Middle Paleolithic Quina technology in Yunnan and the discussion of Neanderthals in China

<sec><p indent="0mm">The Middle Paleolithic in Eurasia, also known as the Middle Stone Age in Africa, spans approximately 300 to <sc>40 ka.</sc> This period represents a critical phase in human evolution, marked by the emergence of early modern humans, the diversification of archaic populations (e.g., Neanderthals and Denisovans), and significant innovations in lithic technology. In western Eurasia, Middle Paleolithic technologies exhibit remarkable diversity, exemplified by the Mousterian techno-complex associated with Neanderthals, which encompasses distinct variants such as Levallois, laminar, Quina, and discoid-denticulate systems. Meanwhile, human evolution in East Asia during this period was marked by considerable complexity, as reflected in a variety of archaic human fossils exhibiting mosaic anatomical features. Palaeoproteomic and ancient DNA analyses have further revealed that some of these individuals belong to the Denisovan lineage, including the Xiahe Man from the Baishiya Karst Cave in Gansu Province, the <italic>Homo</italic> <italic>longi</italic> (“Dragon Man”) from Harbin in Heilongjiang Province, and the Penghu 1 mandible discovered in the Penghu Channel, Taiwan Strait. However, East Asia’s Middle Paleolithic record has long been considered as technologically conservative, with a notable absence of diagnostic Middle Paleolithic techno-complexes contrasting sharply with its rich archaic hominin fossil record. Recent discoveries, including Levallois and discoid assemblages, have begun to challenge this view, highlighting the need to reassess regional technological trajectories. </sec><sec> A newly conducted multidisciplinary study at the Longtan site (optically stimulated luminescence dating, approximately <sc>60–50 ka)</sc> in northwestern Yunnan has identified, for the first time in East Asia, a well-defined Middle Paleolithic Quina lithic assemblage. This lithic technology is distinguished by: (1) A plan-secant flaking strategy designed to produce thick Quina flakes with asymmetrical cross-sections and cortical backing on one side of the dorsal surface, which serve as Quina scraper blanks; (2) sequential edge retouching using both soft and hard hammers, resulting in distinct convexity and concavity scars; and (3) sustained edge resharpening to maintain functionality, with the resulting resharpening flakes repurposed as blanks for small-sized tools, exemplifying a ramified/branched reduction sequence. This highly structured reduction system follows a standardized mental template, yielding morphologically consistent and recyclable scrapers that correspond to high-mobility subsistence strategies, a technological signature previously attributed exclusively to Neanderthals in western Eurasia during MIS 4 to MIS 3 climatic oscillations. Notably, more than 30 additional Quina-related sites have been discovered near Longtan, with the Tianhuadong Cave site serving as a key example. Preliminary dating suggests an occupation range of approximately <sc>90–40 ka</sc> for Tianhuadong Cave, potentially extending the temporal span of Quina technology in the region. Furthermore, Quina-like assemblages have been documented across both northern and southern China, indicating a potential broad spatial and temporal distribution of this techno-complex in East Asia. </sec><sec> By integrating multi-proxy evidence from fossil morphology, ancient genomics, and lithic technology, we propose that Neanderthals likely inhabited East Asia, and potentially dispersing into the region via two routes: a northern steppe corridor through Siberia, supported by genetic evidence of Neanderthal–Denisovan admixture at Denisova Cave, and a southern route via the Indian subcontinent, where they may have interacted with westward-expanding Denisovans. Genetic evidence of Neanderthal-Denisovan admixture, as documented at Denisova Cave in the Altai region of Siberia, further supports this hypothesis. Overall, the discovery of the Quina technology at Longtan, not only fills a critical gap in Middle Paleolithic lithic technologies in East Asia, but also reinforces the diversity and complexity of lithic technology, adaptation strategy, and human populations in this region. These findings highlight the significance of East Asia in the broader narrative of human evolution. </sec>