Fossil Apes Research Articles

Longgupo: EarlyHomo colonizer or late plioceneLufengpithecus survivor in south China?

A fragment of mandible and a maxillary incisor of different individuals from the Longgupo Cave, China have been cited as evidence of an early dispersal ofHomo from Africa to Asia. More specifically, these specimens are said to resemble “Homo ergaster” orHomo habilis, rather than the species usually thought to be the first Asian colonizer,Homo erectus. If this supposition is correct, it calls into question which hominid (sensu stricto) first left Africa, and why hominids became a colonizing species. Furthermore, the Longgupo remains have been used to buttress the argument thatHomo erectus evolved uniquely in Asia and was not involved in the origins of modern humans. We question this whole line of argument because the mandibular fragment cannot be distinguished from penecontemporary fossil apes, especially the Late Miocene-Pliocene Chinese genusLufengpithecus, while the incisor is indistinguishable from those of recent and living east Asian people and may be intrusive in the deposit. We believe that the Longgupo mandible represents the relic survival of a Late Miocene ape lineage into a period just prior to the dispersal of hominids into southeastern Asia, with some female dental features that parallel the hominid condition. If the Longgupo mandibular fragment represents a member of theLufengpithecus clade, it demonstrates that hominoids other thanGigantopithecus and the direct ancestor of the orangutan persisted in east Asia into the Late Pliocene, while all other Eurasian large-bodied hominoids disappeared in the Late Miocene.

The phylogenetic affinities of Otavipithecus namibiensis

The middle Miocene hominoid Otavipithecus namibiensis is the first and most complete fossil ape from sub-equatorial Africa and represents a significant addition to the taxonomically sparse African middle Miocene hominoid fossil record. The Otavipithecus hypodigm comprises the holotype mandible, which presents a unique mosaic of dental and gnathic characters, and several attributed cranial and postcranial elements which resemble the stem hominoid Proconsul. Contrary to initial hopes that this discovery would provide new insights into hominoid morphological diversity and phylogenetic relationships, a variety of conflicting phylogenetic hypotheses have been advanced suggesting ties to virtually every major large-bodied hominoid group (Conroy et al., 1992; Andrews, 1992 a; Conroy, 1994; Pickford et al., 1994; Begun, 1994 a). Cladistic analysis of a matrix of 22 qualitative and ten quantitative characters of the mandible and mandibular dentition found no support for a close phylogenetic relationship between Otavipithecus and either the African ape or great ape clades, or with any of the Eurasian fossil hominoids with which it has previously been compared. A close relationship between Otavipithecus and Kenyapithecus cannot be ruled out, but is deemed unlikely on the basis both of morphological comparisons and the absence of support within a cladistic framework. The present analysis indicates thatOtavipithecus is most closely related to Afropithecus, as previously suggested by Andrews (1992 a) among others. Due to lack of statistical support for this result, a conservative interpretation, that these taxa represented related but divergent lineages of a late early Miocene hominoid radiation, is currently favored. Findings are consistent with the allocation ofOtavipithecus to Andrews' (1992 a) tribe Afropithecini which represents the sister group toKenyapithecus and the extant ape clade.

Oreopithecus was a bipedal ape after all: evidence from the iliac cancellous architecture.

Textural properties and functional morphology of the hip bone cancellous network of Oreopithecus bambolii, a 9- to 7-million-year-old Late Miocene hominoid from Italy, provide insights into the postural and locomotor behavior of this fossil ape. Digital image processing of calibrated hip bone radiographs reveals the occurrence of trabecular features, which, in humans and fossil hominids, are related to vertical support of the body weight, i.e., to bipedality.

A canine tooth from the Siwaliks: first recorded discovery of a fossil ape?

Archival research reveals that it is highly probably that the first discovery of a fossil ape was made by Hugh Falconer and his associates in the 1830s during surveys of Neogene deposits in the Siwalik hills of British Colonial India. However, priority is commonly awarded to Edouard Lartet who, in 1837, brought to light a fossil primate specimen from the Miocene beds at Sansan in France to which Paul Gervais gave the namePliopithecus. Falconer's letters and scientific papers announcing the find of a fossil primate group from the Siwalik Hills were antecedent to Lartet's report to the French Academy of Sciences, Paris. The circumstances surrounding this misconception over priority of discovery of fossil apes are reviewed with attention to the historic significance of the Siwalik fossil primates and with respect to the development of paleoanthropology in South Asia.

