Postcranial functional morphology of Morotopithecus bishopi, with implications for the evolution of modern ape locomotion

The large-bodied hominoid from Moroto, Uganda has until recently been known only from proconsulid like craniodental remains and some vertebrae with modern ape like features. The discovery of two partial femora and the glenoid portion of a scapula demonstrates that the functional anatomy of Morotopithecus differed markedly from other early and middle Miocene hominoids. Previous studies have consistently associated the vertebral remains with a short, stiff back and with orthograde postures. Although the proximal femur more closely resembles the femora of monkeys than of apes and suggests a moderate degree of hip abduction, the distal femur resembles those of extant large bodied apes and suggests a varied loading regime and an arboreal repertoire that may have included substantial vertical climbing. The femoral shaft displays uniformly thick cortical bone, beyond the range of thickness seen in extant primates, and signifies higher axial loading than is typical of most extant primates. The glenoid fossa is broad and uniformly curved as in extant suspensory primates. Overall, Morotopithecus is reconstructed as an arboreal species that probably relied on forelimb-dominated, deliberate and vertical climbing, suspension and quadrupedalism. Morotopithecus thus marks the first appearance of certain aspects of the modern hominoid body plan by at least 20 Ma. If the suspensory and orthograde adaptations linking Morotopithecus to extant apes are synapomorphies, Morotopithecus may be the only well-documented African Miocene hominoid with a close relationship to living apes and humans.     

A reassessment of living hominoid postcranial variability: implications for ape evolution

In an analysis of hominoid postcranial variation, 'Evol. Anthrop. 6 (1998) 87' argued that many purportedly unique features of the hominoid postcranium are actually much more variable than previously reported and in many instances overlap with both suspensory (Ateles) and non-suspensory primates. Based on these results, it was concluded that parallelism in the living ape postcranium was a plausible and even likely possibility given the Miocene hominoid postcranial record. However, this analysis did not distinguish whether within-hominoid variability or overlap with non-hominoids involved one or all ape taxa, a distinction which has potentially important effects on the interpretation of results. To address this issue, primate postcranial morphometric data from the trunk and forelimb were reanalyzed using three techniques: cladistic analysis, principle components analysis, and cluster analysis. Results reveal that these postcranial characters distinguish not only suspensory and quadrupedal primates but also discriminate hominoids and Ateles from all other taxa, great apes from lesser apes and Ateles, cercopithecines from colobines, and cercopithecoids from platyrrhines. The majority of hominoid variability and overlap with Ateles occurs with Hylobates humeral head and shoulder joint characters related to brachiation. This suggests that Hylobates' specializations may skew analyses of hominoid postcranial uniqueness and variability, and that great apes are relatively similar in their postcranium.     

Dental metric comparisons of Morotopithecus and Afropithecus: implications for the validity of the genus Morotopithecus

Morotopithecus bishopi and Afropithecus turkanensis are two large-bodied hominoid primates from early Miocene deposits of eastern Africa. Researchers have used both cranial and postcranial characters to distinguish these two species. Unfortunately, of the fossil material attributed to each, only the face, palate, and upper dentition are preserved well enough in both species for direct comparisons. There are currently no known directly comparable postcranial elements. In this study, we reevaluated dental characters argued to distinguish the type specimens of Morotopithecus from Afropithecus: relative size of the upper premolars and M3. Exact randomization methods were used to address two questions. First, is it possible to find the degree of dental-size difference observed between Morotopithecus (UMP 62-11) and Afropithecus (KNM-WK 16999) within extant African hominoids? Second, what is the probability of observing the levels of difference found between the fossils among pairs of extant individuals? Metric differences in relative premolar and M3 size were calculated between all possible pairs within the extant sample and the observed difference of the fossil pair was then compared to the resulting distribution of extant pairs. The observed size differences for all comparisons in the fossil teeth were well within the variation observed in the extant African hominoid samples (p>0.05). In light of these results and other currently available cranial evidence, we suggest that the type specimens of Morotopithecus and Afropithecus are not different enough to support taxonomic distinction.     

