Ardipithecus kadabba

Where Lived: Eastern Africa (Middle Awash Valley, Ethiopia) When Lived: Between about 5.8 and 5.2 million years ago

Ardipithecus kadabba was bipedal (walked upright), probably similar in body and brain size to a
modern chimpanzee, and had canines that resemble those in later hominins but that still project beyond the tooth row. This early human species is only known in the fossil record by a fewpost-cranial bones and sets of teeth. One bone from the large toe has a broad, robust appearance, suggesting its use in bipedal push-off.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Scientists originally considered Ardipithecus kadabba to be a subspecies of the later Ardipithecus ramidus, then renamed as its own distinct species based on dental differences.

Year of Discovery:
1997

History of Discovery:
When he found a piece of lower jaw lying on the ground in the Middle Awash region of Ethiopia 1997, paleoanthropologist Yohannes Haile-Selassie didnt realize that he had uncovered a new species. But 11 specimens from at least 5 individuals later, Haile-Selassie was convinced he had found a new early human ancestor. The fossilswhich also included hand and foot bones, partial arm bones, and a collarbone (clavicle)were dated to 5.65.8 million years old. One of the specimens, a toe bone, is dated to 5.2 million years old; this fossil has features of bipedal walking. Faunal (fossil animal) evidence from the site indicated that the early humans there lived in a mixture of woodlands and grasslands, and had plenty of access to water via lakes and springs. In 2002, six teeth were discovered in the Middle Awash at the site Asa Koma. The dental wear patterns confirmed the early human fossils were unique and not a subspecies of A. ramidus. Based on these teeth, paleoanthropologists Yohannes Haile-Selassie, Gen Suwa, and Tim White allocated the fossils in 2004 to a new species they named Ardipithecus

kadabba (kadabba means oldest ancestor in the Afar language).

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

Uncertain, but likely close to the size of a chimpanzee.

How They Survived:

Instead of eating mostly fruit and soft leaves like chimpanzees, there is evidence that Ardipithecus kadabba ate a variety of fibrous foods. How do we know they ate fibrous foods? The back teeth of Ardipithecus kadabba are larger than a chimpanzees, but its front teeth are narrower. This evidence suggests this species did most of its chewing in the back of its mouth. This type of chewing would focus on hard-to-eat foods like fibrous nuts. THE UNKNOWN We dont know everything about early humansbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas with groundbreaking technology, and continually filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution. Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Ardipithecus kadabba that may be answered with future discoveries: 1. Was Ar. kadabba routinely bipedal? So far, the evidence for Ar. kadabbas upright walking comes from an single toe bone that dates to 5.2 million years old and was found 10 miles away from the other Ar. kadabba specimens. 2. If Ar. kadabba walked upright, what was its gait like? related to Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis, two earlier human species? 4. How is the Ardipithecus lineage related the Australopithecus lineage? 5. How big were the average male and female Ar. kadabba individuals? Was there a high level ofsexual dimorphism in this early human species? 3. DId bipedalism independently develop in the Ardipithecus lineage? Or is Ar. kadabba somehow

Ardipithecus ramidus
Nickname: Ardi Where Lived: Eastern Africa (Middle Awash and Gona, Ethiopia) When Lived: About 4.4 million years ago

Ardipithecus ramidus was first reported in 1994; in 2009, scientists announced a partial
skeleton, nicknamed Ardi. The foot bones in this skeleton indicate a divergent large toe combined with a rigid foot it's still unclear what this means concerning bipedal behavior. The pelvis, reconstructed from a crushed specimen, is said to show adaptations that combine treeclimbing and bipedal activity. The discoverers argue that the Ardi skeleton reflects a humanAfrican ape common ancestor that was not chimpanzee-like. A good sample of canine teeth of this species indicates very little difference in size between males and females in this species. Ardis fossils were found alongside faunal remains indicating she lived in a wooded environment. This contradicts the open savanna theory for the origin of bipedalism, which states that humans learned to walk upright as climates became drier and environments became more open and grassy.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Over 100 specimens of Ardipithecus ramidus have been recovered in Ethiopia. Even though it has some ape-like features (as do many other early human species), it also has key human features including smaller diamond-shaped canines and some evidence of upright walking. It may have descended from an earlier species of Ardipithecus that has been found in the same area of Ethiopia,Ardipithecus kadabba.

