Fossil Homo femur from Berg Aukas,northern Namibia

The proximal half of a hominid femur was recovered from deep within a paleokarst feature at the Berg Aukas mine, northern Namibia. The femur is fully mineralized, but it is not possible to place it in geochrono logical context. It has a very large head, an exceptionally thick diaphyseal cortex, and a very low collodiaphyseal angle, which serve to differentiate it from Holocene homologues. The femur is not attributable to Australopithecus, Paranthropus, or early Homo (i.e., H. habilis sensu lato). Homo erectus femora have a relatively longer and AP flatter neck, and a shaft that exhibits less pilaster than the Berg Aukas specimen. Berg Aukas also differs from early modern femora in several features, including diaphyseal cortical thickness and the degree of subtrochanteric AP flattening. The massive diaphyseal cortex of Berg Aukas finds its closest similarity within archaic H. sapiens (e.g., Castel di Guido) and H. erectus (e.g., KNM-ER 736) samples. It has more cortical bone at midshaft than any other specimen, although relative cortical thickness and the asymmetry of its cross-sectional disposition at this level are comparable with those of other Pleistocene fem ora. The closest morphological comparisons with Berg Aukas are in archaic (i.e., Middle Pleistocene) H. sapiens and Neandertal samples. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

New evidence of the genus Homo from East Rudolf, Kenya. I

Three new fossil hominid specimens that were recovered in 1970 from the Plio-Pleistocene sediments to the east of Lake Rudolf are described. They include the left side of the body and the symphyseal region of an adult mandible that contains three molar teeth (KNM-ER 730), an edentulous left-sided mandibular fragment (KNM-ER 731) and the shaft of a left femur (KNM-ER 737). The specimens are described in anatomical detail, illustrated and selected measurements given. It is concluded that they should be attributed to the genus Homo sp. indet. Detailed comparative studies will be published in due course.     

A new species of the genusHomo (primates: Hominidae) from the Plio/Pleistocene of Koobi Fora,in Kenya

Reassessment of the hominine cranium, KNM-ER 1813, from the Plio/Pleistocene of Koobi Fora, in Kenya, shows that it is not a small-brained, extreme female variant ofH. habilis Leakey, Tobias, & Napier, 1964. Its cranial and dental morphology, morphometrics, and proportions do not conform with eitherH. habilis orH. antiquus Ferguson, 1984. On the basis of its distinctive morphological pattern and mensural gaps which distinguish it fromH. habilis andH. antiquus, the cranium KNM-ER 1813 is described as a common variant representing a male of a small-brained, intermediate population linkingH. habilis 1.83 Myr BP withH. antiquus 2.9 Myr BP, and a new paleospecies of the genusHomo. A key to the Homininae is provided and the phylogenetic relationship of KNM-ER 1813 toH. habilis andH. antiquus is discussed. This paper is dedicated to the memory of my wife,Grace, whose assistance will be sorely missed.     

A comparative study of frontal bone morphology among Pleistocene hominin fossil groups

Features of the frontal bone that are conventionally used to distinguish among fossil hominin groups were quantitatively examined. Fifty-five fossil crania dating from the early to the late Pleistocene were analyzed. Using a modified pantograph, outlines of the frontal bone were collected along the midsagittal and two parasagittal planes. The profile from nasion to bregma, as well as two profiles above the medial and lateral sections of the orbit, respectively, extending from the orbital margin to the coronal suture were traced. The outlines were measured using Elliptical Fourier Function Analysis (EFFA), which enabled a quantification of aspects of the frontal bone that have historically been described primarily in nonmetric or linear terms. Four measurements were obtained: 1) overall morphology as expressed in the Fourier harmonic amplitudes; 2) maximum projection of the supraorbital torus at three points along the browridge (glabella and the medial and lateral aspects of the torus above the orbit); 3) maximum distance of the frontal squama from the frontal chord, capturing forehead curvature; and 4) nasion-bregma chord length. The results indicate that the midsagittal profile is significantly different among all Pleistocene groups in analyses that include both size and shape, as well as size-adjusted data. Homo erectus is significantly different from the late Pleistocene groups (Neandertals and early modern H. sapiens) in glabellar projection. Anatomically modern humans are significantly different from all other groups in both raw and size-standardized analyses of all three outlines that captured overall morphology, as well as forehead curvature and lateral supraorbital torus prominence, and middle Pleistocene Homo are significantly different in both medial and lateral overall parasagittal form. However, for the majority of analyses there were no significant differences among the Pleistocene archaic groups in supraorbital torus projection, frontal squama curvature, nasion-bregma chord length, or overall frontal bone morphology.     

