Show simple item record

Dental metric assessment of the Omo fossils: Implications for the phylogenetic position of Australopithecus africanus

dc.contributor.authorHunt, Kevin D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVitzthum, Virginia J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-04-28T15:59:12Z
dc.date.available2006-04-28T15:59:12Z
dc.date.issued1986-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationHunt, Kevin; Vitzthum, Virginia J. (1986)."Dental metric assessment of the Omo fossils: Implications for the phylogenetic position of Australopithecus africanus ." American Journal of Physical Anthropology 71(2): 141-155. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/37635>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0002-9483en_US
dc.identifier.issn1096-8644en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/37635
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=3099582&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThe discovery of Australopithecus afarensis has led to new interpretations of hominid phylogeny, some of which reject A. africanus as an ancestor of Homo. Analysis of buccolingual tooth crown dimensions in australopithecines and Homo species by Johanson and White (Science 202 :321–330, 1979) revealed that the South African gracile australopithecines are intermediate in size between Laetoli/Hadar hominids and South African robust hominids. Homo , on the other hand, displays dimensions similar to those of A. afarensis and smaller than those of other australopithecines. These authors conclude, therefore, that A. africanus is derived in the direction of A. robustus and is not an ancestor of the Homo clade. However, there is a considerable time gap (ca. 800,000 years) between the Laetoli/Hadar specimens and the earliest Homo specimens; “gracile” hominids from Omo fit into this chronological gap and are from the same geographic area. Because the early specimens at Omo have been designated A. afarensis and the later specimens classified as Homo habilis , Omo offers a unique opportunity to test hypotheses concerning hominid evolution, especially regarding the phylogenetic status of A. africanus. Comparisons of mean cheek teeth breadths disclosed the significant (P < 0.05) differences between the Omo sample and the Laetoli/Hadar fossils (P 4 , M 2 , and M 3 ), the Homo fossils (P 3 , P 4 , M 1 , M 2 , and M 1 ), and A. africanus (M 3 ). Of the several possible interpretations of these data, it appears that the high degree of similarity between the Omo sample and the South African gracile australopithecine material warrants considering the two as geographical variants of A. africanus. The geographic, chronologic, and metric attributes of the Omo sample argue for its lineal affinity with A. afarensis and Homo. In conclusion, a consideration of hominid postcanine dental metrics provides no basis for removing A. africanus from the ancestry of the Homo lineage.en_US
dc.format.extent1394185 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherLife and Medical Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherAnthropologyen_US
dc.titleDental metric assessment of the Omo fossils: Implications for the phylogenetic position of Australopithecus africanusen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelAnthropologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109en_US
dc.identifier.pmid3099582en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/37635/1/1330710203_ftp.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330710203en_US
dc.identifier.sourceAmerican Journal of Physical Anthropologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.