Longitudinal study of dental development in chimpanzees of known chronological age: Implications for understanding the age at death of Plio-Pleistocene hominids

Reconstruction of life history variables of fossil hominids on the basis of dental development requires understanding of and comparison with the pattern and timing of dental development among both living humans and pongids. Whether dental development among living apes or humans provides a better model for comparison with that of Plio-Pleistocene hominids of the genus Australopithecus remains a contentious point. This paper presents new data on chimpanzees documenting developmental differences in the dentitions of modern humans and apes and discusses their significance in light of recent controversies over the human or pongid nature of australopithecine dental development. Longitudinal analysis of 299 lateral head radiographs from 33 lab-reared chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) of known chronological age allows estimation of means and standard deviations for the age at first appearance of 8 developmental stages in the mandibular molar dentition. Results are compared with published studies of dental development among apes and with published standards for humans. Chimpanzees are distinctly different from humans in two important aspects of dental development. Relative to humans, chimpanzees show advanced molar development vis a vis anterior tooth development, and chimpanzees are characterized by temporal overlap in the calcification of adjacent molar crowns, while humans show moderate to long temporal gaps between the calcification of adjacent molar crowns. In combination with recent work on enamel incremental markers and CAT scans of developing dentitions of Plio-Pleistocene hominids, this evidence supports an interpretation of a rapid, essentially “apelike” ontogeny among australopithecines. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Metrical analysis of the basicranium of extant hominoids and Australopithecus

The size and shape of the basicranium (seen in norma basilaris) in Homo, Gorilla, Pan, Pongo, and Australopithecus have been studied by recording the relative disposition of midline and bilateral bony landmarks. Fifteen linear measurements and two angles were used to relate the landmarks. The relatively longer and narrower cranial base of Gorilla, Pan, and Pongo is clearly contrasted with the wider, shorter cranial base in Homo sapiens. When the same observations were made on two “robust” and two “gracile” australopithecine crania, marked differences were found between the taxa. In the two “robust” specimens, the foramen magnum is located relatively further forward, and the axis of the petrous temporal bone is aligned more nearly with the coronal plane than in the two “gracile” crania. The implications of this apparent parallelism in basicranial morphology between Homo sapiens and the “robust” australopithecines are discussed.     

Further observations on a method for estimating hominoid dental developmental patterns

Several recent studies have concluded that early hominines resembled apes in patterns of dental ontogeny and have inferred from this conclusion that they were ape-like in other aspects of growth and development as well. Prior to their employment on fossil junveniles, the comparative methods used in these studies were not first tested for their predicitive accuracy in distinguishing modern humans from apes on the basis of proposed patterns of dental ontogeny. We find that 92% of a smaple of 48 modern children are classified as ape-like or nonhuman by the criteria employed in one of these studies and overlap entirely with fossil juvenile dental patterns. The use of these methods to characterize early hominines as “ape-like” or distinctly divergent from humans is thus shown to be unwarranted. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Petite bodies of the “robust” australopithecines

