Evolution of the second orangutan: phylogeny and biogeography of hominid origins

Aim To resolve the phylogeny of humans and their fossil relatives (collectively, hominids), orangutans (Pongo) and various Miocene great apes and to present a biogeographical model for their differentiation in space and time. Location Africa, northern Mediterranean, Asia. Methods Maximum parsimony analysis was used to assess phylogenetic relationships among living large‐bodied hominoids (= humans, chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans), and various related African, Asian and European ape fossils. Biogeographical characteristics were analysed for vicariant replacement, main massings and nodes. A geomorphological correlation was identified for a clade we refer to as the ‘dental hominoids’, and this correlation was used to reconstruct their historical geography. Results Our analyses support the following hypotheses: (1) the living large‐bodied hominoids represent a monophyletic group comprising two sister clades: humans + orangutans, and chimpanzees (including bonobos) + gorillas (collectively, the African apes); and (2) the human–orangutan clade (dental hominoids) includes fossil hominids (Homo, australopiths, Orrorin) and the Miocene‐age apes Hispanopithecus, Ouranopithecus, Ankarapithecus, Sivapithecus, Lufengpithecus, Khoratpithecus and Gigantopithecus (also Plio‐Pleistocene of eastern Asia). We also demonstrate that the distributions of living and fossil genera are largely vicariant, with nodes of geographical overlap or proximity between Gigantopithecus and Sivapithecus in Central Asia, and between Pongo, Gigantopithecus, Lufengpithecus and Khoratpithecus in East Asia. The main massing is represented by five genera and eight species in East Asia. The dental hominoid track is spatially correlated with the East African Rift System (EARS) and the Tethys Orogenic Collage (TOC). Main conclusions Humans and orangutans share a common ancestor that excludes the extant African apes. Molecular analyses are compromised by phenetic procedures such as alignment and are probably based on primitive retentions. We infer that the human–orangutan common ancestor had established a widespread distribution by at least 13 Ma. Vicariant differentiation resulted in the ancestors of hominids in East Africa and various primarily Miocene apes distributed between Spain and Southeast Asia (and possibly also parts of East Africa). The geographical disjunction between early hominids and Asian Pongo is attributed to local extinctions between Europe and Central Asia. The EARS and TOC correlations suggest that these geomorphological features mediated establishment of the ancestral range.     

First hominoid from the Miocene of Ethiopia and the evolution of the catarrhine elbow

The first known fossil ape from the early-middle Miocene of Fejej, Ethiopia, is described here. The specimen, FJ-18SB-68, is a partial ulna from a locality dated by ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar and paleomagnetic methods to a minimum age of 16.18 MYA. Compared to a variety of extant and fossil ulnae, FJ-18SB-68 is most similar to Turkanapithecus, Proconsul, and Pliopithecus, and appears to have been an arboreal quadruped with substantial forearm rotational mobility. Among the extant ulnae, canonical variates analysis successfully discriminates platyrrhines from catarrhines and within the latter, cercopithecoids from hominoids. Basal catarrhines (e.g., Aegyptopithecus) are platyrrhine-like in their morphology. Two basic trends appear to evolve from this generalized template: one with less mobile and more habitually pronated forearms, as seen in living and fossil cercopithecoids (including Victoriapithecus and Paracolobus), and another with greater forearm rotational mobility in fossil and modern hominoids. Primitive Miocene apes, including Proconsul, Turkanapithecus, and FJ-18SB-68, share with extant hominoids a more laterally positioned and laterally facing radial notch and an incipient trochlear keel. This morphology, along with a large insertion area for m. brachialis, suggests a departure from the more habitually pronated hand posture of monkeys and may indicate greater climbing abilities in these arboreally quadrupedal apes. Later Miocene apes, such as Oreopithecus and Dryopithecus share additional morphological features with hominoids, indicating considerable suspensory and climbing capabilities. Am J Phys Anthropol 105:257–277, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Fossil primates and the evolution of some primate locomotor systems

