Ape and hominid limb length

Cross-sectional properties of the humeral diaphysis of Paranthropus boisei: Implications for upper limb function

A ∼1.52 Ma adult upper limb skeleton of Paranthropus boisei (KNM-ER 47000) recovered from the Koobi Fora Formation, Kenya (FwJj14E, Area 1A) includes most of the distal half of a right humerus (designated KNM-ER 47000B). Natural transverse fractures through the diaphysis of KNM-ER 470000B provide unobstructed views of cortical bone at two sections typically used for analyzing cross-sectional properties of hominids (i.e., 35% and 50% of humerus length from the distal end). Here we assess cross-sectional properties of KNM-ER 47000B and two other P. boisei humeri (OH 80-10, KNM-ER 739). Cross-sectional properties for P. boisei associated with bending/torsional strength (section moduli) and relative cortical thickness (%CA; percent cortical area) are compared to those reported for nonhuman hominids, AL 288-1 (Australopithecus afarensis), and multiple species of fossil and modern Homo. Polar section moduli (Z_p) are assessed relative to a mechanically relevant measure of body size (i.e., the product of mass [M] and humerus length [HL]). At both diaphyseal sections, P. boisei exhibits %CA that is high among extant hominids (both human and nonhuman) and similar to that observed among specimens of Pleistocene Homo. High values for Z_p relative to size (M × HL) indicate that P. boisei had humeral bending strength greater than that of modern humans and Neanderthals and similar to that of great apes, A. afarensis, and Homo habilis. Such high humeral strength is consistent with other skeletal features of P. boisei (reviewed here) that suggest routine use of powerful upper limbs for arboreal climbing.

The pattern of hominin postcranial evolution reconsidered in light of size-related shape variation of the distal humerus

Previous research suggests that some hominin postcranial features do not follow a linear path of increasing modernization through geological time. With respect to the distal humerus, in particular, the earliest known hominin specimens are reportedly among the most modern in morphology, while some later humeri appear further removed from the average modern human shape. Although Plio-Pleistocene humeri vary widely in size, previous studies have failed to account for size-related shape variation when making morphometric comparisons. This study reexamines hominin postcranial evolution in light of distal humeral allometry. Using two-dimensional landmark data, the relationship between specimen size and shape among modern humans is quantified using multivariate regression and principal components analysis of size-shape space. Fossils are compared with modern human shapes expected at a given size, as well as with the overall average human shape. The null hypothesis of humeral isometry in modern humans is rejected. Subsequently, if one takes allometry into account, the apparent pattern of hominin humeral evolution does not resemble the pattern described above. All 14 of the Plio-Pleistocene hominin fossils examined here share a similar pattern of shape differences from equivalently-sized modern humans, though they vary in the extent to which these differences are expressed. The oldest specimen in the sample (KNM-KP 271; Australopithecus anamensis) exhibits the least human-like elbow morphology. Similarly primitive morphology characterizes all younger species of Australopithecus as well as Paranthropus robustus. After 2 Ma, a subtly more human-like elbow morphology is apparent among specimens attributed to early Homo, as well as among isolated specimens that may represent either Homo or Paranthropus boisei. This study emphasizes the need to consider size-related shape variation when individual fossil specimens are compared with the average shape of a comparative group, particularly when specimens fall near an extreme of the comparative size distribution.

Five years of Homo floresiensis

Since Homo floresiensis was first described in October 2004 there has been a lively debate over its status. Is it a late surviving species of early Homo or merely a modern individual afflicted with disordered growth and one of the many syndromes resulting in microchephaly? Recently the discovery team has published a series of articles providing detailed descriptions of the hominin material, its geomorphological context, and the associated archaeology and faunal material (Morwood and Jungers: J Hum Evol 57 (2009) 437-648). In addition, other researchers have put forward new hypotheses for possible pathologies including Laron's Syndrome and Myxoedematous Endemic (ME) Cretinism. Here I review this new information and conclude that the evidence supports the hypothesis that Homo floresiensis is a late-surviving species of early Homo with its closest morphological affinities to early African pre-erectus/ergaster hominins. Although this hypothesis requires fundamental paradigm changes in our understanding of human evolution, it provides a more economical explanation for H. floresiensis than do the alternatives. None of the current explanations for microcephaly and disordered growth account for the range of features observed in H. floresiensis. Neither do they provide explanations for why a pathological condition in modern humans would mimic so closely the morphology observed in earlier hominins. This conclusion is based on the current evidence for H. floresiensis and on the particular pathological explanations that have appeared in the literature. There is no doubt that controversy over H. floresiensis will continue until new and conclusive evidence is available to settle the debate one way or another.