Locomotor anatomy and biomechanics of the Dmanisi hominins

The Dmanisi hominins inhabited a northern temperate habitat in the southern Caucasus, approximately 1.8 million years ago. This is the oldest population of hominins known outside of Africa. Understanding the set of anatomical and behavioral traits that equipped this population to exploit their seasonal habitat successfully may shed light on the selection pressures shaping early members of the genus Homo and the ecological strategies that permitted the expansion of their range outside of the African subtropics. The abundant stone tools at the site, as well as taphonomic evidence for butchery, suggest that the Dmanisi hominins were active hunters or scavengers. In this study, we examine the locomotor mechanics of the Dmanisi hind limb to test the hypothesis that the inclusion of meat in the diet is associated with an increase in walking and running economy and endurance. Using comparative data from modern humans, chimpanzees, and gorillas, as well as other fossil hominins, we show that the Dmanisi hind limb was functionally similar to modern humans, with a longitudinal plantar arch, increased limb length, and human-like ankle morphology. Other aspects of the foot, specifically metatarsal morphology and tibial torsion, are less derived and similar to earlier hominins. These results are consistent with hypotheses linking hunting and scavenging to improved walking and running performance in early Homo. Primitive retentions in the Dmanisi foot suggest that locomotor evolution continued through the early Pleistocene.     

Variation among early Homo crania from Olduvai Gorge and the Koobi Fora region

Fossils recognized as early Homo were discovered first at Olduvai Gorge in 1959 and 1960. Teeth, skull parts and hand bones representing three individuals were found in Bed I, and more material followed from Bed I and lower Bed II. By 1964, L.S.B. Leakey, P.V. Tobias, and J.R. Napier were ready to name Homo habilis. But almost as soon as they had, there was confusion over the hypodigm of the new species. Tobias himself suggested that OH 13 resembles Homo erectus from Java, and he noted that OH 16 has teeth as large as those of Australopithecus. By the early 1970s, however, Tobias had put these thoughts behind him and returned to the opinion that all of the Olduvai remains are Homo habilis. At about this time, important discoveries began to flow from the Koobi Fora region in Kenya. To most observers, crania such as KNM-ER 1470 confirmed the presence of Homo in East Africa at an early date. Some of the other specimens were problematical. A.C. Walker and R.E. Leakey raised the possibility that larger skulls including KNM-ER 1470 differ significantly from smaller-brained, small-toothed individuals such as KNM-ER 1813. Other workers emphasized that there are differences of shape as well as size among the hominids from Koobi Fora. There is now substantial support for the view that in the Turkana and perhaps also in the Olduvai assemblages, there is more variation than would be expected among male and female conspecifics. One way to approach this question of sorting would be to compare all of the new fossils against the original material from Olduvai which was used to characterize Homo habilis in 1964. A problem is that the Olduvai remains are fragmentary, and none of them provides much information about vault form or facial structure. An alternative is to work first with the better crania, even if these are from other sites. I have elected to treat KNM-ER 1470 and KNM-ER 1813 as key individuals. Comparisons are based on discrete anatomy and measurements. Metric results are displayed with ratio diagrams, by which similarity in proportions for several skulls can be assessed in respect to a single specimen selected as a standard. Crania from Olduvai examined in this way are generally smaller than KNM-ER 1470, although OH 7 has a relatively long parietal. In the Koobi Fora assemblage, there is variation in brow thickness, frontal flattening and parietal shape relative to KNM-ER 1470. These comparisons are instructive, but vault proportions do not help much with the sorting process. Contrasts in the face are much more striking. Measurements treated in ratio diagrams show that both KNM-ER 1813 and OH 24 have relatively short faces with low cheek bones, small orbits and low nasal openings. Also, they display more projection of the midfacial region, just below the nose. This is not readily interpreted to be a female characteristic, since in most hominoid primates the females tend to have flatter lower faces than the males. The obvious size differences among these individuals have usually been interpreted as sex dimorphism, but, in fact, two taxa may be sampled at Olduvai and in the Turkana basin at the beginning of the Pleistocene. One large-brained group made up of KNM-ER 1470, several other Koobi Fora specimens, and probably OH 7, can be called Homo habilis. If these skulls go with femora such as KNM-ER 1481 and the KNM-ER3228 hip, then this species is close in postcranial anatomy to Homo erectus. The other taxon, including small-brained individuals such as KNM-ER 1813 and probably OH 13, seems also to be Homo rather than Australopithecus. If the OH 62 skeleton is part of this assemblage, then the small hominids have postcranial proportions unlike those of Homo erectus. However, it is too early to point unequivocally to one or the other of these groups as the ancestors of later humans. Both differ from Homo erectus in important ways, and both need to be better understood before we can map the earliest history of the Homo clade. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