Year of Discovery:
1994

History of Discovery:
A team led by American paleoanthropologist Tim White discovered the first Ardipithecus

ramidusfossils in the Middle Awash area of Ethiopia between 1992 and 1994. Since that time, Whites team have uncovered over 100 fossil specimens of Ar. ramidus . White and his colleagues gave their discovery the name Ardipithecus ramidus (ramid means root in the Afar
language of Ethiopia and refers to the closeness of this new species to the roots of humanity,

while Ardi means ground or floor). At the time of this discovery, the genus Australopithecus was scientifically well established, so White devised the genus name Ardipithecus to distinguish this new genus from Australopithecus. In 2009, scientists formally announced and published the findings of a partial skeleton (ARA-VP-6/500), nicknamed "Ardi", first found in 1994.

An early branch in our family tree A partial skeleton of a female, known as "Ardi", combines human and other primate traits. Ardi moved in the trees using a grasping big toe, yet her pelvis was shorter and broader than an ape'sindicating that she could walk bipedally. Nicknamed "Ardi," ARA-VP-6/500 is a 4.4 million year old female partial skeleton. So far, she is one of the most complete early human skeletons scientists have ever found, and only one of six known early human partial skeletons over 1 million years old. When discovered, Ardis bones were so fragile they crumbled when the team touched them. Because the team couldnt excavate the crumbling bones in situ, Whites team had to remove whole blocks of stone and earth to the National Museum of Ethiopia and excavate there. Her bones were then analyzed and reconstructed using micro-computed tomography, or CT scans. Ardis skeleton includes most of her skull and teeth, as well as her hands, feet, and pelvis. While she has a small brain (300350 cubic centimeters), her face is small with thin cheeks and incisors incapable of chewing tough foods. Her face does not project as far as a chimpanzees, and her brow ridges werent as thick. She also has a short (probably down-turned) skull that helped to balance her head above her neck during upright walking. Ardi stood almost four feet tall and weighed 110 lbs, making her similar in size to a chimpanzee. She walked upright, but could move through the trees using all four limbs equally. Her feet had opposable big toes that could grasp branches, while the rest of her toes were more rigid and helped with bipedal walking. Her pelvis was short and broad, which helped her keep her balance while upright, and her spine was long and curved like a modern humans. In fact, some scientists believe she is so well adapted to bipedal walking, that her species must have been walking on two legs for a long time before her; however, with a large pelvis and opposable big toes, she probably did not walk like later humans. She probably spent much of her time in the trees, though she probably wasnt swinging from branches. Ardis hand can bend backwards at the wrist, which is unlike chimpanzees or gorillas who have stiff wrists designed for knuckle-walking. Ardis flexible hands allowed her to walk with four limbs carefully on top of branches (called palmigrady).

Height:
Females: average 3 ft 11 inches (120 centimeters)

Weight:
Females: average 110 lbs (50 kg)

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

The only body size estimate scientists have made so far is based on the partial female skeleton ARA-VP-6/500 ("Ardi"). She is estimated to have stood 3 ft 11 in (120 cm) tall, weighed approximately 110 lbs (50 kg). Based on the size of the upper canine teeth in males is not much larger than the canines of females, scientists dont expect Ar. ramidus to have shown much body sizesexual dimorphism - so a male individual would have been similar to a female in size. Its possible that Ar. ramidus males did not compete against each other for dominance, and therefore did not need to grow bigger in size.

How They Survived:

Ardipithecus ramidus individuals were most likely omnivores, which means they enjoyed more generalized diet of both plants, meat, and fruit. Ar. ramidus did not seem to eat hard,
abrasive foods like nuts and tubers. How do we know they were omnivores? The enamel on Ar. ramidus teeth remains show it was neither very thick nor very thin. If the enamel was thick, it would mean Ar. ramidus ate tough, abrasive foods. If the enamel was thin, this would suggest Ar. ramidus ate softer foods such as fruit. Instead, A.

ramidus has an enamel thickness between a chimpanzees and later Australopithecus or Homo species, suggesting a mixed diet. However, the wear pattern and incisor sizes indicate Ar. ramidus was not a specialized frugivore ( fruit-eater). Ar. ramidus probably also avoided tough foods, as they did not have the heavy chewing specializations of later Australopithecus species.

THE UNKNOWN We dont know everything about our early ancestorsbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas with groundbreaking technology, and continually filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution.

Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Ardipithecus ramidus that may be answered with future discoveries: 1. Does the pelvis of Ar. ramidus support the hypothesis that this early human species was bipedal? The pelvis was reconstructed from crushed fossils and, according to some scientists, is only suggestive of bipedalism. 2. What is the average size of male Ar. ramidus individuals? If more fossils support the original finding of relatively low sexual dimorphism, how does this relate to male and female size differences in other early humans at the base of our family tree -- and what does it mean?

Australopithecus afarensis
Nickname: Lucy's species Where Lived: Eastern Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania) When Lived: Between about 3.85 and 2.95 million years ago

Australopithecus afarensis is one of the longest-lived and best-known early human species
paleoanthropologists have uncovered remains from more than 300 individuals! Found between 3.85 and 2.95 million years ago in Eastern Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania), this species survived for more than 900,000 years, which is over four times as long as our own species has been around. It is best known from the sites of Hadar, Ethiopia (Lucy, AL 288-1 and the 'First Family', AL 333); Dikika, Ethiopia (Dikika child skeleton); and Laetoli (fossils of this species plus the oldest documented bipedal footprint trails). Similar to chimpanzees, Au. afarensis children grew rapidly after birth and reached adulthood earlier than modern humans. This meant A. afarensis had a shorter period of growing up than modern humans have today, leaving them less time for parental guidance and socialization during childhood.

Au. afarensis had both ape and human characteristics: members of this species had apelike face
proportions (a flat nose, a strongly projecting lower jaw) and braincase (with a small brain, usually less than 500 cubic centimeters -- about 1/3 the size of a modern human brain), and long, strong arms with curved fingers adapted for climbing trees. They also had small canine teeth like all other early humans, and a body that stood on two legs and regularly walked upright. Their adaptations for living both in the trees and on the ground helped them survive for almost a million years as climate and environments changed.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

This species may be a direct descendant of Au. anamensis and may be ancestral to later species ofParanthropus, Australopithecus, and Homo.

Year of Discovery:
1974

History of Discovery:
The species was formally named in 1978 following a wave of fossil discoveries at Hadar, Ethiopia, and Laetoli, Tanzania. Subsequently, fossils found as early as the 1930s have been incorporated into this taxon.

AL 288-1

DIK-1-1

This child's baby teeth had Lucy (AL 288-1) is an adult female, 3.2 erupted in a pattern similar to a million-year-old A. afarensis skeleton found three-year-old chimpanzees, telling us she grew up at a rate at Hadar, Ethiopia. Because she could walk upright on the ground and climb trees, she and other members of her species were able

similar to a chimpanzee. But her brain size indicates that a human

to use resources from woodlands, grasslands, growth rate was evolving. CTscans shows small canine teeth and other diverse environments. forming in the skull, telling us this individual was female. Read more about this fossil. Read more about this fossil.

Laetoli Footprint Trails

The Laetoli footprints were most likely made by Australopithecus afarensis, an early human whose fossils were found in the same sediment layer. The entire footprint trail is almost 27 m (88 ft) long and includes impressions of about 70 early human footprints.

Height:
Males: average 4 ft 11 in (151 cm); Females: average 3 ft 5 in (105 cm)

Weight:
Males: average 92 lbs (42 kg) ; Females: average 64 lbs (29 kg)

How They Survived:

Au. afarensis had mainly a plant-based diet, including leaves, fruit, seeds, roots, nuts, and
insects and probably the occasional small vertebrates, like lizards. How do we know what Au. afarensis ate? Paleoanthropologists can tell what Au. afarensis ate from looking at the remains of their teeth.Dental microwear studies indicate they ate soft, sugar-rich fruits, but their tooth size and shape suggest that they could have also eaten hard, brittle foods too probably as fallback foods during seasons when fruits were not available. THE UKNOWN We dont know everything about our early ancestorsbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas, using groundbreaking technology, and continually filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution.

Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Au. afarensis that may be answered with future discoveries: 1. A fossil similar to Au. afarensis and dating to 3.5 million years ago has been found in Chad did this species extend so far into central Africa? 2. We know Au. afarensis were capable of walking upright on two legs, but they would have walked differently than modern humans do today; so, what did their bipedal locomotion look like? 3. Did Au. afarensis usually walk upright like modern humans, or did they spend more time climbing trees like other living African apes? 4. The species Au. afarensis existed through a period of environmental fluctuation yet showed no adaptations to the changing environmentwhy? Was it because they were able to migrate to where their usual food sources were located? Or were their food sources somehow unaffected? 5. Au. afarensis shows strong sexual dimorphism in that the body sizes between males and females are quite different; however, sexual dimorphism in other primates is usually characterized by size differences in bodies and teeth. Fossil evidence shows that male Au.

afarensis individuals had canine teeth comparable in size to those of females. Did male dominance in Au. afarensisindividuals not include the need to bear large canine teeth, as it
does in many other male primates? 6. The teeth and jaw of Au. afarensis are robust enough to chew hard foods, but dental microwearstudies show Au. afarensis individuals ate soft foods like plants and fruit instead. While most scientists think that Au. afarensis ate hard, brittle foods during tough times when vegetation was not easily found, further microwear studies show that eating hard foods did not coincide with dry seasons of little vegetation. So how do properties of A. afarensis teeth relate to their diet?

Australopithecus africanus
Where Lived: Southern Africa (South Africa) When Lived: About 3.3 to 2.1 million years ago

Au. africanus was anatomically similar to Au. afarensis, with a combination of human-like and ape-like features. Compared to Au. afarensis, Au. africanus had a rounder cranium housing a
larger brain and smaller teeth, but it also had some ape-like features including relatively long arms and a strongly sloping face that juts out from underneath the braincase with a pronounced jaw. Like Au. afarensis, the pelvis, femur (upper leg), and foot bones of Au.

africanus indicate that it walked bipedally, but its shoulder and hand bones indicate they were

also adapted for climbing,

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Many scientists consider either this species or Au. afarensis of East Africa to represent a viable candidate for the ancestor of the genus Homo.

Year of Discovery:
1924

History of Discovery:
The Taung child, found in 1924, was the first to establish that early fossil humans occurred in Africa. After Prof. Raymond Dart described it and named the species Australopithecus

africanus(meaning southern ape of Africa), it took more than 20 years for the scientific community to widely accept Australopithecus as a member of the human family tree.

African Origins When this 3-year-old child's skull was found in 1924, it was among the first early human fossils to be found in Africa -- and the first early human fossil discovery to draw major attention to this region as a place of origin of the human family tree. Still, it took over 20 years after that before scientists accepted the importance of Africa as a major source of human evolution. The Taung Childs fossilized anatomy represented the first time researchers saw evidence of early human upright, two-legged (bipedal) walking. The evidence was the position of the Taung Childsforamen magnum, or the hole through which the spinal cord connects with the brain. This spinal cord hole is positioned toward the front of the Taung Childs skull, a characteristic associated with bipedal locomotion. This bipedal adaptation allows the head to balance atop of the neck; while contrastingly, a four-legged ape has its foramen magnum positioned toward the rear of the head to keep its eyes facing forward (and not down) when it moves.

How do we know how old the Taung Child was at death? The Taung Childs first molars had only just begun to erupt through the gum and become visible as teeth, indicating that the fossilized jaw belongs to a child. Closer analysis of dental development, crown formation, and root length has estimated the childs age at death at 3.3

years.

How do we know how the Taung Child died? The Taung Child is thought have been attacked and killed by an eagle. Scientists suspect an eagle killed the Taung Child because puncture marks were found at the bottom of the 3-yearolds eye sockets (see close-up photo below). These marks resemble those made by a modern eagles sharp talons and beak when they attack monkeys in Africa today. Other evidence for the eagle kill hypothesis includes the presence of eggshells at the site and an unusual mixture of animals bones found alongside the Taung Childs skull. Most of the bones found are from small animals (including hyrax, rodents, tortoises, lizards, crabs, small antelopes, and small baboons), which is uncommon compared with animal bones at other early human sites. Many of these small animal bones also have damage resembling that made by modern birds of prey.

