Technological advances in human evolutionary biology research have contributed greatly to progress in understanding human variation and implications for health and basic research. The measurement and assessment of hormones, genes, and other biomarkers in remote field settings using minimally invasive collection methods has led to the emergence and growth of new fields such as reproductive and immune ecology as well as evolutionary genetics. These advances are likely to accelerate as the result of miniaturization of equipment and vital analytical devices, wearable technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), cloud data storage, and enhanced abilities to analyze large, small, and incomplete data sets. While these technologies and methods should be welcomed and embraced, these advances also merit vigilance and continued awareness of the following scientific best practices: 1) Valid interpretation of results; 2) constant interrogation of physiological significance of results; 3) the maintenance, awareness, and development of theoretical context; and 4) the maintenance of ethical data collection. As research using challenging biomarkers at remote field sites and more sophisticated analysis becomes easier, more accessible, and more efficient, it is important to maintain and promote these scientific best practices.

A Nature (2023) survey of more than 1,600 researchers across the natural, social, and physical sciences showed that many expect artificial intelligence (AI) will soon be central to research practices. AI, including shallow machine learning and deep learning, has already begun transforming research practices, offering capabilities for every step in the scientific process including insight generation, research conceptualization, data collection, data analysis, and writing. In the field of human biology specifically, AI can be used to accelerate and expand qualitative data analysis, detect patterns in human biological variation, increase the number of input variables in biological and biocultural models, and increase multi-modal data collection. However, there is still much debate as to which AI applications are acceptable and which are problematic and/or unethical. AI tools often perpetrate biases, “hallucinate” or make up information, and could lead to a lack of replication, faked studies, and plagiarism. Models often require large amounts of data, labelling, understanding, and supervision, with technologies consuming massive amounts of power and water. Further, deep learning algorithms are uninterpretable black-boxes, that are only as good as the inputs they are trained on, with massive amounts of infrastructure needed to retrain models due to bias and drift. A proactive and collaborative approach is needed to integrate AI into research methods and policies effectively while addressing practical and ethical considerations, issues of access, and other limitations. Here, our goal is to outline an approach that systematically reviews its uses at each step of the scientific process.

Biological anthropologists have increasingly recognized the strengths of collaboration, with research in human biology becoming a multidisciplinary endeavor shaped by these partnerships. Integrating local and Indigenous knowledge has revealed new insights into the complex ways biology is influenced by cultural, historical, and environmental contexts; a framework captured by Margaret Lock’s concept of “local biologies” (1993). As Human Biology moves into the next 50 years, ethical praxis, inclusivity, and the development of a Bioethos must guide its future. A Bioethos, as conceptualized by Pamela Geller (2019, 2021), calls attention to how research is conceptualized, carried out, and communicated within the multiple contexts bioarchaeological research exists within. The application of a Bioethos to Human Biology brings together these theoretical lenses to envision a recentering of the research priorities, methodologies, and the production of knowledge. Grounded in collaboration with local, marginalized, and Indigenous communities - populations that are often the subjects of major breakthroughs in our discipline – a Bioethos emphasizes the need for embedding collaborative frameworks in every aspect of the research lifecycle: from design and training to outreach, data generation, analysis, visualization, and storage. Inherent in this approach is the co-creation of knowledge, which emphasizes reciprocity, social justice, and long-term relationships between researchers and communities. Such an approach ensures that scientific findings are culturally responsive, ethically grounded, and beneficial to all participants of science. Ultimately, centering a Bioethos in the research lifecycle offers the opportunity to challenge entrenched power dynamics and reshape research priorities, creating a more equitable future for the field.

La brecha entre el Sur y el Norte Global en la producción, circulación, comunicación y acceso al conocimiento científico ha sido ampliamente documentada. Dichas desigualdades se manifiestan en el volumen, alcance, diversidad e impacto de iniciativas y resultados de investigación, la inversión en la generación de sistemas de investigación, la oferta de programas académicos y de oportunidades laborales, la migración de profesionales altamente capacitados, las barreras de lenguaje y el anglocentrismo de la ciencia contemporánea, entre otros. Las causas de dichas disparidades son múltiples y complejas, pero en el caso de Latinoamérica, el impacto que los altibajos políticos, las ideologías y democracias cambiantes, y la resultante inestabilidad económica de años recientes han tenido en la política científica de la mayoría de los países de la región, ha planteado desafíos importantes para las instituciones y comunidades científicas y educativas. En este espacio, proponemos reflexionar sobre los retos que implica el construir y mantener las capacidades de docencia e investigación para una investigación en Biología Humana de largo aliento en condiciones de incertidumbre e inestabilidad, e identificar oportunidades e imaginar estrategias adaptativas, y colaborativas que posibiliten una investigación pertinente, relevante y transformadora que permita vislumbrar un futuro promisorio para la Biología Humana pensada desde, con y para el Sur.