The “robust” australopithecines are often depicted as having large and powerfully built bodies to match their massive masticatory apparatus, but until 1988 the sample of postcranial remains attributed with certainty to this group was very limited. Almost nothing was known about the body of the East African “robust” australopithecine because taxonomic attribution of the postcrania was so uncertain. The body of the South African “robust” australopithecine had to be reconstructed from about a dozen isolated fragments of postcrania. Now a partial skeleton is attributed with confidence to the East African “robust” group along with several isolated bones. The South African sample has more than tripled. Analyses of this vastly expanded sample reveal that a large portion of postcrania attributed to “robust” australopithecines from Swartkrans Member 1 (35%) are from extraordinarily small-bodied individuals similar in size to a modern Pygmy weighing as little as 28 kg. These small elements include parts from the forelimb, spine, and hindlimb. About 22% of these Swartkrans 1 “robust” australopithecines are about the same size as a modern human weighing about 43 kgs and about 43% are larger than this standard but less than or equal to a 54 kg modern human. Approximately the same pattern is true for the Swartkrans 2 hominids, but taxonomic attribution is less certain. All of the Member 3 specimens are similar in size to the 45 kg standard. The partial skeleton of the East African “robust” australopithecine (KNM-ER 1500) has hindlimb joints that would correspond to a modern human of 34 kgs although the actual weight may be 5 to 10 kgs greater judging from shaft robusticity and forelimb size. The largest postcranial element attributed with some certainty to the East African “robust” australopithecine group (the talus, KNM-ER 1464) is about the same overall size as a modern human of 54 kgs, although its tibial facet is slightly smaller. Although many previous studies have hinted at the possibility that “robust” australopithecines had relatively small bodies, the new fossils provide substantial evidence that these creatures ranged from quite small to only moderate in body size relative to modern humans. These were the petite-bodied vegetarian cousins of our ancestors. Sexual dimorphism in body size appears to be greater than that in modern humans, similar to that in Pan, and less than that in Gorilla or Pongo, although such comparisons are of limited value given the small samples, poorly known body proportions, time averaging, and many other problems.     

A reappraisal of variation in hominid mandibular corpus dimensions

The relationship between breadth and height of the mandibular corpus has been investigated in a sample of 77 hominid mandibles. An interspecific allometric increase in robusticity with size occurs between four taxonomic subgroups of Australopithecus, but subgroups of Homo vary in robusticity while differing little in size. Within taxonomic subgroups, variation in breadth is not significantly related to variation in height among the “gracile” australapithecines; however, it is isometrically related to height in the “robust” australopithecines and bears an allometric relationship to height in Homo. Thus, robusticity, in conjunction with size, may provide a useful indicator of the taxonomic affinities of hominid mandibles.     

Australopithecine diet based on a baboon analogy

Recent analyses suggest that both gracile and robust australopithecines could have been “small object feeders” in the sense suggested by Jolly (1970). Data are presented on the diet of Theropithecus gelada, a grassland baboon which has been put forward as a possible analogy for this stage in hominid evolution. The relevance of these data for a reconstruction of australopithecine diet is assessed and the implications of a “small object” diet for the evolution of hunting are discussed.     

Basicranial anatomy of Plio-Pleistocene hominids from East and South Africa

The results of a metrical analysis of the basicranium of 19 Plio-Pleistocene fossil hominid crania are presented. The sample includes crania attributed to Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus boisei, and robustus, and Homo erectus as well as crania whose attribution is still under discussion. These results confirm significant differences between the cranial base patterns of the "gracile" and "robust" australopithecines and the three crania attributed to Homo erectus have a pattern which resembles that of modern humans. None of the crania examined from East Africa sites have base patterns which resemble that of the "gracile" australopithecines. The crania KNM-ER 407 and 732 have patterns which are compatible with them being smaller-bodied females of Australopithecus boisei; KNM-ER 1470 and 1813 have base patterns which most closely resemble that of Homo erectus. The cranial base pattern of KNM-ER 1805 is compatible with its inclusion in either Australopithecus boisei or Homo. When account is taken of the immaturity of Taung, the evidence of its cranial base pattern suggests that if it had reached adulthood it would have resembled the "gracile" australopithecine crania from Sterkfontein and Makapansgat.     