A morphometric mapping analysis of lower fourth deciduous premolar in hominoids: Implications for phylogenetic relationship between Nakalipithecus and Ouranopithecus

Clarifying morphological variation among African and Eurasian hominoids during the Miocene is of particular importance for inferring the evolutionary history of humans and great apes. Among Miocene hominoids, Nakalipithecus and Ouranopithecus play an important role because of their similar dates on different continents. Here, we quantify the lower fourth deciduous premolar (dp4) inner morphology of extant and extinct hominoids using a method of morphometric mapping and examine the phylogenetic relationships between these two fossil taxa. Our data indicate that early Late Miocene apes represent a primitive state in general, whereas modern great apes and humans represent derived states. While Nakalipithecus and Ouranopithecus show similarity in dp4 morphology to a certain degree, the dp4 of Nakalipithecus retains primitive features and that of Ouranopithecus exhibits derived features. Phenotypic continuity among African ape fossils from Miocene to Plio-Pleistocene would support the African origin of African apes and humans (AAH). The results also suggest that Nakalipithecus could have belonged to a lineage from which the lineage of Ouranopithecus and the common ancestor of AAH subsequently derived.     

A partial skeleton of the fossil great ape Hispanopithecus laietanus from Can Feu and the mosaic evolution of crown-hominoid positional behaviors

The extinct dryopithecine Hispanopithecus (Primates: Hominidae), from the Late Miocene of Europe, is the oldest fossil great ape displaying an orthograde body plan coupled with unambiguous suspensory adaptations. On the basis of hand morphology, Hispanopithecus laietanus has been considered to primitively retain adaptations to above-branch quadrupedalism-thus displaying a locomotor repertoire unknown among extant or fossil hominoids, which has been considered unlikely by some researchers. Here we describe a partial skeleton of H. laietanus from the Vallesian (MN9) locality of Can Feu 1 (Vallès-Penedès Basin, NE Iberian Peninsula), with an estimated age of 10.0-9.7 Ma. It includes dentognathic and postcranial remains of a single, female adult individual, with an estimated body mass of 22-25 kg. The postcranial remains of the rib cage, shoulder girdle and forelimb show a mixture of monkey-like and modern-hominoid-like features. In turn, the proximal morphology of the ulna-most completely preserved in the Can Feu skeleton than among previously-available remains-indicates the possession of an elbow complex suitable for preserving stability along the full range of flexion/extension and enabling a broad range of pronation/supination. Such features, suitable for suspensory behaviors, are however combined with an olecranon morphology that is functionally related to quadrupedalism. Overall, when all the available postcranial evidence for H. laietanus is considered, it emerges that this taxon displayed a locomotor repertoire currently unknown among other apes (extant or extinct alike), uniquely combining suspensory-related features with primitively-retained adaptations to above-branch palmigrady. Despite phylogenetic uncertainties, Hispanopithecus is invariably considered an extinct member of the great-ape-and-human clade. Therefore, the combination of quadrupedal and suspensory adaptations in this Miocene crown hominoid clearly evidences the mosaic nature of locomotor evolution in the Hominoidea, as well as the impossibility to reconstruct the ancestral locomotor repertoires for crown hominoid subclades on the basis of extant taxa alone.     

On the systematic status of the late Neogene hominoids from Yunnan Province,China