Fossil ape's grasp gets two thumbs way up

Fossil ape's grasp gets two thumbs way up

First hominoid from the Miocene of Ethiopia and the evolution of the catarrhine elbow.

The first known fossil ape from the early-middle Miocene of Fejej, Ethiopia, is described here. The specimen, FJ-18SB-68, is a partial ulna from a locality dated by 40Ar/39Ar and paleomagnetic methods to a minimum age of 16.18 MYA. Compared to a variety of extant and fossil ulnae, FJ-18SB-68 is most similar to Turkanapithecus, Proconsul, and Pliopithecus, and appears to have been an arboreal quadruped with substantial forearm rotational mobility. Among the extant ulnae, canonical variates analysis successfully discriminates platyrrhines from catarrhines and within the latter, cercopithecoids from hominoids. Basal catarrhines (e.g., Aegyptopithecus) are platyrrhine-like in their morphology. Two basic trends appear to evolve from this generalized template: one with less mobile and more habitually pronated forearms, as seen in living and fossil cercopithecoids (including Victoriapithecus and Paracolobus), and another with greater forearm rotational mobility in fossil and modern hominoids. Primitive Miocene apes, including Proconsul, Turkanapithecus, and FJ-18SB-68, share with extant hominoids a more laterally positioned and laterally facing radial notch and an incipient trochlear keel. This morphology, along with a large insertion area for m. brachialis, suggests a departure from the more habitually pronated hand posture of monkeys and may indicate greater climbing abilities in these arboreally quadrupedal apes. Later Miocene apes, such as Oreopithecus and Dryopithecus share additional morphological features with hominoids, indicating considerable suspensory and climbing capabilities.

Parallel evolution in the hominoid trunk and forelimb

The evolutionary history of the living hominoids has remained elusive despite years of exploration and the discovery of numerous Miocene fossil ape species. Part of the difficulty can be attributed to the changing nature of our views about the course of hominoid evolution. In the 1950s and 1960s, individual Miocene taxa were commonly viewed as the direct ancestors of specific living ape species, suggesting an early divergence of the modern lineages.1–5 However, in most cases, the Miocene forms were essentially “dental apes,” resembling extant species in dental and a few cranial features, but possessing more primitive postcranial features that suggested arboreal quadrupedalism rather than suspensory habits. With the introduction of molecular methods of phylogenetic reconstruction and the increasing use of cladistic analysis, it has become apparent that the radiation leading to the modern hominoids was somewhat more recent than had been believed, and that most of the Miocene hominoid species had little to do with the evolutionary history of the living apes. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Sexual Dimorphic Features Within Extant Great Ape Faciodental Skeletal Anatomy and Testing the Single Species Hypothesis

This paper examines sexually dimorphic skeletal characters within the face and upper dentition of extant hominids (great ape), not including members of the Hominini. Specimens of Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus are used to help identify likely sex specific characters for the Hominidae. The aim of this paper is to identify extant hominid faciodental sexual features which can be used to help sex fossil specimens. A morphometric and skeletal study of sexual variability demonstrates relatively diverse patterns of sexual variability within the extant hominids. In terms of morphometrics, P. paniscus is relatively non-dimorphic, while P. troglodytes, Gorilla and Pongo display a large degree of sexual dimorphism. In their respective skeletal anatomies, however, each has specific characters which tend to differentiate between the sexes. Some faciodental sex features are shown to be common amongst all four taxa and as such are likely to be important criteria for determining the sex of Miocene and Plio-Pleistocene fossil hominid specimens. The construction of extant great ape sexual ranges of variability are also important in helping to test the fossil ape single species hypotheses. The testing of sex and species ranges of variability should employ range based statistics not only because they are sample size independent, (relative to C.V.) but also because they are of low power.