Image Credit: Chip Clark, Smithsonian Institution

Image Credit: Chip Clark, Smithsonian Institution

Image Credit: Chip Clark, Smithsonian Institution

Height:
Males: average 4 ft 6 in (138 cm); Females: average 3 ft 9 in (115 cm)

Weight:
Males: average 90 lbs

How They Survived:

The hunter or the hunted? No stone tools have been discovered in the same sediments as A.

africanus fossils; however, for a long time researchers believed A. africanus was a hunter. Raymond Dart created the term
osteodontokeratic culture (osteo = bone, donto = tooth, keratic = horn) in the 1940s and 1950s because remains of this species were found alongside broken animal bones. Dart assumed these broken animal bones, teeth and horns were used by Au. africanus as weapons; however, in the 1970s and 1980s, other scientists began to recognize that predators such as lions, leopards, and hyenas were instead responsible for leaving these broken animal bones. These predators even ate Au. africanus individuals, too. Despite the carnivorous preferences of their contemporaneous predators, Au. africanusindividuals had a diet similar to modern chimpanzees, which consisted of fruit, plants, nuts, seeds, roots, insects, and eggs.

How do we know what they ate? Scientists can tell what Au. africanus may have eaten from looking at the remains of their teeth---tooth-size, shape, and tooth-wear can all provide diet clues. Dental microwear studies found more scratches than pits on Au. africanus teeth compared to a contemporaneous species, P.

robustus. This pattern indicates that Au. africanus ate tough foods but
also had a very variable diet including softer fruits and plants. THE KNOWN We dont know everything about our early ancestorsbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas, using groundbreaking technology, and continually filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution. Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Au.

afarensis that may be answered with future discoveries:

1. Au. africanus is currently the oldest known early human from southern Africa. Where did it come from? Was it a descendent of Au.

afarensis from Eastern Africa? 2. Is Au. africanus part of the lineage that led to our own species, Homo sapiens?
3. In 1994, scientist Ron Clarke found four left early human foot bones while searching through boxes of fossils at Sterkfontein, a site in South Africa where most Au. africanus fossils come from. He dubbed this fossil "Little Foot", and has since found that it comes from a 3.3 million year old partial skeleton, most of which is still embedded in the cave sediments. When this fossil is completely excavated, it shed light on several questions about this species (if it is designated as an Au.

africanus individual): How big was it? What did its post-cranial skeleton
look like? How does it compare to STS 14, another partial skeleton of Au. africanus?

Australopithecus anamensis

Image Credit: Karen Carr Studio

Where Lived: Eastern Africa (Lake Turkana, Kenya and Middle Awash, Ethiopia) When Lived: About 4.2 to 3.9 million years ago

Australopithecus anamensis has a combination of traits found in both

apes and humans. The upper end of the tibia (shin bone) shows an expanded area of bone and the orientation of the ankle joint in humanlike, indicative of regular bipedal walking (support of body weight on one leg at the time). Long forearms and features of the wrist bones suggest these individuals probably climbed trees as well.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Jaw remains suggest that this species was the direct ancestor of Australopithecus afarensis, and possibly the direct descendent of a species of Ardipithecus.

Year of Discovery:
1995

History of Discovery:
In 1965, a research team led by Bryan Patterson from Harvard University discovered a single arm bone (KNM-KP 271) of an early human at the site of Kanapoi in northern Kenya. But without additional human fossils, Patterson could not confidently identify the species to which it

belonged. In 1994, a research team led by paleoanthropologist Meave Leakey found numerous teeth and fragments of bone at the same site. Leakey and her colleagues determined that the fossils were those of a very primitive hominin and they named a new species called Australopithecus anamensis(anam means lake in the Turkana lanaguage). Researchers have since found other Au. anamensisfossils at nearby sites (including Allia Bay), all of which date between about 4.2 million and 3.9 million years old.

Walking upright on shorter legs This 4.1 million year old upper tibia (shin bone) fossil, KNM-KP 29285 from Kanapoi, Kenya, comes from an early human species that lived near open areas and dense woods; Australopithecus anamensis. Their bodies had evolved in ways that enabled them to walk upright most of the time, but still climb trees. As a result, they could take advantage of both habitats. The top part of the tibia where the lower leg meets the knee is concave, or depressed from stress. This shows that the individual often put weight on the boneevidence of standing upright. The lower part of the tibia where the lower leg meets the ankle is wider or thickerevidence that it acted as a type of shock absorber as this individual walked .

Image Credit: Chip Clark, Smithsonian Institution

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

This species was possibly the size of female chimpanzee, yet there is also evidence of strong male-female body size difference (sexual dimorphism).