Of Paleocene primates only Plesiadapis is complete enough to reconstruct locomotor patterns; it was an arboreal scrambler, perhaps functioning like a large squirrel. Eocene lemurs (adapids) show an array of locomotor types much like certain modern Malagasy lemurs. The European Eocene tarsiid Necrolemur and the American Hemiacodon show the beginning of saltatory specializations in possession of elongated calcaneum and astragalus. Although not a direct anthropoid ancestor Necrolemur seems one of the best models for representing the early locomotor type from which higher primates arose. The Oligocene primates of Egypt (among which are the earliest undoubted pongids) are preserved with a forest fauna. Structures of long bones suggest they were arboreal. A considerable number of Miocene ape bones are known and those of Pliopithecus and Dryopithecus indicate similar adaptations. Of African Miocene forms, Dryopithecus major was a large, gorilla-sized animal, and hence perhaps primarily terrestrial. D. africanus was somewhat more arboreally adapted and a partial brachiator. The Italian fossil Oreopithecus, a coal-swamp dweller, shows indications of bipedality in pelvic structure. Ramapithecus, which is presumably ancestral to Australopithecus, shows palatal and facial patterns much like these later hominids, and probably hence had locomotor patterns more like men than like living apes; its lack of the dental specializations of apes strongly supports this suggestion.     

Longgupo: EarlyHomo colonizer or late plioceneLufengpithecus survivor in south China?

A fragment of mandible and a maxillary incisor of different individuals from the Longgupo Cave, China have been cited as evidence of an early dispersal ofHomo from Africa to Asia. More specifically, these specimens are said to resemble “Homo ergaster” orHomo habilis, rather than the species usually thought to be the first Asian colonizer,Homo erectus. If this supposition is correct, it calls into question which hominid (sensu stricto) first left Africa, and why hominids became a colonizing species. Furthermore, the Longgupo remains have been used to buttress the argument thatHomo erectus evolved uniquely in Asia and was not involved in the origins of modern humans. We question this whole line of argument because the mandibular fragment cannot be distinguished from penecontemporary fossil apes, especially the Late Miocene-Pliocene Chinese genusLufengpithecus, while the incisor is indistinguishable from those of recent and living east Asian people and may be intrusive in the deposit. We believe that the Longgupo mandible represents the relic survival of a Late Miocene ape lineage into a period just prior to the dispersal of hominids into southeastern Asia, with some female dental features that parallel the hominid condition. If the Longgupo mandibular fragment represents a member of theLufengpithecus clade, it demonstrates that hominoids other thanGigantopithecus and the direct ancestor of the orangutan persisted in east Asia into the Late Pliocene, while all other Eurasian large-bodied hominoids disappeared in the Late Miocene.     

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.     

Sivapithecus simonsi,a new species of miocene hominoid,with comments on the phylogenetic status of the ramapithecinae

The Ramapithecinae are an extinct, mainly Miocene group of hominoids, whose relationship to modern taxa is disputed. Some regard them as hominids, while others view them as ancestral toPongo,or even as the group ancestral to both hominids and extant apes. In this paper a systematic revision of Ramapithecinae is undertaken. Sivapithecus sivalensis andRamapithecus punjabicus are considered the same species, with the former name having priority. A new Indian species,Sivapithecus simonsi,is recognized. Ramapithecine anatomy is reviewed and compared with that of gracileAustralopithecus, early and middle MioceneProconsul andDryopithecus, and living pongidsPan, Gorilla, andPongo.Ramapithecines are shown to be much more primitive or “ape-like” than some have argued. Anatomical data are evaluated cladistically with several results. Parallel evolution in the jaws, teeth, and facial structure of hominoids appears to be the rule rather than the exception. Bearing this in mind, nevertheless, from the available evidence of anatomy, ramapithecines are cladistically hominids.     

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.     