Phylogenetic implications of the first African Middle Miocene hominoid frontal bone from Otavi, Namibia

The discovery of a hominoid frontal at Berg Aukas, Namibia, aged 13-12 Ma, permits an analysis of the phylogenetic relations between fossil and extant great apes. The Namibian specimen is closer morphologically to African apes and humans (AAH), whereas all fossil Eurasian great apes differ markedly from AAH but are closer to the Pongo clade.

Oldest fossil ape may be human ancestor

Oldest fossil ape may be human ancestor

Comparative analysis of weight gain, hand/wrist maturation, and dental emergence rates in chimpanzees aged 0-24 months from varying captive environments.

Variability during the first 2 years of growth and development is examined in captive chimpanzees. The mixed longitudinal study of 175 animals compares curves of weight, hand/wrist maturation, and dental emergence for groups within the sample which differ in sex, rearing circumstances (mother-reared versus hand-reared), and colony (Primate Foundation of Arizona, White Sands Research Center, and The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Department of Veterinary Sciences in Bastrop, Texas). Comparison of LOWESS fits of the curves, using a conservative jack-knife approach, reveals trends toward significant differences between colonies for weight (with 4 comparisons reaching significance) and between rearing groups for maturation (1 reaching significance). Results of a full versus reduced model approach show the same trends, for which significance is reached in a higher number of comparisons. The latter approach also indicates possible effects of sex and environmental differences on dental emergence rate. Difficulties with both approaches are discussed. It is concluded that the results are suggestive of significant sex and environmental effects on the variables monitored, justifying further analysis and continuation of the study. The study is significant in 1) providing norms specific to sex and rearing and colony environments with which individual colony animals may be compared in the assessment of their development and in 2) providing a standard, based upon data from a larger and more varied captive chimpanzee population than previously available, with which the dental emergence status and hand/wrist maturation of fossil apes and hominids may be compared.

Australopithecus ramidus, a new species of early hominid from Aramis, Ethiopia

Seventeen hominoid fossils recovered from Pliocene strata at Aramis, Middle Awash, Ethiopia make up a series comprising dental, cranial and postcranial specimens dated to around 4.4 million years ago. When compared with Australopithecus afarensis and with modern and fossil apes the Aramis fossil hominids are recognized as a new species of Australopithecus--A. ramidus sp. nov. The antiquity and primitive morphology of A. ramidus suggests that it represents a long-sought potential root species for the Hominidae.

Locomotor energetics and hominid evolution

AbstractThe presence of a bipedal gait in fossil apes is now recognized as the earliest paleontological evidence of the beginnings of the human lineage. Thus, the search for the selective pressure that led to the adoption of bipedal posture and gait is the search for the origins of the human adaptation. One of the most popular candidates for the origin of erect posture is its purported energetic advantage.1–4This argument is reevaluated in light of data on the energetic cost of locomotion in mammals and, particularly, data on the effect of bipedalism on cost. I go on to discuss what morphological traces we might expect to see of changes in the locomotor economy of our ancestors once bipedalism became established.

Shape variation in the mandibular symphysis of apes: an application of a median axis method.

Symphyseal contours in a sample of living and fossil apes were assessed by application of the line skeleton, a form of median axis transformation. While the line skeleton offers novel opportunities for the analysis of shape, this study reaffirms previous observations that the shape of the symphysis is highly variable within great ape species, such that symphyseal morphology is not useful as a taxonomic marker. There is also little indication that symphyseal shape differs significantly between the sexes. The perception of what constitutes a salient superior or inferior transverse torus among living apes appears to be dependent on the expression of the genioglossal fossa.