Late Miocene and Pliocene hominoids from Yunnan Province in southern China have been recovered from four sites or site complexes: Xiaolongtan, Yangyi, Shihuiba and Yuanmou. Of these, Shihuiba and Yuanmou are among the most prolific fossil hominoid sites in Eurasia, and they have yielded important evidence that is critical for documenting the evolutionary history, biogeography and paleobiology of later Neogene hominids. The aim of this paper is to clarify their taxonomy and nomenclature, and to present a preliminary synthesis of their phylogenetic relationships and biogeography. The morphological pattern and degree of variation observed in the fossil samples is consistent with there being a single, sexually dimorphic species represented at each site. Provisionally, we consider the Shihuiba, Xiaolongtan and Yuanmou samples to belong to two separate species within a single genus. The valid names for these species are Lufengpithecus lufengensis (from Shihuiba) and L. keiyuanensis (from Xiaolongtan and Yuanmou). From a phylogenetic perspective, the currently available evidence suggests that Lufengpithecus is either a primitive hominid that represents the sister taxon of the Ponginae+Homininae or a primitive sister taxon to the Ponginae. We tend to favor the second alternative, but acknowledge that a more comprehensive comparative analysis is needed to substantiate the phylogenetic and taxonomic affinities of Lufengpithecus. Importantly, the Yunnan fossil apes provide a unique temporal perspective on the evolutionary history of hominoids. Their continued occurrence during the late Miocene and Pliocene (approximately 8-2Ma), when hominoids became extinct throughout the rest of Eurasia, suggests that southern China (and presumably southeast Asia in general) was an important refugium for hominoids, including the ancestors of the orang-utans and gibbons. The uplift of the Tibetan plateau and its impact on regional climatic conditions may have been an important contributing factor in isolating the hominoids geographically and ecologically. We speculate that changed climatic condition in the mid-Pliocene, and possibly the arrival of Homo soon after, may have precipitated the regional extinction of large hominoids in southern China and in mainland southeast Asia.     

Knuckle-walking in Sivapithecus? The combined effects of homology and homoplasy with possible implications for pongine dispersals

Sivapithecus is a Miocene great ape from South Asia that is orangutan-like cranially but is distinctive postcranially. Work by others shows that the humerus resembles large terrestrial cercopithecoids proximally and suspensory hominoids distally, but most functional interpretations nevertheless situate Sivapithecus in an arboreal setting. We present a new quantitative analysis of the Sivapithecus capitate and hamate. Though the functional morphology of both bones suggests some degree of arboreality, the overall morphology is most similar to knuckle-walking African apes. Other features of the Sivapithecus humerus and hind limb are also functionally consistent with knuckle-walking, and we suggest that this locomotor behavior is a valid alternative functional interpretation of the postcranial morphology. We speculate that knuckle-walking in Sivapithecus would have evolved independently from African apes, perhaps for similar ecological reasons. The discovery of a possible pongine knuckle-walker challenges the hypotheses that (1) knuckle-walking evolved only once in hominoids and (2) knuckle-walking is too highly specialized to be the positional behavior from which human bipedalism evolved. The possibility of knuckle-walking in Sivapithecus may help to explain not only the curious combination of characters that typify the postcranium but also the unique postcranial morphology of extant Pongo. Furthermore, it may clarify the distribution of fossil pongines across many ecological zones in Eurasia in the Miocene and Pleistocene, as well as, independently, the spread of African apes across a diversity of environments in equatorial Africa.     

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.     

Unresolved molecular phylogenies of gibbons and siamangs (Family: Hylobatidae) based on mitochondrial, Y-linked, and X-linked loci indicate a rapid Miocene radiation or sudden vicariance event

According to recent taxonomic reclassification, the primate family Hylobatidae contains four genera (Hoolock, Nomascus, Symphalangus, and Hylobates) and between 14 and 18 species, making it by far the most species-rich group of extant hominoids. Known as the "small apes", these small arboreal primates are distributed throughout Southeast, South and East Asia. Considerable uncertainty surrounds the phylogeny of extant hylobatids, particularly the relationships among the genera and the species within the Hylobates genus. In this paper we use parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian methods to analyze a dataset containing nearly 14 kilobase pairs, which includes newly collected sequences from X-linked, Y-linked, and mitochondrial loci together with data from previous mitochondrial studies. Parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian analyses largely failed to find a significant difference among phylogenies with any of the four genera as the most basal taxon. All analyses, however, support a tree with Hylobates and Symphalangus as most closely related genera. One strongly supported phylogenetic result within the Hylobates genus is that Hylobates pileatus is the most basal taxon. Multiple analyses failed to find significant support for any singular genus-level phylogeny. While it is natural to suspect that there might not be sufficient data for phylogenetic resolution (whenever that situation occurs), an alternative hypothesis relating to the nature of gibbon speciation exists. This lack of resolution may be the result of a rapid radiation or a sudden vicariance event of the hylobatid genera, and it is likely that a similarly rapid radiation occurred within the Hylobates genus. Additional molecular and paleontological evidence are necessary to better test among these, and other, hypotheses of hylobatid evolution.     