New evidence of the genus Homo from East Rudolf,Kenya (III)

A new fossil hominid partial skeleton (KNM-ER 803) that was discovered from the Plio-Pleistocene sediments to the east of Lake Rudolf is described. It includes parts of a femur, two tibiae, an ulna, two radii, a third metatarsal and several toe bones. There are also two teeth, an upper canine and an upper central incisor. A second new fossil hominid (KNM-ER 164) is represented by a parietal fragment, two vertebrae and some hand bones. A third is represented by a massive left femur (KNM-ER 999). The specimens are described in anatomical detail, some are illustrated and selected measurements are given. It is concluded that they should be attributed to the genus Homo sp. indet. Detailed comparative studies will be published in due course.     

CRANIAL SIZE VARIATION AND LINEAGE DIVERSITY IN EARLY PLEISTOCENE HOMO

A recent article in this journal concluded that a sample of early Pleistocene hominin crania assigned to genus Homo exhibits a pattern of size variation that is time dependent, with specimens from different time periods being more different from each other, on average, than are specimens from the same time period. The authors of this study argued that such a pattern is not consistent with the presence of multiple lineages within the sample, but rather supports the hypothesis that the fossils represent an anagenetically evolving lineage (i.e., an evolutionary species). However, the multiple‐lineage models considered in that study do not reflect the multiple‐species alternatives that have been proposed for early Pleistocene Homo. Using simulated data sets, I show that fossil assemblages that contain multiple lineages can exhibit the time‐dependent pattern of variation specified for the single‐lineage model under certain conditions, particularly when temporal overlap among fossil specimens attributed to the lineages is limited. These results do not reject the single‐lineage hypothesis, but they do indicate that rejection of multiple lineages in the early Pleistocene Homo fossil record is premature, and that other sources of variation, such as differences in cranial shape, should be considered.     

Biomechanics of the hip and birth in early Homo

A complex of traits in the femur and pelvis of Homo ereclus and early “erectus-like” specimens has been described, but never satisfactorily explained. Here the functional relationships between pelvic and femoral structure in humans are explored using both theoretical biomechanical models and empirical tests within modern samples of diverse body form (Pecos Amerindians, East Africans). Results indicate that a long femoral neck increases mediolateral bending of the femoral diaphysis and decreases gluteal abductor and hip joint reaction forces. Increasing biacetabular breadth along with femoral neck length further increases M-L bending of the femoral shaft and maintains abductor and joint reaction forces at near “normal” levels. When compared to modern humans, Homo erectus and early “erectus-like” specimens are characterized by a long femoral neck and greatly increased M-L relative to A-P bending strength of the femoral shaft, coupled with no decrease in hip joint size and a probable increase in abductor force relative to body size. All of this strongly suggests that biacetabular breadth as well as femoral neck length was relatively large in early Homo. Several features preserved in early Homo partial hip bones also indicate that the true (lower) pelvis was very M-L broad, as well as A-P narrow. This is similar to the lower pelvic shape of australopithecines and suggests that nonrotational birth, in which the newborn's head is oriented transversely through the pelvic outlet, characterized early Homo as well as Australopithecus. Because M-L breadth of the pelvis is constrained by other factors, this may have limited increases in cranial capacity within Homo until rotational birth was established during the late Middle Pleistocene. During or after the transition to rotational birth biacetabular breadth decreased, reducing the body weight moment arm about the hip and allowing femoral neck length (abductor moment arm) to also decrease, both of which reduced M-L bending of the proximal femoral shaft. Variation in femoral structural properties within early Homo and other East African Early Pleistocene specimens has several taxonomic and phylogenetic implications. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Geometric morphometric analyses of hominid proximal femora: Taxonomic and phylogenetic considerations

