CT-Based Study of Internal Structure of the Anterior Pillar in Extinct Hominins and Its Implications For the Phylogeny of Robust Australopithecus

Department of Anthropology, University College London, London WC1H 0BW, United Kingdom.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Impact Factor: 9.67). 09/2011; 108(39):16200-5. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1105844108
Source: PubMed


The phylogeny of the early African hominins has long been confounded by contrasting interpretations of midfacial structure. In particular, the anterior pillar, an externally prominent bony column running vertically alongside the nasal aperture, has been identified as a homology of South African species Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus robustus. If the anterior pillar is a true synapomorphy of these two species, the evidence for a southern African clade of Australopithecus would be strengthened, and support would be given to the phylogenetic hypothesis of an independent origin for eastern and southern African "robust" australopith clades. Analyses of CT data, however, show that the internal structure of the circumnasal region is strikingly different in the two South African australopith species. In A. africanus the anterior pillar is a hollow column of cortical bone, whereas in A. robustus it is a column of dense trabecular bone. Although Australopithecus boisei usually lacks an external pillar, it has internal morphology identical to that seen in A. robustus. This result supports the monophyly of the "robust" australopiths and suggests that the external similarities seen in the South African species are the result of parallel evolution.

Download full-text


Available from: Brian Villmoare, Mar 11, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Determining the diet of an extinct species is paramount in any attempt to reconstruct its paleoecology. Because the distribution and mechanical properties of food items may impact postcranial, cranial, mandibular, and dental morphologies related to their procurement, ingestion, and mastication, these anatomical attributes have been studied intensively. However, while mechanical environments influence skeletal and dental features, it is not clear to what extent they dictate particular morphologies. Although biomechanical explanations have been widely applied to extinct hominins in attempts to retrodict dietary proclivities, morphology may say as much about what they were capable of eating, and perhaps more about phylogenetic history, than about the nature of the diet. Anatomical attributes may establish boundary limits, but direct evidence left by the foods that were actually (rather than hypothetically) consumed is required to reconstruct diet. Dental microwear and the stable light isotope chemistry of tooth enamel provide such evidence, and are especially powerful when used in tandem. We review the foundations for microwear and biogeochemistry in diet reconstruction, and discuss this evidence for six early hominin species (Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Au. afarensis, Au. africanus, Paranthropus robustus, and P. boisei). The dietary signals derived from microwear and isotope chemistry are sometimes at odds with inferences from biomechanical approaches, a potentially disquieting conundrum that is particularly evident for several species.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2012 · American Journal of Physical Anthropology
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This chapter reviews various ways by which the genus Paranthropus has and is being interpreted, and explains the importance of this junior synonym of Australopithecus in the field. A table in this chapter lists the site, age of remains, dating method, and nature of evidence of Paranthropus discovered in East and southern Africa. It also lists the Paranthropus taxa, which includes Paranthropus aethiopicus, Paranthropus boisei, and Paranthropus robustus. Some researchers have suggested that Homo and Paranthropus may be sister taxa. That is they shared a most recent common ancestor not shared with any other hominin taxon. Different studies have found support for Paranthropus monophyly. Most of the present cladistic evidence is in favor of monophyly. If one is comfortable with the conclusion that hard-tissue morphology is capable of recovering phylogenetic relationships established on the basis of independent genetic evidence, then Paranthropus monophyly must be the hypothesis of choice.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2013
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent biomechanical analyses examining the feeding adaptations of early hominins have yielded results consistent with the hypothesis that hard foods exerted a selection pressure that influenced the evolution of australopith morphology. However, this hypothesis appears inconsistent with recent reconstructions of early hominin diet based on dental microwear and stable isotopes. Thus, it is likely that either the diets of some australopiths included a high proportion of foods these taxa were poorly adapted to consume (i.e., foods that they would not have processed efficiently), or that aspects of what we thought we knew about the functional morphology of teeth must be wrong. Evaluation of these possibilities requires a recognition that analyses based on microwear, isotopes, finite element modeling, and enamel chips and cracks each test different types of hypotheses and allow different types of inferences. Microwear and isotopic analyses are best suited to reconstructing broad dietary patterns, but are limited in their ability to falsify specific hypotheses about morphological adaptation. Conversely, finite element analysis is a tool for evaluating the mechanical basis of form-function relationships, but says little about the frequency with which specific behaviors were performed or the particular types of food that were consumed. Enamel chip and crack analyses are means of both reconstructing diet and examining biomechanics. We suggest that current evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that certain derived australopith traits are adaptations for consuming hard foods, but that australopiths had generalized diets that could include high proportions of foods that were both compliant and tough. Am J Phys Anthropol 151:339-355, 2013.© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2013 · American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Show more