Cautious climbing and folivory: a model of hominoid differentation

Despite the large and growing number of Miocene fossil catarrhine taxa, suitable common ancestors of great apes and humans have yet to be agreed upon. Considering a) the conservative and primitive nature of the hominoid molar cusp pattern, and b) the variability of secondary dental features, it is difficult to discern whether a hominoid dentition is primitive, secondarily simplified to the primitive condition or too far derived to be ancestral to any of the living forms. Nonetheless, the inability to recognize a common ancestor is primarly due to the absence of a model of hominoid differentiation that provides a basis for its recognition. Vertical climbing as the limiting component of cautious climbing, explains all of the locomotor anatomy shared by living hominoids. Comparison of the shared derived characters of hominoids to those of forms which have converged on hominoidsi.e colobines, atelines, lorisines, paleopropithecines and sloths suggest that early hominoids were probably folivores. In arboreal forms there is a strong link between a large body size, folivory and cautious climbing. Comparison of craniodental characters of committed folivores to committed frugivores from among each of the compared groups with the exception of lorisines, indicates that many of the distinguishing craniodental characters of humans and great apes are adaptations to folivory. Many of these characters, however, are also present in Jolly's seed eating complex. As such folivory may be the heritage factor which Jolly hypothesized to account for differential reduction of canines in fossilTheropithecus and hominids.     

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.     

Morphometric analysis of hominoid lower molars from Yuanmou of Yunnan Province, China

Shape analyses of cross-sectional mandibular molar morphology, using Euclidean Distance Matrix Analysis, were performed on 79 late Miocene hominoid lower molars from Yuanmou of Yunnan Province, China. These molars were compared to samples of chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan,Lufengpithecus lufengensis, Sivapithecus, Australopithecus afarensis, and human mandibular molars. Our results indicate that the cross-sectional shape of Yuanmou hominoid lower molars is more similar to the great apes that to humans. There are few differences between the Yuanmou,L. lufengensis, andSivapithecus molars in cross-sectional morphology, demonstrating strong affinities between these three late Miocene hominoids. All three of the fossil samples show strong similarities to orangutans. From this, we conclude that these late Miocene hominoids are more closely related to orangutants than to either the African great apes or humans.     

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.     

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.     

Patterns of tooth crown size and shape variation in great apes and humans and species recognition in the hominid fossil record

It has been suggested that patterns of craniodental variation in living hominids (Gorilla, Homo, Pan, and Pongo) may be useful for evaluating variation in fossil hominid assemblages. Using this approach, a fossil sample exhibiting a pattern of variation that deviates from one shared among living taxa would be regarded as taxonomically heterogeneous. Here we examine patterns of tooth crown size and shape variation in great apes and humans to determine 1) if these taxa share a pattern of dental variation, and 2) if such a pattern can reliably discriminate between samples that contain single species and those that contain multiple species. We use parametric and nonparametric correlation methods to establish the degree of pattern similarity among taxa, and randomization tests to assess their statistical significance. The results of this study show that extant hominids do not share a pattern of dental size variation, and thus these taxa cannot be used to generate expectations for patterns of size variation in fossil hominid species. The hominines (Gorilla, Homo, and Pan) do share a pattern of shape variation in the mandibular dentition; however, Pongo is distinct, and thus it is unclear which, if either, pattern should be expected in fossil hominids. Moreover, in this case, most combined-species samples exhibit patterns of shape variation that are similar to those for single hominine species samples. Thus, although a common pattern of shape variation is present in the mandibular dentition, it is not useful for recognizing taxonomically mixed paleontological samples.     

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.     

Meningeal arterial patterns in great apes: Implications for hominid vascular evolution

Arterial meningeal patterns were observed for 100 hemispheres from great ape endocasts (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus). Eight patterns emerged based on the relative contributions to the walls and dura mater of the middle part of the braincase of meningeal arteries that stem from two sources. These arteries enter the braincase through either the orbit (delivering blood from the internal carotid artery) or through the base of the middle cranial fossa (via the middle meningeal artery whose blood comes from the external carotid artery). The three genera of apes manifest different frequencies of the eight, patterns, with orangutans highly dependent on orbital meningeal arteries at one extreme, and chimpanzees showing the greatest reliance on the middle meningeal artery at the other. As was the case in an earlier study of rhesus monkeys, there is a trend across the two genera of African apes for increased mean cranial capacity to be associated with increased reliance on the internal carotid artery for supplying the middle portion of the braincase. However, unlike the case for macaques, this trend does not reach statistical significance in African apes. Because it is rare for humans to manifest significant arterial contributions from the orbit to the middle cranial fossa, the comparative data on monkeys, apes, and humans suggest that, during the course of vascular evolution in Homo, the middle meningeal artery eventually took over supply of the entire middle cranial fossa. This hypothesis should be tested in the hominid fossil record. Earlier work on meningeal arterial patterns in apes has traditionally relied on Adachi's system that was determined from humans and focuses on the origin of the middle branch of the middle meningeal artery. As a result, the extensive orbital contributions to the middle portion of the braincase that characterize apes were not recognized and the eight patterns described in this paper were often erroneously assigned to the three patterns that adequately describe only humans. Adachi's system should therefore be abandoned for nonhuman primates and early hominids. A correct understanding of meningeal arterial evolution cannot be achieved until the orbital contributions to the meningeal arteries are recognized and incorporated into an evolutionary study that spans from apes to fossil hominids to living people. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