Khoratpithecus piriyai, a Late Miocene hominoid of Thailand

A Khoratpithecus piriyai lower jaw corresponds to a well-preserved Late Miocene hominoid fossil from northeastern Thailand. Its morphology and internal structure, using a microcomputed tomography scan, are described and compared to those of other known Miocene hominoids. It originated from fluviatile sand and gravel deposits of a large river, and was associated with many fossil tree trunks, wood fragments, and large vertebrate remains. A biochronological analysis by using associated mammal fauna gives an estimated geological age between 9-6 Ma. The flora indicates the occurrence of a riverine tropical forest and wide areas of grassland. K. piriyai displays many original characters, such as the great breadth of its anterior dentition, suggesting large incisors, large lower M3, a canine with a flat lingual wall, and symphysis structure. Several of its morphological derived characters are shared with the orangutan, indicating sister-group relationship with that extant ape. This relationship is additionally strongly supported by the absence of anterior digastric muscle scars. These shared derived characters are not present in Sivapithecus, Ankarapithecus, and Lufengpithecus, which are therefore considered more distant relatives to the orangutan than Khoratpithecus. The Middle Miocene K. chiangmuanensis is older, displays more primitive dental characters, and shares several dental characters with the Late Miocene form. It is therefore interpreted as its probable ancestor. But its less enlarged M3 and more wrinkled enamel may suggest an even closer phylogenetic position to orangutan ancestors, which cannot yet be supported because of the incomplete fossil record. Thus Khoratpithecus represents a new lineage of Southeast Asian hominoids, closely related to extant great ape ancestors.     

Nacholapithecus skeleton from the Middle Miocene of Kenya

An almost entire skeleton of a male individual of Nacholapithecus kerioi (KNM-BG 35250) was discovered from Middle Miocene (approximately 15 Ma) sediments at Nachola, northern Kenya. N. kerioi exhibits a shared derived subnasal morphology with living apes. In many postcranial features, such as articular shape, as well as the number of the lumbar vertebrae, N. kerioi resembles Proconsul heseloni and/or P. nyanzae, and lacks suspensory specializations characteristic of living apes. Similarly, N. kerioi shares some postcranial characters with Kenyapithecus spp. However, despite the resemblance, N. kerioi and Proconsul spp. are quite different in their body proportions and some joint morphologies. N. kerioi has proportionally large forelimb bones and long pedal digits compared to its hindlimb bones and lumbar vertebrae. Its distinctive body proportions suggest that N. kerioi was more derived for forelimb dominated arboreal activities than P. nyanzae and P. heseloni. On the other hand, it exhibits a mixture of derived and primitive cranio-dental and postcranial features relative to the contemporaneous Kenyapithecus and Early MioceneMorotopithecus. While the phylogenetic position of N. kerioi is unsettled, it seems necessary to posit parallel evolution of cranio-dental and/or postcranial features in fossil and living apes.     