The proximal femur has long been used to distinguish fossil hominin taxa. Specifically, the genus Homo is said to be characterized by larger femoral heads, shorter femoral necks, and more lateral flare of the greater trochanter than are members of the genera Australopithecus or Paranthropus. Here, a digitizing arm was used to collect landmark data on recent human (n=82), chimpanzee (n=16), and gorilla (n=20) femora and casts of six fossil hominin femora in order to test whether one can discriminate extant and fossil hominid (sensu lato) femora into different taxa using three-dimensional (3D) geometric morphometric analyses. Twenty proximal femoral landmarks were chosen to best quantify the shape differences between hominin genera. These data were first subjected to Procrustes analysis. The resultant fitted coordinate values were then subjected to PCA. PC scores were used to compute a dissimilarity matrix that was subjected to cluster analyses. Results indicate that one can easily distinguish Homo, Pan, and Gorilla from each other based on proximal femur shape, and one can distinguish Pliocene and Early Pleistocene hominin femora from those of recent Homo. It is more difficult to distinguish Early Pleistocene Homo proximal femora from those of Australopithecus or Paranthropus, but cluster analyses appear to separate the fossil hominins into four groups: an early australopith cluster that is an outlier from other fossil hominins; and two clusters that are sister taxa to each other: a late australopith/Paranthropus group and an early Homo group.     

Does KNM-ER 1481A establish Homo erectus at 2.0 myr BP?

Kennedy (1983) has proposed that the KNM-ER 1481A femur represents Homo erectus and establishes the presence of this species at ca. 2.0.myr BP. A reconsideration of her criteria for taxonomic attribution indicates that its morphology implies only that it is an archaic member of the genus Homo. Its geochronological position, in conjunction with its morphology, suggest that it is best referred to H. habilis.     

Postcranial robusticity in Homo. I: Temporal trends and mechanical interpretation

Temporal trends in postcranial robusticity within the genus Homo are explored by comparing cross-sectional diaphyseal and articular properties of the femur, and to a more limited extent, the humerus, in samples of Recent and earlier Homo. Using both theoretical mechanical models and empirical observations within Recent humans, scaling relationships between structural properties and bone length are developed. The influence of body shape on these relationships is considered. These scaling factors are then used to standardize structural properties for comparisons with pre-Recent Homo (Homo sp. and H. erectus, archaic H. sapiens, and early modern H. sapiens). Results of the comparisons lead to the following conclusions: 1) There has been a consistent, exponentially increasing decline in diaphyseal robusticity within Homo that has continued from the early Pleistocene through living humans. Early modern H. sapiens are closer in shaft robusticity to archaic H. sapiens than they are to Recent humans. The increase in diaphyseal robusticity in earlier Homo is a result of both medullary contraction and periosteal expansion relative to Recent humans. 2) There has been no similar temporal decline in articular robusticity within Homo–relative femoral head size is similar in all groups and time periods. Thus, articular to shaft proportions are different in pre-Recent and Recent Homo. 3) These findings are most consistent with a mechanical explanation (declining mechanical loading of the postcranium), that acted primarily through developmental rather than genetic means. The environmental (behavioral) factors that brought about the decline in postcranial robusticity in Homo are ultimately linked to increases in brain size and cultural-technological advances, although changes in robusticity lag behind changes in cognitive capabilities. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Taxonomic affinity of the early Homo cranium from Swartkrans,South Africa

A quantitative analysis that employs randomization methods and distance statistics has been undertaken in an attempt to clarify the taxonomic affinities of the partial Homo cranium (SK 847) from Member 1 of the Swartkrans Formation. Although SK 847 has been argued to represent early H. erectus, exact randomization tests reveal that the magnitude of differences between it and two crania that have been attributed to that taxon (KNM-ER 3733 and KNM-WT 15000) is highly unlikely to be encountered in a modern human sample drawn from eastern and southern Africa. Some of the variables that differentiate SK 847 from the two early H. erectus crania (e. g., nasal breadth, frontal breadth, mastoid process size) have been considered to be relevant characters in the definition of that taxon. Just as the significant differences between SK 847 and the two early H. erectus crania make attribution of the Swartkrans specimen to that taxon unlikely, the linkage of SK 847 to KNM-ER 1813, and especially Stw 53, suggests that the Swartkrans cranium may have its closest affinity with H. habilis sensu lato. Differences from KNM-ER 1813, however, hint that the South African fossils may represent a species of early Homo that has not been sampled in the Plio-Pleistocene of eastern Africa. The similarity of SK 847 and Stw 53 may support faunal evidence which suggests that Sterkfontein Member 5 and Swartkrans Member 1 are of similar geochronological age. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Brief communication: The human humerus from the Broken Hill Mine, Kabwe, Zambia