Dental development and the evolution of life history in Hominidae

Development of the dentition is critically integrated into the life cycle in living mammals. Recent work on dental development has given rise to three separate lines of evidence on the evolution of human growth and aging; these three, based on several independent studies, are reviewed and integrated here. First, comparative study of living primate species demonstrates that measures of development (e.g., age of emergence of the first permanent molar) are highly correlated with the morphological attributes brain and body weight (as highly as r = 0.98, N = 21 species). These data predict that small-bodied, small-brained Australopithecus erupted M₁ at 3–3.5 years and possessed a life span comparable to that of a chimpanzee. Second, chronological age at death for three australopithecines who died at or near emergence of M₁ is now estimated as ～3.25 years based on incremental lines in teeth; this differs substantially from expectations based on human growth schedules (5.5–6 years). Third, developmental sequences (assessed by the coefficient of variation of human dental age) observed in gracile Australopithecus and great apes diverge from those of humans to a comparable degree; sequences become more like modern humans after the appearance of the genus Homo. These three lines of evidence agree that the unique rate and pattern of human life history did not exist at the australopithecine stage of human evolution. It is proposed that the life history of early Homo matched no living model precisely and that growth and aging evolved substantially in the Hominidae during the last 2 million years.     

African ape ancestry

It is commonly believed that the australopithecines are more closely related to humans than to African apes. This view is hardly compatible with the biomolecular data which place theHomo/Pan split at the beginning of the australopithecine period. Nothing in the fossil hominid morphology precludes the possibility that some australopithecines were ancestral to gorillas or chimpanzees and others to humans.     

Alleged synapomorphy of the M1/I1 eruption pattern in robust australopithecines and Homo: evidence from high-resolution computed tomography

Ever since Broom and Robinson (1951) published their claim that the eruption pattern of permanent incisors in robust australopithecines was most similar to that of modern man and different from that of gracile australopithecines and apes, the accuracy of this observation has been the subject of periodic debate (e.g., Wallace: Ph.D. thesis, 1972; Dean: Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 67:251-257, 1985; Grine: Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 72:353-359, 1987). Part of the problem is that the developing incisors in one of the specimens most crucial to this argument (SK61) are difficult to visualize clearly by conventional radiographic techniques because of the heavy mineralization in the fossil. This study reanalyzes SK 61 by high-resolution computed tomography in order to contribute to the final resolution of its incisor development. Grine's (op. cit.) assessment of the incisors as the deciduous ones, not the permanent ones, is fully confirmed. This fact, in conjunction with the observation that permanent incisor root formation had only just commenced in this specimen, further weakens the argument of M1/I1 eruption pattern synapomorphy between Homo and robust australopithecines.     

Body weight prediction in early fossil hominids: Towards a taxon-“independent” approach

The choice of a model taxon is crucial when investigating fossil hominids that clearly do not resemble any extant species (such as Australopithecus) or show significant differences from modern human proportions (such as Homo habilis OH 62). An “interhominoid” combination is not adequate either, as scaling with body weight is strongly divergent in African apes and humans for most skeletal predictors investigated here. Therefore, in relation to a study of seven long bone dimensions, a new taxon-“independent” approach is suggested. For a given predictor, its taxonomic “independence” is restricted to the size range over which the body weight-predictor relationship for African apes and humans converges. Different predictors produce converging body weight estimates (BWEs) for different size ranges: taxon-“independent” estimates can be calculated for small- and medium-sized hominids (e. g., for weights below 50 kg) using femoral and tibial dimensions, whereas upper limb bones provide converging results for large hominids (above 50 kg). If the remains of Australopithecus afarensis really belong to one species, the relationship of male (above 60 kg) to female body weight (approximately 30 kg) does not fall within the observed range of modern hominoids. Considering Sts 14 (22 kg) to represent a small-sized Australopithecus africanus, the level of encephalization lies well above that of extant apes. If OH 62 (approximately 25 kg), with limb proportions less human-like than those of australopithecines, indeed represents Homo habilis (which has been questioned previously), an increase in relative brain size would have occurred well before full bipedality, an assumption running counter to current assumptions concerning early human evolution. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Growth changes in measurements of upper facial positioning