How They Survived:

THE UNKNOWN Australopithecus anamensis individuals had thickly-built, long narrow
jaws with their side rows of teeth arranged in parallel lines. Their strong jaws combined with heavily enameled teeth suggest Au.

anamensis individuals may at times have eaten hard, abrasive foods,

but they likely were plant-eaters in general, relying on both fruits and tough foods such as nuts. The sites where remains of Au.

anamensis have been found were forests and woodlands that grew
around lakes. We dont know everything about our early ancestorsbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas with groundbreaking technology, and continually

filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution. Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Australopithecus anamensis that may be answered with future discoveries: 1. Is Au. anamensis a separate species from Au. afarensis? Many scientists think the fossilmaterial of Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis represents a single lineage that evolved through time. 2. Is Au. amanensis a direct descendant of the 4.4 million year old species Ardipithecus ramidus?

Australopithecus garhi

Image Credit: Karen Carr Studio

Where Lived: Eastern Africa (the site of Bouri, Middle Awash, Ethiopia) When Lived: About 2.5 million years ago

This species is not well documented; it is defined on the basis of 1 fossil cranium and 4 other skull fragments, although a partial skeleton found nearby, from about the same layer, is usually included as part of the Australopithecus garhi sample. The associated fragmentary skeleton indicates a longer femur (compared to other Australopithecus specimens, like Lucy) even though long, powerful arms were maintained. This suggests a change toward longer strides during bipedal walking.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Some scientists claim that the large molar teeth show that Australopithecus garhi is related toParanthropus aethiopicus; however, the combination of features of the face, braincase, and teeth are unlike Paranthropus. The scientists who originally reported the finds think that Au. garhi may represent an ancestor of the genus Homo.

Year of Discovery:
1990

History of Discovery:
The human fossil record is poorly known between 3 million and 2 million years ago, which makes the finds from the site of Bouri, Middle Awash Ethiopia, particularly important. First in 1990 and then from 1996 to 1998, a research team led by Ethiopian paleoanthropologist Berhane Asfaw and American paleoanthropologist Tim White found the partial skull (BOU-VP-12/130) and other skeletal remains of an early humans dated to around 2.5 million years old. In 1997, the team named the new species Australopithecus garhi: the word garhi means surprise in the Afar language.

KEY FOSSIL This partial cranium, designated as the species holotype, is actually a set of fragments consisting of the front and side portions of the skull, the upper jaw, and upper teeth. The lower face isprognathic and the back teeth are very large with thick enamel. The estimated cranial capacity from the reconstructed cranium is 450 cubic centimeters, similar to other australopithecines.

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

Uncertain (the principal specimen BOU-VP-12/1, a cranium, may be a male, similar in size to the average of other Australopithecus specimens).

How They Survived:

Fossils of Australopithecus garhi are associated with some of the oldest known stone tools, along with animal bones that were cut and broken open with stone tools. It is possible, then, that this species was among the first to make the transition to stone toolmaking and to eating meat and bone marrow from large animals. THE UNKNOWN We dont know everything about our early ancestorsbut we keep learning more! Paleoanthropologists are constantly in the field, excavating new areas with groundbreaking technology, and continually filling in some of the gaps about our understanding of human evolution. Below are some of the still unanswered questions about Australopithecus garhi that may be answered with future discoveries: 1. Will scientists recover more individuals from this species? Until they do, it is hard to determine exactly where this species fits on the human family tree. 2. Did Au. garhi actually make and use the stone tools found nearby? 3. Is it possible the Au. garhi skull BOU-VP-12/130 is really a female Paranthropus aethiopicus or a late Australopithecus

afarensis specimen?

Australopithecus sediba

Image Credit: Karen Carr Studio

Where Lived: Southern Africa (South Africa) When Lived: Between 1.95 and 1.78 million years ago

The recently discovered species, Australopithecus sediba, is notable for its mixture of primitive and derived characteristics. Australopithecus

sediba has more derived features that are also found in the genus Homo than other australopithecines, linking it closely with our own genus. These links indicate that Au. sediba may reveal information about the origins and ancestor of the genus Homo. Functional changes in the pelvis of Au. sediba point to the evolution of upright walking,
while other parts of the skeleton retain features found in other australopithecines. Measurements of the strength of the humerus and femur show that Au. sediba had a more human-like pattern of locomotion than a fossil attributed to Homo habilis. These features suggest that Au. sediba walked upright on a regular basis and that changes in the pelvis occurred before other changes in the body that are found in later specimens of Homo. The Australopithecus

sediba skull has several derived features, such as relatively small

premolars and molars, and facial features that are more similar to those in Homo. However, despite these changes in the pelvis and skull, other parts of Au. sedibaskeleton shows a body similar to that of other australopithecines with long upper limbs and a smallcranial capacity. The combination of primitive and derived traits in Australopithecus

sediba shows part of the transition from a form adapted to partial

arboreality to one primarily adapted to bipedal walking. The fossils also show that changes in the pelvis and the dentition occurred before changes in limb proportions or cranial capacity.