The distal half of a right human humerus (E.898), recovered ex situ in 1925 by Hrdli?ka at the Broken Hill Mine, Kabwe, Zambia, has figured prominently in assessments of Middle Pleistocene Homo postcranial variation and of the phylogenetic polarity and functional anatomy of Pleistocene Homo upper limb morphology. Reassessment of distal humeral features that distinguish modern human and some archaic Homo humeri, especially relative olecranon breadth and medial and lateral pillar thicknesses, confirm previous studies placing it morphologically close to recent humans, as well as possibly to Early Pleistocene Homo. However, it completely lacks stratigraphic context, and there is faunal and archeological evidence for human activity at Broken Hill from the Middle Pleistocene to the Holocene. Given its uncertain geological age and modern human morphology, the Broken Hill E.898 humerus should not be used in analyses of Pleistocene humans until it is securely dated. Am J Phys Anthropol 149:312–317, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The history of the genusHomo

The genusHomo was established by Carolus Linnaeus in 1758. During the course of the past 150 years, the addition of fossil species to the genusHomo has resulted in a genus that, according to the taxonomic interpretation, could span as much time as 2.5 Myr, and include as many as ten species. This paper reviews the fossil evidence for each of the species involved, and sets out the case for their inclusion inHomo. It suggests that while the case for the inclusion of some species in the genus (e.g.Homo erectus) is well-supported, in the case of two of the species,Homo habilis andHomo rudolfensis, the case for their inclusion is much weaker. Neither the cladistic evidence, nor evidence about adaptation suggest a particularly close relationship with laterHomo.     

Morphometric variation in Plio-Pleistocene hominid distal humeri

The magnitude and meaning of morphological variation among Plio-Pleistocene hominid distal humeri have been recurrent points of disagreement among paleoanthropologists. Some researchers have found noteworthy differences among fossil humeri that they believe merit taxonomic separation, while others question the possiblity of accurately sorting these fossils into different species and/or functional groups. Size and shape differences among fossil distal humeri are evaluated here to determine whether the magnitude and patterns of these differences can be observed within large-bodied, living hominoids. Specimens analyzed in this study have been assigned to various taxa (Australopithecus afarensis, A. africanus, A. anamensis, Paranthropus, and early Homo) and include AL 288-1m, AL 288-1s, AL 137-48a, AL 322-1, Gomboré IB 7594, TM 1517, KNM-ER 739, KNM-ER 1504, KMN-KP 271 (Kanapoi), and Stw 431. Five extant hominoid populations are sampled to provide a standard by which to consider differences found between the fossils, including two modern human groups (Native American and African American), one group of Pan troglodytes, and two subspecies of Gorilla gorilla (G. g. beringei, G. g. gorilla). All possible pairwise d values (average Euclidean distances) are calculated within each of the reference populations using an exact randomization procedure. This is done using both raw linear measurements as well as scale-free shape data created as ratios of each measurement to the geometric mean. Differences between each pair of fossil humeri are evaluated by comparing their d values to the distribution of d values found within each of the reference populations. Principal coordinate analysis and an unweighted pair group method with arithmetic averages (UPGMA) cluster analysis are utilized to further assess similarities and differences among the fossils. Finally, canonical variates analysis and discriminant analysis are employed using all hominoid samples in order to control for correlations among variables and to identify those variables that discriminate among groups; possible affinities of individual fossils with specific extant species are also examined. The largest size differences, those between the small Hadar specimens and the two largest fossils (KNM-ER 739, IB 7594), can be accommodated easily within the ranges of variation of the two Gorilla samples, but are extreme relative to the other reference samples. The d values between most of the fossils based on shape data, with the notable exception of those associated with KNM-ER 739 and KNM-ER 1504, can be sampled safely within all five reference samples. Subsequent analyses further support the inference that KNM-ER 739 and KNM-ER 1504 are different from the other hominid humeri and possess a unique total morphometric pattern. In overall shape, the distal humeri of the other fossils (non-Koobi Fora) are most similar to living chimpanzees. The distal humerus of Paranthropus from Kromdraai (TM 1517e) is most similar to one of the Hadar specimens of A. afarensis (AL 137-48a), whereas the first specimen of A. africanus from Sterkfontein (Stw 431) is not closely linked to any of the other australopithecines. The A. anamensis humerus from Kanapoi exhibits no special affinities to A. afarensis or to modern humans. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Human evolution at the Matuyama‐Brunhes boundary

