Josephine Joordens and Erika Schagatay propose that some early Homo populations may have developed exceptional endurance through repeated breath-hold diving for aquatic food before, or alongside, the evolution of long-distance running. Their “dive first, run later” idea widens the familiar land-based account; it is a hypothesis for testing, not an established timeline for human evolution.
What the “dive first, run later” hypothesis proposes
In a paper published in PaleoAnthropology on September 17, 2026, hominin palaeoecologist and evolution professor Josephine Joordens and animal physiology professor Erika Schagatay argue that human endurance should be considered in relation to both aquatic and terrestrial foraging. The paper’s DOI is 10.48738/2027.iss1.4031.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Evolution: The Human Story, 2nd Edition | $27.28 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Humans: The Evolution of a Species | $24.62 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
The Complete World of Human Evolution (The Complete Series) | $8.61 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Understanding Human Evolution (Understanding Life) | $14.90 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
The Magic School Bus Explores Human Evolution | $13.69 | Buy on Amazon |
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Here, “endurance diving” means making repeated breath-hold dives separated by short periods of breathing at the surface—not performing one isolated, deep dive. The authors suggest that coastal Homo populations could have expanded their food-gathering into aquatic environments, and that physical and physiological traits useful in that setting may also matter when considering endurance on land.
How diving might relate to running
The authors discuss increased bone mass as a possible aid to buoyancy control in shallow water. They also suggest that cardiorespiratory abilities associated with diving could be relevant to endurance running and tolerance of high-altitude environments. These are proposed functional connections, not demonstrated adaptations traced through a proven sequence of fossils.
#1 Best Overall
The idea does not require choosing between diving and running as competing explanations. It modifies the familiar endurance-running account by asking whether aquatic foraging also helped shape the capacities that later supported, or coexisted with, terrestrial endurance. It does not reject running or persistence hunting.
How it compares with the land-focused account
| Question | Endurance-running account | Combined land-and-water proposal |
|---|---|---|
| Possible selective pressure | Pursuit of terrestrial prey and endurance on land. | Aquatic-resource foraging through repeated breath-hold dives, considered alongside land-based foraging. |
| Anatomical focus | Features associated with running economy. | Bone mass as a possible aid to buoyancy, alongside traits relevant to land endurance. |
| Physiological connection | Adaptations considered in relation to running. | Cardiorespiratory traits potentially relevant to diving, running and hypoxia. |
| Evidence status | A recognized explanatory hypothesis about human endurance. | A newer proposal that has not yet been tested by the paper’s authors. |
The two accounts need not be mutually exclusive, and they are not equally established: the diving proposal is an invitation to broaden the questions asked of the evidence, not a replacement conclusion.
Rank #2
What modern diving can—and cannot—show
A Max Planck Society account describes a two-hour recording of an Ama diver’s work shift: 50 dives to around 8–10 metres, with 45 per cent of the recorded time spent underwater. It illustrates what repeated breath-hold diving can look like in a present-day setting. It does not establish that ancient Homo populations dived in the same way, at the same depths, or for the same reasons.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
What evidence is still needed
Joordens and Schagatay synthesize comparative physiology and anatomy, paleoecology and paleoanthropology. They explicitly distinguish that synthesis from a test of the proposal. As the paper’s abstract states, “Testing hypotheses is outside the scope of this paper.” Evaluation will require further work involving fossils and physiology, among other evidence. The authors also note that the hominin fossil record is incomplete and biased, which limits how confidently researchers can reconstruct behavior and evolutionary sequence.
So the question “Endurance running or endurance diving—which came first?” remains open. The paper does not establish that diving preceded running, or that this sequence applied to all Homo populations. Its contribution is to make aquatic foraging a possible part of the discussion about why humans evolved exceptional aerobic endurance, while leaving the proposal to be assessed against future evidence.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
