Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2026

Reverse Dissection and DiceCT Reveal Otherwise Hidden Data in the Evolution of the Primate Face
Published on: January 7, 2019
The naming of Homo bodoensis by Roksandic and colleagues does not resolve issues surrounding Middle Pleistocene human
Eric Delson1,2,3,4,5, Chris Stringer6
1Department of Anthropology, Lehman College, City University of New York (CUNY), Bronx, New York, USA.
Abstract:
Roksandic et al. (2022) proposed the new species name Homo bodoensis as a replacement name for Homo rhodesiensis Woodward, 1921, because they felt it was poorly and variably defined and was linked to sociopolitical baggage. However, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature includes regulations on how and when such name changes are allowed, and Roksandic et al.'s arguments meet none of these requirements. It is not permitted to change a name solely because of variable (or erroneous) later use once it has been originally defined correctly, nor can a name be modified because it is offensive to one or more authors or to be politically expedient. We discuss past usage of H. rhodesiensis and the relevant nomenclatural procedures, the proposed evolutionary position of H. bodoensis, and issues raised about decolonizing paleoanthropology. We reject H. bodoensis as a junior synonym, with no value from its inception.
Related Concept Videos
Hybrid Zones
The Fossil Record
Convergent Evolution
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons
Eukaryotic Evolution
Contrary to the endosymbiont theory, the eukaryote-first hypothesis proposes that the simpler prokaryotic and...
Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...