The cranial morphology of fossil hominids between the end of the Early Pleistocene and the beginning of the Middle Pleistocene provides crucial evidence to understand the distribution in time and space of the genus Homo. This evidence is critical for evaluating the competing models regarding diversity within our genus. The debate focuses on two alternative hypotheses, one basically anagenetic and the other cladogenetic. The first suggests that morphological change is so diffused, slow, and steady that it is meaningless to apply species names to segments of a single lineage. The second is that the morphological variation observed in the fossil record can best be described as a number of distinct species that are not connected in a linear ancestor‐descendant sequence. Today much more fossil evidence is available than was in the past to test these alternative hypotheses, as well as intermediate variants. Special attention must be paid to Africa because this is the most probable continental homeland for both the origin of the genus Homo (around 2.5–2 Ma), 1 as well as the site, two million or so years later, of the emergence of the species H. sapiens. 2 However, the African fossil record is very poorly represented between 1 Ma and 600 ka. Europe furnishes recent discoveries in this time range around the Matuyama‐Brunhes chron boundary (780,000 years ago), a period for which, at present, we have no noteworthy fossil evidence in Africa or the Levant. Two penecontemporaneous sources of European fossil evidence, the Ceprano calvaria (Italy) 3 and the TD6 fossil assemblage of Atapuerca (Spain) 4 are thus of great interest for testing hypotheses about human evolution in the fundamental time span bracketed between the late Early and the Middle Pleistocene. This paper is based on a phenetic approach to cranial variation aimed at reviewing the Early‐to‐Middle Pleistocene trajectories of human evolution. The focus of the paper is on neither the origin nor the end of the story of the genus Homo, but rather its chronological and phylogenetic core. Elucidation of the evolutionary events that happened around 780 ka during the transition from the Early to Middle Pleistocene is one of the new frontiers for human paleontology, and is critical for understanding the processes that ultimately led to the origin of H. sapiens.     

Brain expansion and rotation during hominid evolution

The question of how an endocast (or brain) is oriented within a skull that is positioned in the Frankfurt plane is investigated for African great apes, early hominids STS 71, KNM-ER 1813 and KNM-ER 1470, and modern humans using a 3SPACE digitizer. Our results suggest that, rather than being positioned in the orientation in which isolated brains (endocasts) are conventionally illustrated, brains within skulls that are oriented in the Frankfurt plane tend to be inclined so that the frontal pole is higher than the occipital pole, especially inHomo. These preliminary findings have implications for interpreting early hominid endocasts such as that of AL 162-28.     

Insights into the evolution of child growth from Lower Pleistocene humeri at Venta Micena (Orce, Granada province, Spain)

Well-defined human anatomical characteristics are present on humeral fragments of a child (VM-1960) and an adult (VM-3691) from early Lower Pleistocene sediments at Venta Micena: both have narrower medullary cavities than in AfricanHomo erectus/ergaster (KNM-ER 1808), and the child’s humeral shaft is longer than in recent 8-to-9-year-olds even though its muscle markings are less pronounced than theirs. We infer that exposure of growing children to high mechanical loading favoured Plio-Pleistocene skeletal evolution inHomo of humeral robusticity and elongation. Precocious childhood arm-bone development, occurring before pubertal growth-spurt increments in shoulder and arm muscularity, implies a different balance from today between prepubertal hormonal influences exerted on ossification (growth hormone and somatomedin C) and the adolescent gonadal hormones of our modern growth spurt which may have still been in the process of evolution by natural selection.     

Human evolution

The common ancestor of modern humans and the great apes is estimated to have lived between 5 and 8 Myrs ago, but the earliest evidence in the human, or hominid, fossil record is Ardipithecus ramidus, from a 4.5 Myr Ethiopian site. This genus was succeeded by Australopithecus, within which four species are presently recognised. All combine a relatively primitive postcranial skeleton, a dentition with expanded chewing teeth and a small brain. The most primitive species in our own genus, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis, are little advanced over the australopithecines and with hindsight their inclusion in Homo may not be appropriate. The first species to share a substantial number of features with later Homo is Homo ergaster, or ‘early African Homo erectus’, which appears in the fossil record around 2.0 Myr. Outside Africa, fossil hominids appear as Homo erectus-like hominids, in mainland Asia and in Indonesia close to 2 Myr ago; the earliest good evidence of ‘archaic Homo’ in Europe is dated at between 600–700 Kyr before the present. Anatomically modern human, or Homo sapiens, fossils are seen first in the fossil record in Africa around 150 Kyr ago. Taken together with molecular evidence on the extent of DNA variation, this suggests that the transition from ‘archiac’ to ‘modern’ Homo may have taken place in Africa.