Growth changes in the position of the midline upper face are examined for samples of Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and modern humans. Horizontal and vertical distances between nasion and the anterior end of the cribriform plate are plotted against stage of dental development. Kendall's nonparametric correlations between facial positioning and stage of dental development are tested for significance. In African apes, the upper face becomes more projecting and positioned higher relative to the anterior cranial base. The extent of this horizontal and vertical separation reflects primarily facial size. In modern humans, the upper face becomes more projecting but is relatively stable in its vertical position. Comparison of Pan and modern human crania in the youngest dental age category indicates that the upper face of modern humans is positioned lower early in postnatal life. The position of the upper face (glabella) relative to the anterior and posterior cranial base is presented for several fossil hominid crania. The fossil crania are similar to Pan and modern humans in facial projection relative to the anterior cranial base. However, glabella is positioned low in the fossil crania. Total facial projection (relative to hormion) for Sts 5 is similar to the mean for Gorilla. Fossil Homo and robust australopithecine crania display very projecting upper faces. We suggest that the upper face of Homo is projecting due to the length of the anterior cranial fossa, while robust australopithecines possess a thick frontal bone.     

Metacarpal proportions in Australopithecus africanus

Recent work has shown that, despite being craniodentally more derived, Australopithecus africanus had more apelike limb-size proportions than A. afarensis. Here, we test whether the A. africanus hand, as judged by metacarpal shaft and articular proportions, was similarly apelike. More specifically, did A. africanus have a short and narrow first metacarpal (MC1) relative to the other metacarpals? Proportions of both MC breadth and length were considered: the geometric mean (GM) of articular and midshaft measurements of MC1 breadth was compared to those of MC2-4, and MC1 length was compared to MC3 length individually and also to the GM of MC2 and 3 lengths. To compare the extant hominoid sample with an incomplete A. africanus fossil record (11 attributed metacarpals), a resampling procedure imposed sampling constraints on the comparative groups that produced composite intrahand ratios. Resampled ratios in the extant sample are not significantly different from actual ratios based on associated elements, demonstrating the methodological appropriateness of this technique. Australopithecus africanus metacarpals do not differ significantly from the great apes in the comparison of breadth ratios but are significantly greater than chimpanzees and orangutans in both measures of relative length. Conversely, A. africanus has a significantly smaller breadth ratio than modern humans, but does not significantly differ from this group in either measure of relative length. We conclude that the first metacarpals of A. africanus are more apelike in relative breadth while also being more humanlike in relative length, a finding consistent with previous work on A. afarensis hand proportions. This configuration would have likely promoted a high degree of manipulative dexterity, but the relatively slender, apelike first metacarpal suggests that A. africanus did not place the same mechanical demands on the thumb as more recent, stone-tool-producing hominins.     

An analysis of australopithecine dentition

The means and variances of dental length, breadth, and area measurements of South and East African gracile and robust australopithecines are analyzed to determine the existence of statistically significant differences due possibly to different niche utilization and divergent evolution. The study material is divided into four groups: South African gracile, South African robust, East African gracile, and East African robust. Comparison of East and South African graciles, East African robusts and graciles, and South African robusts and graciles shows few significant F-ratios; a high frequency of significance is observed between East and South African robusts. High frequencies of significance are observed in t tests between all groups. Probit analysis, carried out on each of the four groups separately for each measurement, shows little or no significant deviation from normality; similar results are obtained when the groups are combined, suggesting the joint-normal distribution of the total australopithecine sample. High frequencies of significant t tests and low frequencies of significant F-ratios are observed when all graciles are compared with all robusts; yet few significant t tests and many significant F-ratios occur when all East African forms are combined with all South African forms. Observed differences in dental measurements in australopithecines tend to occur on a regional rather than a morphologic basis, especially with regard to robust samples from South and East Africa. While analysis of variance and probit analysis cannot be used to establish taxonomic divisions, results suggest the inappropriateness of dental measurements in establishing an australopithecine taxonomy.     