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Australopithecus sedibas mixture of primitive traits found in other australopithecines and derived traits also found in Homo makes the evolutionary position of Au. sediba an interesting question. Similar to other australopithecine species, Au. sediba is small in size, with long
arms and smallcranial capacity. Its features are more derived than those of Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis.Australopithecus sediba bears a strong resemblance to Au. africanus, a fossil species that is also found

in South Africa. They have similar skull, facial and dental features. The species differ in features such as the shape of the cranium and the face, showing that Au. sediba was more derived compared with Au. africanus. The combination of similarities and differences led Berger and his colleagues to conclude that Au. sediba was descended from Au.

africanus.
The traits Australopithecus sediba shares with Homo may indicate a closer relationship between this species and Homo than between other australopithecines and Homo. Berger and his colleagues proposed that Au. sediba is ancestral to the genus Homo or is closely related to the ancestral species. However, there are earlier and contemporaneous fossils attributed to Homo, making it difficult to think of Au. sediba as an ancestor to Homo. The time range for the species Au. sediba is currently unknown. It is not known where in that time span the current sample falls and how it fits with the time ranges of other species. Another possibility is that Au. sediba is closely related to another, still unknown species that was ancestral to the genus Homo. While that species evolved into Homo, Au. sediba may have persisted leading to the overlap in time between Homo and Au. sediba. Other researchers question the idea that Au. sediba and Homo are closely related at all, citing the possibility that the juvenile MH1 may not reflect the adult postcranial characteristics of Au. sediba or that the postcranial features of Au. sediba may not be unique to the taxon, but may be found in other australopithecines. Another possibility raised by researchers is that the Malapa finds belong in the genus Homo. The number of different ideas about the placement of the Malapa finds stems from the debate on how early members of the genus Homo should be recognized and which fossils belong in it. There is a question of whether cranial and dental features or the advent of modern postcranial body proportions are most important in defining Homo, since some fossils, such as theAustralopithecus

sediba remains, contain a combination of features.

Year of Discovery:
2008

History of Discovery:
The first specimen of Australopithecus sediba, the right clavicle of MH1,

was discovered on the 15thof August in 2008 by Matthew Berger, son of paleoanthropologist Lee Berger from the University of Witwatersrand, at the site of Malapa, South Africa. It was announced in Science in April 2010.

MH2 This adult female Both cranial and postcranial remains have been recovered from this juvenile australopithecine, about 12-13 years old. The mixture of primitive and derived traits may help link the genus Australopithecus with the genus Homo. specimen of Au.

sediba includes
upper dentition, a partial mandible and a partial postcranial specimen. Comparison of the size of MH2 and the male juvenile MH1 shows that the species Au.

sediba has a level

of sexual dimorphism similar to that in modern humans.

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

MH1, a juvenile male around 12-13 years old, was a maximum of 1.3 meters (43) tall. In general,Australopithecus sediba had small bodies with long arms. Australopithecus sediba had a level ofsexual dimorphism similar to that found in modern humans.

How They Survived:

Due to the mixture of derived features in the pelvis and primitive features in other areas of the skeleton, it is unclear to some researchers the extent to which Au. sediba used arboreal habitats or remained on the ground using terrestrial bipedal locomotion. Relatively long arms and a small body may have allowed Au. sediba to utilize arboreal habitats. Derived features in the pelvis and the pattern of diaphyseal strength in the humerus and femur suggest that Au. sediba might have regularly walked upright in a way that was more similar to modern humans than to earlier members of Australopithecus. The possible increasing emphasis on upright walking is accompanied by differences in the skull and teeth compared with other australopithecines. The relatively small dentition of Au. sediba may signal a dietary change. As more features of the environment and functional morphology ofAustralopithecus sediba are discovered, their way of life will become clearer. THE UNKNOWN Since Au. sediba was discovered recently, there are many unanswered questions about it. 1. What is the time range and geographic range of Australopithecus

sediba? This question can only be answered by the finds of more

specimens. 2. Is the close relationship between Au. sediba and Homo confirmed by future finds?