First partial face and upper dentition of the Middle Miocene hominoid Dryopithecus fontani from Abocador de Can Mata (Vallès‐Penedès Basin,Catalonia, NE Spain): Taxonomic and phylogenetic implications

A well‐preserved 11.8‐million‐years‐old lower face attributed to the seminal taxon Dryopithecus fontani (Primates, Hominidae) from the Catalan site ACM/C3‐Ae of the Hostalets de Pierola area (Vallès‐Penedès Basin, Catalonia, NE Spain) is described. The new data indicate that D. fontani is distinct at the genus level from Late Miocene European taxa previously attributed to Dryopithecus, which are here reassigned to Hispanopithecus. The new facial specimen also suggests that D. fontani and the Middle Miocene Pierolapithecus catalaunicus are not synonymous. Anatomical and morphometric analyses further indicate that the new specimen shows a combination of lower facial features—hitherto unknown in Miocene hominoids—that resembles the facial pattern of Gorilla, thus providing the first nondental evidence of gorilla‐like lower facial morphology in the fossil record. Considering the current evidence, the gorilla‐like facial pattern of D. fontani is inferred to be derived relative to previously known stem hominids, and might indicate that this taxon is either an early member of the Homininae or, alternatively, a stem hominid convergent with the lower facial pattern of Gorilla. The biogeographic implications of both alternatives are discussed. This new finding in the Hostalets de Pierola section reinforces the importance of this area for understanding the elusive question of the Middle Miocene origin and early radiation of great apes. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

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.     

Paleoenvironmental basis of cognitive evolution in great apes

A bias favoring tree-dominated habitats and ripe-fruit frugivory has persisted in great ape evolution since the early Miocene. This bias is indicated by fossil ape paleoenvironments, molar morphology, dental microwear, the geographic pattern of extinctions, and extant apes' reliance on wooded settings. The ephemeral aspect of high-quality fruit has placed a premium on cognitive and social means of finding and defending food sources, and appears related to great apes' affinity since the Miocene for wooded, fruit-rich environments. These habitats have, however, undergone a severe withdrawal toward the low latitudes of Africa and Southeast Asia since the late Miocene, corresponding to a decline in the diversity of great apes beginning 9.5 million years ago. Plio-Pleistocene records imply that wooded settings of Africa and SE Asia were prone to substantial fragmentation and coalescence. Once apes were confined to equatorial settings, therefore, habitat instability heightened the spatial/temporal uncertainty of ripe-fruit sources. Prolonged learning, the assignment of attributes to distant places, mental representation, and reliance on fallback foods were all favored in this dynamic environmental context. These abilities helped sustain forest frugivory in most lineages. Fluid social grouping afforded the animals opportunities to locate ephemeral foods in continuous and fragmented forests. Fission-fusion grouping also magnified the problems of object impermanence (of individuals) and dispersion manifested by food sources in the ecological realm. Thus the spatial and temporal dynamics of fruit and wooded habitats since the Miocene are reflected in important components of great ape cognition, foraging, and sociality. In contrast to great apes, cercopithecoid monkeys have increased their plant dietary options and diversified in seasonal environments since the late Miocene. Early hominins eventually severed the habitat bias that characterized the evolution of great apes, and later expanded into diverse environments.