Homo floresiensis and the evolution of the hominin shoulder

The holotype of Homo floresiensis, diminutive hominins with tiny brains living until 12,000 years ago on the island of Flores, is a partial skeleton (LB1) that includes a partial clavicle (LB1/5) and a nearly complete right humerus (LB1/50). Although the humerus appears fairly modern in most regards, it is remarkable in displaying only 110 degrees of humeral torsion, well below modern human average values. Assuming a modern human shoulder configuration, such a low degree of humeral torsion would result in a lateral set to the elbow. Such an elbow joint would function more nearly in a frontal than in a sagittal plane, and this is certainly not what anyone would have predicted for a tool-making Pleistocene hominin. We argue that Homo floresiensis probably did not have a modern human shoulder configuration: the clavicle was relatively short, and we suggest that the scapula was more protracted, resulting in a glenoid fossa that faced anteriorly rather than laterally. A posteriorly directed humeral head was therefore appropriate for maintaining a normally functioning elbow joint. Similar morphology in the Homo erectus Nariokotome boy (KNM-WT 15000) suggests that this shoulder configuration may represent a transitional stage in pectoral girdle evolution in the human lineage.

Forelimb segment length proportions in extant hominoids and Australopithecus afarensis

Forelimb proportions have been used to infer locomotor adaptation in Australopithecus afarensis. However, little is known about proportions among individual forelimb segments in extant or fossil hominoids. The partial A. afarensis skeleton A.L. 438-1 and the more complete skeleton A.L. 288-1 provide the opportunity to assess relative length of the arm, forearm, wrist, and palm. We compare scaling relationships between pairs of forelimb bones of extant hominoids and A. afarensis, and length of individual forelimb elements to a body size surrogate. Hylobatids, and to a lesser extent orangutans, have the longest forelimb bones relative to size, although the carpus varies little among taxa, perhaps due to functional constraints of the wrist. Pan species are unique in having long metacarpals relative to ulnar length, demonstrating that they probably differ from the common chimp-human ancestor, and also that developmental mechanisms can be altered to results in differential growth of individual forelimb segments. A. afarensis has no forelimb bones that are significantly longer than those of humans for its size. It falls within the range of variation seen in modern humans for all comparisons relative to size, but appears to differ from the typical human brachial index due to a slightly shorter humerus and/or slightly longer ulna. It has short metacarpals like humans only among hominoids. Thus, while Pan may have elongated its metacarpus relative to ulnar length, A. afarensis may have reduced the length of its metacarpals and possibly its humerus relative to body size from the primitive condition.

Human evolution: taxonomy and paleobiology

This review begins by setting out the context and the scope of human evolution. Several classes of evidence, morphological, molecular, and genetic, support a particularly close relationship between modern humans and the species within the genus Pan, the chimpanzee. Thus human evolution is the study of the lineage, or clade, comprising species more closely related to modern humans than to chimpanzees. Its stem species is the so-called 'common hominin ancestor', and its only extant member is Homo sapiens. This clade contains all the species more closely-related to modern humans than to any other living primate. Until recently, these species were all subsumed into a family, Hominidae, but this group is now more usually recognised as a tribe, the Hominini. The rest of the review sets out the formal nomenclature, history of discovery, and information about the characteristic morphology, and its behavioural implications, of the species presently included in the human clade. The taxa are considered within their assigned genera, beginning with the most primitive and finishing with Homo. Within genera, species are presented in order of geological age. The entries conclude with a list of the more important items of fossil evidence, and a summary of relevant taxonomic issues.