Cladistic relationships of extant and fossil hominoids

There is general agreement that the hominoid primates form a monophyletic group, that the extant great apes and humans form a second clade within that group with the gibbons as the sister group, and that the African apes and humans form a third clade. Although it has recently been proposed that humans and orang utans are sister taxa and also that the great apes form a clade to the exclusion of humans, our analysis, particularly of the molecular evidence, supports the existence of an African ape and human clade. The major problem in hominoid phylogeny at present is the relationships of the species within this clade: morphological data generally support the existence of an African ape clade which is the sister group to humans; some molecular data also support this conclusion, but most molecular evidence indicates the existence of a chimpanzee/human clade. We have cladistically re-analysed the DNA and protein sequence data for which apomorphic character states can be assessed. It is clear that there is a high degree of homoplasy whichever branching pattern is produced, with some characters supporting the existence of a chimpanzee/human clade and others supporting an African ape clade. When the cladistic analyses of morphological and molecular data are combined we believe that the most parsimonious interpretation of the data is that the African apes form a clade which is the sister taxon of the human (i.e., Australopithecus, Homo and Paranthropus) clade.This paper is not intended as a survey of all hominoid fossils but as a study of branching points in hominoid evolution and fossils are included which are relevant to this branching pattern. The analysis of fossil taxa in this study leads us to conclude that Proconsul is the sister taxon to the later Hominoidea. A number of middle Miocene forms such as Dryopithecus, Kenyapithecus, Heliopithecus and Afropithecus are shown to share derived characters with great apes and humans and provide evidence for the divergence of that clade from the gibbon lineage prior to 18 Ma. The position that Sivapithecus represents the sister group of the orang utan clade is supported here and shows that the orang utan lineage had diverged from the African ape and human lineage prior to 11·5 Ma. There is unfortunately no definitive fossil cvidence on branching sequences within the African ape and human clade, although a new specimen from Samburu, Kenya may be related to the gorilla.     

An oreopithecid proximal humerus from the middle miocene of Maboko Island,Kenya

A proximal humerus, recently recovered from the middle Miocene of Maboko Island, Kenya, provides the earliest evidence of postcranial structure and adaptation of Oreopithecidae. Provisionally attributed toNyanzapithecus pickfordi (Harrison, 1986), the specimen manifests a globose head, subequally large tuberosities, and a board, shallow bicipital groove. Although readily distinguished from the fundamentally cercopithecoid proximal humeral morphology ofVictoriapithecus (Senut, 1986), the Maboko Island oreopithecid, shows none of the derived features that are characteristic of the proximal humeri of extant hominoids. It is inferred from proximal humeral anatomy that the Maboko Island oreopithecid was an active arboreal scansor with moderate mobility at the shoulder but lacking adaptations for circumduction of the arm. In combination with craniodental evidence, proximal humeral morphology indicates that Oreopithecidae was a clade of hominoids which originated before the last common ancestor of extant apes and went extinct, without issue, in the later 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 that Otavipithecus 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 of Otavipithecus to Andrews' (1992 a) tribe Afropithecini which represents the sister group to Kenyapithecus and the extant ape clade.     

Rudabánya: A late miocene subtropical swamp deposit with evidence of the origin of the African apes and humans

Rudabánya, a rich late Miocene fossil site in northern central Hungary, has yielded an abundant record of fossil primates, including the primitive catarrhine Anapithecus and the early great ape Dryopithecus. While the affinities of Anapithecus are not clear, Dryopithecus is clearly a great ape sharing numerous characteristics of its dental, cranial and postcranial anatomy with living great apes. Like all Miocene hominids (great apes and humans), Dryopithecus is more primitive in a number of ways than any living hominid, which is probably related to the passage of time since the divergence of the various lineages of living hominids, allowing for similar refinements in morphology and adaptation to take place independently. On the other hand, Dryopithecus (and Ouranopithecus) share derived characters with hominines (African apes and humans), and Sivapithecus (and Ankarapithecus) share derived characters with orangutans, thus dating the split between pongines and hominines to a time before the evolution of these fossil great apes. Pongines and hominines follow similar fates in the late Miocene, the pongines moving south into Southeast Asia from southern or eastern Asia and the hominines moving south into East Africa from the Mediterranean region, between 6 to 9 Ma.     