Homo erectus

Image Credit: John Gurche, artist / Chip Clark, photographer

Where Lived: Northern, Eastern, and Southern Africa; Western Asia (Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia); East Asia (China and Indonesia) When Lived: Between about 1.89 million and 143,000 years ago

Early African Homo erectus fossils (sometimes called Homo

ergaster) are the oldest known early humans to have possessed modern
human-like body proportions with relatively elongated legs and shorter arms compared to the size of the torso. These features are considered adaptations to a life lived on the ground, indicating the loss of earlier tree-climbing adaptations, with the ability to walk and possibly run long distances. Compared with earlier fossil humans, note the expanded braincase relative to the size of the face. The most complete fossil individual of this species is known as the Turkana Boy a wellpreserved skeleton (though minus almost all the hand and foot bones), dated around 1.6 million years old. Microscopic study of the teeth indicates that he grew up at a growth rate similar to that of a great ape. There is fossil evidence that this species cared for old and weak individuals. The appearance of Homo erectus in the fossil record is often associated with the earliest handaxes, the first major innovation in stone tool technology. Early fossil discoveries from Java (beginning in the 1890s) and China

(Peking Man, beginning in the 1920s) comprise the classic examples of this species. Generally considered to have been the first species to have expanded beyond Africa, Homo erectus is considered a highly variable species, spread over two continents (it's not certain whether it reached Europe), and possibly the longest lived early human species - about nine times as long as our own species, Homo sapiens, has been around!

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Some scientists distinguish between the African (Homo ergaster) and Asian (Homo erectus sensu stricto) fossils of this taxon, while others lump them together as Homo erectus sensu lato. In either case, there is general agreement that it descended from an earlier species of Homo (e.g., Homo habilis) and represents one of the widest dispersals of early humans in our evolutionary history. It is likely that distinct populations of Homo erectus sensu lato led to the emergence of later homininspecies, such as Homo heidelbergensis, and ultimately to our own species, Homo sapiens. At the beginning of its time range, around 1.9 Mya, H. erectus coexisted in East Africa with several other early human species including Homo

rudolfensis, Homo habilis, and Paranthropus boisei. Sometimes they

were even found at the same fossil sites. At the end of its time range, around 143,000 years ago, it coexisted with Homo sapiens and possibly Homo floresiensis in Indonesia.

Year of Discovery:
1891

History of Discovery:
Eugne Dubois, a Dutch surgeon, found the first Homo

erectus individual (Trinil 2) in Indonesia in 1891. In 1894, DuBois named the species Pithecanthropus erectus, or erect ape-man. At that time,Pithecanthropus (later changed to Homo) erectus was the most
primitive and smallest-brained of all known early human species; no early human fossils had even been discovered in Africa yet.

D3444 KNM-ER 1808

This elderly male belonged to a population of Homo

An outer layer of abnormal bone on this females thigh shows evidence of bleeding just before death. After consulting doctors and accounts of wilderness explorers, researchers concluded that an overdose of

erectus that spread

from Africa to the

Caucasus Mountains in vitamin Aperhaps from eating a carnivores liver, which concentrates vitamin Acaused the bleeding and western Asia. Most of his teeth fell out long before he died, and his jaw deteriorated as a result. Members of his social group must have taken care of him. her death.

KNM-WT 15000

Trinil 2

This Homo hot, dry part of East Africa near an ancient marsh. His teeth indicate that he grew up quickly, at a rate similar to that of a living great ape. His is one of the most complete early human skeletons ever found.

When this skull cap was discovered in 1891, it was the sometimes called "Java Man" because it was found on the island of Java, Indonesia.

erectus youth lived in a first early human fossil recognized outside Europe. It is

Height:
Ranges from 4 ft 9 in - 6 ft 1 in (145 - 185 cm)

Weight:
Ranges from 88 - 150 lbs (40 - 68 kg)

Height & Weight Supplemental Information:

There was a large amount of variation in the size of Homo erectus individuals. Many fossils cannot be

attributed to male or female, so we present the entire size range here. The fossils from Africa indicate a larger body size than those from China, Indonesia, and the Republic of Georgia.

Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins ...

humanorigins.si.edu/