Continuity and discontinuity during hominization

Recent observations on an ontogenetic craniofacial phenomenon have led to new concepts of facial morphogenesis and to recognition of a process called craniofacial contraction. This begins at embryogenesis, in association with the growth of the brain. The degree of craniofacial contraction is acquired in major part during embryogenesis. It separates the living primates into four ontogenic levels: prosimians, monkeys, apes and Homo sapiens (‘Sapiens’). The phenomenon is modeled and quantified using an architectural analysis, the double pantograph. The hypothesis is that hominization represents a continous phenomenon from fossil apes to Sapiens, i.e. an increase in the embryonic contraction, but with discontinous effects, i.e. ontogenic organization plans. The fossil hominid record verifies the hypothesis. Hominization appears as a continuous process of craniofacial contraction, with three ontogenic thresholds: Australopithecus, Homo and Sapiens. Neanderthal man is not Sapiens. He results from a decrease in the embryonic contraction of Homo erectus, in association with an impoverishment of the meningeal vascularization. Sapiens does not emerge before skulls such as Qafzeh. The increase in endocranial capacity in Homo does not alone allow us to define an evolutionary trend in Sapiens. The concept of archaic H. sapiens has no ontogenic reality.

Sexual dimorphism in Laccopithecus robustus, a late Miocene Hominoid from China

Laccopithecus robustus is a siamang-sized fossil ape from the Miocene site of Lufeng, China. The species is known from a partial cranium, numerous mandibles, and scores of isolated teeth. This species shows striking dental similarities to Pliopithecus from the Miocene of Europe and a number of cranial similarities to extant gibbons. Laccopithecus differs from extant gibbons and resembles other fossil and extant apes in showing marked sexual dimorphism in the size and shape of the canines and anterior lower premolars. Evidence for sexual differences in either the size or shape of other teeth is less clear. There is some evidence for a sexual size dimorphism based on the variability of molar teeth.

Primate adaptation and evolution

Tables & Illustrations. Preface. Adaptation, Evolution, and Systematics. The Primate Body. Primate Lives. Prosimians. New World Anthropoids. Old World Monkeys. Apes and Humans. Primate Communities. Primate Adaptations. The Fossil Record. Primate Origins. Fossil Prosimians. Early Anthropoids. Fossil Platyrrhines. Fossil Apes. Fossil Old World Monkeys. Hominids, the Bipedal Primates. Patterns in Primate Evolution. Index.

Fossil evidence on human origins and dispersal.

The close relationship of humans with apes has been recognized for many years. Darwin (1871) was very specific in his inferences about the common ancestor between humans and apes. He recognized the subdivision of the Catarrhini from other primates, and divided it into the monkeys and the anthropomorphous apes, with humans part of the latter group; and he further states that as “chimpanzees and gorillas…are now man's nearest allies, it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived oh the African continent than elsewhere.” Darwin also had some more speculative things to say about early human ancestors, for instance, inferring that they had frugivorous diets (based on analogy of morphological form of teeth), that they were restricted to hot climates (loss of hair), and that they had diverged from the apes by the middle Miocene (because of the known existence of the of the fossil ape Dryopithecus in the...

Palatine fenestrae, the orangutan and hominoid evolution

Although most mammals develop relatively large double anterior palatine fenestrae that patently communicate with the nasal cavity, four extant primates—Homo sapiens, Pongo, Pan andGorilla—do not. While these four have closed-down these foramenal structures,Homo sapiens andPongo are unique in forming a single foramen palatally. Among fossil taxa,Homo, Australopithecus, Sivapithecus (=Ramapithecus) andRudapithecus also develop a single foramen palatally. Dryopithecines, the presumed fossil apes, preserve the two patent fenestrae. In light of dental features that are considered diagnostically “hominid,” which are also found in the orangutan, it is suggested that this “ape,” rather thanPan, is phylogenetically closer toHomo.

The relationships of Sivapithecus and Ramapithecus and the evolution of the orang-utan

We review here the molecular data that bear on and provide a framework for interpreting hominoid relationships. Man is shown to be most closely related to chimpanzees and gorillas among extant hominoids, with the orang-utan more distantly related to them and the gibbons more distantly still. A fossil ape, Sivapithecus meteai, shares several characters with the orang-utan and is thus probably related to it. S. meteai is part of the Middle Miocene Sivapithecus-Ramapithecus species complex, and if this group forms a valid clade then Ramapithecus must also be considered as being more closely related to the orang-utan than to man. The date of divergence of the orang-utan from the African apes and man is suggested by fossil and molecular evidence to be 10 +/- 3 Myr ago.