The posterior border of the sphenoid greater wing and its phylogenetic usefulness in human evolution

The elucidation of patterns of cranial skeletal maturation and growth in fossil hominids is possible not only through dental studies but also by mapping different aspects of ossification in both extant African apes and humans. However, knowledge of normal skeletal development in large samples of extant great apes is flimsy. To remedy this situation, this paper offers an extensive survey and thorough discussion of the ossification of the posterior border of the sphenoid greater wing. Indeed, this area provides much information about basicranial skeletal maturation. We investigate three variants: the absence of the foramen spinosum and the position of both the foramen spinosum and the foramen ovale in relation to the sphenosquamosal suture. Providing original data about humans and 1,425 extant great ape skulls and using a sample of 64 fossil hominids, this study aimed to test whether different ossification patterns occurred during the course of human evolution. The incidence of three derived morphologies located on the posterior border of the sphenoid greater wing increases during human evolution at different geological periods. The evolutionary polarity of these three derived morphologies is assessed by outgroup comparison and ontogenetic methods. During human evolution, there is a clear trend for the foramen spinosum to be present and wholly located on the posterior area of the sphenoid greater wing. Moreover, in all the great ape species and in Australopithecus afarensis, the sphenosquamosal suture may split the foramen ovale. Inversely, the foramen ovale always lies wholly within the sphenoid greater wing in Australopithecus africanus, robust australopithecines, early Homo, H. erectus (and/or H. ergaster), and Homo sapiens. From ontogenetic studies in humans, we conclude that, during human evolution, the ossification of the posterior area of the sphenoid greater wing progressively surrounded the middle meningeal artery (passing through the foramen spinosum) and the small meningeal artery (passing through the foramen ovale). Am J Phys Anthropol 107:387–399, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

The crescent of foramina in Australopithecus afarensis and other early hominids

The crescent of foramina of the cerebral surface of the sphenoid bone (superior orbital fissure, foramen rotundum, foramen ovale, foramen spinosum) differs morphologically in the African great apes and modern humans. New discoveries of Australopithecus afarensis at Hadar, Ethiopia, draw attention to the similarity of the crescent, particularly the “foramen” shape of the superior orbital fissure and its close proximity to the foramen rotundum, in this species, the African apes, and many other primates. Australopithecus africanus also shows this primitive pattern, whereas “robust” australopiths and humans share a configuration in which a true, laterally extended superior orbital fissure intervenes between the greater and lesser wings of the sphenoid and a broad bridge of bone separates the fissure from the foramen rotundum. This shared morphology may be added to the list of putative “robust” australopith-Homo synapomorphies. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Innervation of the human upper primary dentition: Implications for understanding tooth initiation and rethinking growth and eruption patterns

Recent comparisons of humans with apes and early fossil hominids have prompted renewed interest in the study of sequences of dental growth and development. Such comparisons, however, rely on certain assumptions about tooth development and dental homology and the biological reality of distinguishing “deciduous” from “permanent” teeth. In light of earlier suggestions by Schwartz that there might be a correlation between nerves and the stem progenitors of tooth classes, and thus between nerve branch number and number of tooth classes, we studied a large sample of ～ 3 month fetuses to elucidate the nature of nerve branching patterns and the development of the primary dentition (i.e., the “deciduous” incisors, canine, and molars, and the first “permanent” molar). Contrary to expectation, variation in nerve branch patterning was the rule. If nerve fibers do have a role in tooth development, it can only be at the time of initiation, with definitive innervation occurring late in tooth development. In taking into consideration the entire span of tooth development—from initiation to innervation to eruption—and the process by which successional teeth arise (each from the external dental epithelium of a predecessor tooth), we suggest that dividing tooth growth and eruption into patterns of the “deciduous” teeth vs. those of the “permanent” is artificial and that a more meaningful approach would be the study of the entire dentition.     

Early hominid feeding mechanisms.