Miocene hominoid palatofacial morphology

The palatofacial morphology of Proconsul africanus, P. nyanzae, P. major and Sivapithecus meteai is compared to extant catarrhines. The early Miocene hominoids (Proconsul) are unlike modern great apes, but retain a primitive catarrhine pattern more similar to some extant cercopthecoids. By middle Miocene times the typical hominoid palatofacial morphology can be recognized in at least one species (S. meteai) and this corresponds to the evolution of the postcranium in which the hominoid pattern is also only recognizable by the middle Miocene.     

Nacholapithecus and its importance for understanding hominoid evolution

Nacholapithecus kerioi is a large‐sized hominoid from the Aka Aiteputh Formation (15 Ma) in Nachola, northern Kenya. 1 While eight large‐sized hominoid species dating to the late Early to early Middle Miocene (17‐14 Ma) are known in Afro‐Arabia and western Eurasia, 2 - 6 the facial and postcranial anatomy of these apes is poorly known. However, much has been learned of the craniodental and postcranial anatomy of N. kerioi over the last ten years (A list of published specimens is available online, accompanying this article), and it plays a key role in our understanding of hominoid evolution in the Early to Middle Miocene of Africa and Eurasia. Importantly, it bears on the interpretation of the hominoid Morotopithecus bishopi from 20.6 my‐old Uganda. 7 - 10 In the article, we provide information on the anatomy and adaptations of N. kerioi as well as on the site of Nachola, and discuss how our current knowledge of N. kerioi can be incorporated into scenarios of hominoid evolution.     

Inferring hominoid and early hominid phylogeny using craniodental characters: the role of fossil taxa

Recent discoveries of new fossil hominid species have been accompanied by several phylogenetic hypotheses. All of these hypotheses are based on a consideration of hominid craniodental morphology. However, Collard and Wood (2000) suggested that cladograms derived from craniodental data are inconsistent with the prevailing hypothesis of ape phylogeny based on molecular data. The implication of their study is that craniodental characters are unreliable indicators of phylogeny in hominoids and fossil hominids but, notably, their analysis did not include extinct species. We report here on a cladistic analysis designed to test whether the inclusion of fossil taxa affects the ability of morphological characters to recover the molecular ape phylogeny. In the process of doing so, the study tests both Collard and Wood's (2000) hypothesis of character reliability, and the several recently proposed hypotheses of early hominid phylogeny. One hundred and ninety-eight craniodental characters were examined, including 109 traits that traditionally have been of interest in prior studies of hominoid and early hominid phylogeny, and 89 craniometric traits that represent size-corrected linear dimensions measured between standard cranial landmarks. The characters were partitioned into two data sets. One set contained all of the characters, and the other omitted the craniometric characters. Six parsimony analyses were performed; each data set was analyzed three times, once using an ingroup that consisted only of extant hominoids, a second time using an ingroup of extant hominoids and extinct early hominids, and a third time excluding Kenyanthropus platyops. Results suggest that the inclusion of fossil taxa can play a significant role in phylogenetic analysis. Analyses that examined only extant taxa produced most parsimonious cladograms that were inconsistent with the ape molecular tree. In contrast, analyses that included fossil hominids were consistent with that tree. This consistency refutes the basis for the hypothesis that craniodental characters are unreliable for reconstructing phylogenetic relationships. Regarding early hominids, the relationships of Sahelanthropus tchadensis and Ardipithecus ramidus were relatively unstable. However, there is tentative support for the hypotheses that S. tchadensis is the sister taxon of all other hominids. There is support for the hypothesis that A. anamensis is the sister taxon of all hominids except S. tchadensis and Ar. ramidus. There is no compelling support for the hypothesis that Kenyanthropus platyops shares especially close affinities with Homo rudolfensis. Rather, K. platyops is nested within the Homo + Paranthropus + Australopithecus africanus clade. If K. platyops is a valid species, these relationships suggest that Homo and Paranthropus are likely to have diverged from other hominids much earlier than previously supposed. There is no support for the hypothesis that A. garhi is either the sister taxon or direct ancestor of the genus Homo. Phylogenetic relationships indicate that Australopithecus is paraphyletic. Thus, A. anamensis and A. garhi should be allocated to new genera.