The middle Pliocene gets crowded

Reappraising the palaeobiology of Australopithecus

The naming of Australopithecus africanus in 1925, based on the Taung Child, heralded a new era in human evolutionary studies and turned the attention of the then Eurasian-centric palaeoanthropologists to Africa, albeit with reluctance. Almost one hundred years later, Africa is recognized as the cradle of humanity, where the entire evolutionary history of our lineage prior to two million years ago took place-after the Homo-Pan split. This Review examines data from diverse sources and offers a revised depiction of the genus and characterizes its role in human evolution. For a long time, our knowledge of Australopithecus came from both A. africanus and Australopithecus afarensis, and the members of this genus were portrayed as bipedal creatures that did not use stone tools, with a largely chimpanzee-like cranium, a prognathic face and a brain slightly larger than that of chimpanzees. Subsequent field and laboratory discoveries, however, have altered this portrayal, showing that Australopithecus species were habitual bipeds but also practised arboreality; that they occasionally used stone tools to supplement their diet with animal resources; and that their infants probably depended on adults to a greater extent than what is seen in apes. The genus gave rise to several taxa, including Homo, but its direct ancestor remains elusive. In sum, Australopithecus had a pivotal bridging role in our evolutionary history owing to its morphological, behavioural and temporal placement between the earliest archaic putative hominins and later hominins-including the genus Homo.

Hominin dental remains from the Pliocene localities at Lomekwi, Kenya (1982-2009)

Increasing evidence for both taxonomic diversity and early stone manufacture during the Pliocene highlights the importance of the hominin fossil record from this epoch in eastern Africa. Here, we describe dental remains from Lomekwi (West Turkana, Kenya), which date from between 3.2 and 3.5 Ma. The sample was collected between 1982 and 2009 and includes five gnathic specimens and a total of 67 teeth (mostly isolated permanent postcanine teeth). Standard linear dimensions indicate that, although the Lomekwi teeth are relatively small, there is broad overlap in size with contemporary Australopithecus afarensis and Australopithecus deyiremeda specimens at most tooth positions. However, some dental characters differentiate this sample from these species, including a relatively large P₄ and M₃ compared with the M₁, a high incidence of well-developed protostylids, and specific accessory molar cuspules. Owing to a lack of well-preserved tooth crowns (and the complete absence of mandibular teeth) in the holotype and paratype of Kenyanthropus platyops, and limited comparable gnathic morphology in the new specimens, it cannot be determined whether these Lomekwi specimens should be attributed to this species. Attribution of these specimens is further complicated by a lack of certainty about position along the tooth row of many of the molar specimens. More comprehensive shape analyses of the external and internal morphology of these specimens, and additional fossil finds, would facilitate the taxonomic attribution of specimens in this taxonomically diverse period of human evolution.

Middle Pliocene hominin diversity: Australopithecus deyiremeda and Kenyanthropus platyops

Geometric morphometric shape analyses are used to compare the maxillae of the Kenyanthropus platyops holotype KNM-WT 40000, the Australopithecus deyiremeda holotype BRT-VP-3/1 and other australopiths. The main aim is to explore the relationship between these two specimens and contemporary Australopithecus afarensis Five landmarks placed on lateral views of the maxillae quantify key aspects of the morphology. Generalized Procrustes analyses and principal component analyses of the resulting shape coordinates were performed. The magnitudes of differences in shape and their significances were assessed using Procrustes and Mahalanobis' distances, respectively. Both KNM-WT 40000 and BRT-VP-3/1 show statistically significant differences in maxillary shape from A. afarensis, but do so in dissimilar ways. Moreover, the former differs more from A. afarensis than the latter. KNM-WT 40000 has a more anteriorly positioned zygomatic process with a transversely flat, and more orthognathic subnasal clivus. BRT-VP-3/1 has a more inferiorly positioned zygomatic process, a slightly retracted dental arcade, but without shortening of the anterior maxilla. These findings are consistent with previous conclusions that the two fossils should be attributed to separate species, rather than to A. afarensis, and with the presence of three contemporary hominin species in the Middle Pliocene of eastern Africa.This article is part of the themed issue 'Major transitions in human evolution'.