Three predominant influences mark the evolution of human head form: big brain, erect bipedalism, modified oral apparatus. Confusing interplay between different adaptive requirements of each feature has made explanation of skull structure extremely difficult in the past. It now seems possible to isolate each influence in early fossil forms. A model of mammalian modes of feeding adaptation is proposed in the form of a “Natural Experiment” for tighter analysis of fossil forms. Two forms of australopithecines are recognized, “gracile” and “robust.” Both had closely similar brains, both had erect bipedalism, but each had different masticatory construction. Separation of the first two similar influences isolates the adaptive differences in oral mechanics. The gracile form had a projecting oral apparatus, distinct canine and zygomatic buttresses, moderate jaw-lever development, jaw joint not unlike most higher primates, large unusual anterior teeth, moderately sized posterior teeth. The robust form had a retruded, greatly deepened oral apparatus, “dished-in” face with fused canine and zygomatic buttresses, powerful jaw-lever development, distinctively different joint construction, remarkably small anterior teeth, enormous posterior teeth. Striking evidence for extraordinary jaw movements emerges from these features in the robust form. This is strongly supported by remarkably close parallels in Ursidae: grizzly bear and giant panda.     

A whole new world of ancestors: Eocene anthropoideans from Africa

The last decade has witnessed enormous gains in our knowledge of early anthro-poidean primates,

1 “Anthropoidean” refers to members of the suborder Anthropoidea, whch contaings New and Old world monkeys, apes, and humans. These primates are also often called “simians,” “simiiforms” or “anthropoids;” the latter term is potentially confusing because it has often been used to refer only to the great apes.

the oldest known relatives of monkeys, apes and humans. Recent fossil finds in Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, and Oman, along with the associated geological research at these sites, have radically changed our models of anthro-poidean origins and differentiation. Instead of first appearing as robust-jawed herbivorous primates in the earliest Oligocene, it is now apparent that there was radiation of small-bodied, fruit-and-insect-eating anthropoideans during the Eocene. These early forms included at least two oligopithecines (squirrel-monkey-sized primates with a catarrhine dental formula) and two early “parapithecid monkeys” (three-premolared primates with lumpy, bunodont dentitions). In addition, several smaller species from Algeria and Egypt, ranging in size from pygmy marmosets to tamarins, are not definitely assignable to previously known families. Alongside the early anthropoideans, there are also at least four recently identified prosimian families. The continental Eocene of Africa—for years, little more than a blank on the paieontologi-cal map—now comprises an increasingly productive field source of new data that is important in deciphering phyletic and adaptive aspects of the prosimian-anthropoid transition.     

Post-cranial skeletons of hypothyroid cretins show a similar anatomical mosaic as Homo floresiensis

Human remains, some as recent as 15 thousand years, from Liang Bua (LB) on the Indonesian island of Flores have been attributed to a new species, Homo floresiensis. The definition includes a mosaic of features, some like modern humans (hence derived: genus Homo), some like modern apes and australopithecines (hence primitive: not species sapiens), and some unique (hence new species: floresiensis). Conversely, because only modern humans (H. sapiens) are known in this region in the last 40 thousand years, these individuals have also been suggested to be genetic human dwarfs. Such dwarfs resemble small humans and do not show the mosaic combination of the most complete individuals, LB1 and LB6, so this idea has been largely dismissed. We have previously shown that some features of the cranium of hypothyroid cretins are like those of LB1. Here we examine cretin postcrania to see if they show anatomical mosaics like H. floresiensis. We find that hypothyroid cretins share at least 10 postcranial features with Homo floresiensis and unaffected humans not found in apes (or australopithecines when materials permit). They share with H. floresiensis, modern apes and australopithecines at least 11 postcranial features not found in unaffected humans. They share with H. floresiensis, at least 8 features not found in apes, australopithecines or unaffected humans. Sixteen features can be rendered metrically and multivariate analyses demonstrate that H. floresiensis co-locates with cretins, both being markedly separate from humans and chimpanzees (P<0.001: from analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) over all variables, ANOSIM, global R>0.999). We therefore conclude that LB1 and LB6, at least, are, most likely, endemic cretins from a population of unaffected Homo sapiens. This is consistent with recent hypothyroid endemic cretinism throughout Indonesia, including the nearby island of Bali.