work at Paisley Caves, about 220 miles southeast of Portland as the crow flies.

"They look just like Fido's droppings in the backyard," he said.

In fact, Jenkins wasn't sure at first the feces were human.

He was curious, though, and eager to cooperate when he heard Willerslev was looking for possible sources of ancient American DNA.

The Danish DNA expert said his own interest in the subject was sparked by a boyhood fascination with Sitting Bull and other American Indians.

The Americas were the last continents populated by humans, and scientists have long believed that the Clovis people were the first to arrive in what are now Canada and the United States. They brought with them their distinctively fluted stone spear points and tools.

A recent re-analysis of Clovis artifacts pinpointed the era's beginning at about 13,000 years ago.

But several other archaeological discoveries have raised doubts about the "Clovis first" theory, including evidence of human settlement 15,000 years ago in Chile. Stone tools and mammoth bones with butchering marks from two sites in Wisconsin date to more than 14,000 years ago. Artifacts from a rock shelter in Pennsylvania have dated back 18,000 years.

But none of those sites, all of which are controversial, offered up human remains — even in the form of poop.

"That's what Paisley Caves provides," Waters said. "Solid evidence of a human presence."

Not everyone is convinced.

Of six coprolites from Oregon identified as human by DNA and protein analysis, three dated to around 14,000 years. The team collected DNA from all 67 people who might have come in contact with the feces, to rule out the possibility of contamination with modern genetic material.

But the scientists also found traces of DNA from foxes, wolves or coyotes in some of the samples.

The most likely explanation is that the early humans ate the animals, or that animal urine got mixed with the feces, Jenkins said.

Anthropologist Gary Haynes, of the University of Nevada, Reno, said it could have happened the other way around: Animal feces were mixed with human DNA. He also points out that several artifacts were dug up in the Oregon caves, including string made from sinew and plant and obsidian flakes, but all are much younger than the oldest coprolites.

"That's kind of a red flag," Haynes said. "Where are the things the people left behind?"

Jenkins and his students plan to keep digging at the caves to try to answer that question.

Now a treeless expanse, the basin where the caves and rock shelters are located was watered by streams and held a large lake 14,000 years ago, Jenkins said. Long-extinct species of camels, horses and bison roamed the scrub and grasslands.

Jenkins has already collected another 24 coprolites from about eight feet below the surface. That's where the oldest poop came from, and he's hoping for more.

He's also thinking about coprolites collected long before DNA analysis was possible, and the secrets they might yield.

"There are thousands of them," he said, "just sitting on museum shelves."

poop,poop, everywhere poop.

Does anyone have a link to any analysis conducted on BF scat? Is it common to find this type of evidence in areas where is BF is reported to be very active? Evidently poop has a pretty good shelf life, therefore even an old sample may be sufficient.

Sakes alive, look at all the information and data them folks squeezed out of (pardon the pun) that pile of poop. Why hasn't any of the BF poop that some individuals, at one time or another have had in their possesion(s)?......

......If they can come up with some DNA and protein from a 14,000 year old crap, shoot they oughtta be able answer about all our questions concerning BF, and if it's fresh enough these guys could probably even tell whether he was right handed or left?.....

Hi

What would you compare BF poop to ???? DNA might come up with some sort of primate but not BF cause there is nothing to compare too, If science has all the answers , Then if i take a big crap and have it analized, Because i believe in BF it should show up ????
Peace
Tim

Nothing new here. Bring in a pile of steaming sasquatch crap and tell folks that's what it is, and they'll tell you sasquatches don't exist, or that (after "analysis") that it can't be identified.

Bring in some supposed prehistoric crap and tell them it's from ancient man, and they can tell you whatever they want.

What a bunch of s**t.

So someone has already submitted a sample?...

..... And this was the result?....

....Do you happen to have a link?....

....Thus far, we have examined five coprolite samples of suspected Sasquatch origin. Two of the fecal specimens were found in the Pacific Northwest region. We were unable to use the coprolite analysis to confirm the identity of the animal which deposited these samples. Our analysis showed that in almost every respect these samples were similar. However, some minor differences did exist. One sample did not contain any conifer needles. This could have reflected a slightly different diet preference, sampling bias due to having only one sample from each locale, or it could have meant that these samples reflected the diets of two different animal species. The pollen content or each coprolite was also somewhat different, but that was expected since the samples were recovered from different locales, each of which was characterized by different flora. We consider that the specimens could have been deposited by a cow or by some other large animal which had similar eating habits — a diet composed entirely of plant foods — and which produces large, unsegmented fecal masses. For both specimens we are able to rule out many large animals such as man, moose, elk, deer, and bear as being the organism that produced these samples.

The three remaining coprolite samples we have examined were collected on Mound Key in Florida. Everything about these specimens was radically different from the two coprolite specimens we examined from the Pacific Northwest. All three samples consisted primarily of remains of non-vegetal diets, only one containing a significant amount of any vegetal material (grass stems and leaves). None of these samples contained parasites. The Florida samples were produced by an organism or organisms which ate mainly small mammals, insects, birds, and crustaceans. One sample resembled coprolites produced by owls; however we cannot be certain that it was of owl origin. Two other samples were similar in many respects (smell, colour, dietary components) yet could have been produced by either the same or two different kinds of animals. The origin of these three coprolites remains a mystery. None of the specimens appear to be of human origin and whether or not they were of Sasquatch origin remains unknown.....

That is not a full spectrum lab analysis, Huntster, and not comparable to the rigorous examination and testing offered at a facility like the University of Oregon, mentioned in article. This sounds like someone with some very limited equipment basically just passed portions of the specimen under a garden variety microscope....

So why isn't it subjected to a "full spectrum lab analysis"?

How was the owl scat identified and the rest unidentified?

I think I asked these same questions pretty much myself, allow me to clarify. Your reply offered no further data than an assessment of what partially digested, reconizable material was found and a comment on some pollen fragments identified in the samples tested. Is there a link to your post that perhaps would further explain what steps were taken in the matter of collecting and sending these specimens, what facility performed the testing, and what exactly was the procedures performed once it reached its destination.......

.....Like I asked....why wasn't a full spetrum analysis performed, which could include some results concerning the things I mentioned...ie. DNA, proteins, etc.....

....Of six coprolites from Oregon identified as human by DNA and protein analysis, three dated to around 14,000 years. The team collected DNA from all 67 people who might have come in contact with the feces, to rule out the possibility of contamination with modern genetic material.

But the scientists also found traces of DNA from foxes, wolves or coyotes in some of the samples.

The most likely explanation is that the early humans ate the animals, or that animal urine got mixed with the feces, Jenkins said.....

.....All I was saying, if anyone has seen owl scat before, you can pretty much throw it in a pile with 40 other kinds of poop and anyone with half a brain and 20/20 vision can stand on the other side of the room and point out the owl crap in the pile....