Australopithecus Research Paper

Australopithecus Africanus: Shape is almost identical to A. Afarensis, however the cranial capacity is much more in this skull

Extinction: Most species become extinct because they can’t cope with the environmental change, and also because of introduced species that turned into competitors for

In this project, we investigated the tooth shape of several, common primates (Gorillas, Macaques, Baboons, etc.), fossil hominins (Australopithecus africanus, Homo

The most distinct of H. neanderthalensis is its unique cranial features. These features comprise of a large middle part of the face where their skull was more long and flat but had more of a protruding brow ridge. They also had slanting cheek bones and a large nose which is said to be for humidifying and warming cold, dry air. Their jaw and teeth are larger and have a hole called the retro molar space (behind wisdom teeth at the back of the

1. How did Australopithecus differ from other mammals? Australopithecus is differ from other mammals by Australopithecus lived from 4 million to 1 million B.C. ago, found in southern and Eastern Africa, have brain size of 500 cubic centimeters, and they are the first creature to know how to walk upright. 2.

sahelanthropus tchadensis:it is missing a lot of pieces like less full,higher eyebrow bone, and t

The primate cranial base has been an important structure to investigate for analyses involving facial, cranial, and brain morphology. Specifically, the basicranium has sparked interest because of the correlations found between the Cranial Base Angle (CBA) and brain size in non-hominoid primates. Previous studies have indicated that there may be a direct correlation between the degree of cranial base flexion and relative brain size in primates. Based upon this knowledge, it is possible to design hypotheses to test CBA correlation to relative brain size, encephalization rates, endocranial volume, and to investigate development of the cranial base and CBA ontogenetically. The study here will analyze these correlations by documenting cranial landmarks relative to linear length and size in order to establish planes and angle measurements. The data collected here will focus on comparing species from the parvorders Catarrhini and Platyrrhini to demonstrate that catarrhines show an evolutionary tendency towards higher encephalization and ergo a smaller (more flexed) CBA. Unlike previous studies, the analyses performed here will include

We also had to decide why that part of the skull evolved the way it had and the function of it. Our independent variable was the ratio between molar width and skull width. Our dependent variable was the width between the molars. We replicated it three times with each of the four species; three different skulls of the same species were measured and used in our calculations. The four carnivores we used were the Coyote, Fox, Mink, and Badger. The four herbivores we used were the Woodchuck, Beaver, Muskrat, and

Viewed from the side, the occipital bone is somewhat bun-shaped. The forehead rises more vertically than that of a H. Erectus, and the brow ridges arch over the orbits instead of forming a straight bar. The Neanderthals were robust, barrel-chested, powerfully muscled. They also had a large, thick skull, a sloping forehead, and a chinless jaw. This robust skeletal structure, in fact, dominates hominin evolution from H. Erectus through all premodern forms. (Jurmain, Kilgore, Trevathan and Ciochon. p.370). Neanderthals had a compact body of short stature. Males averaged 1.7 m (5ft 5in) tall and an estimate to weigh 84kg (185lb), and females averaged 1.5 m (5ft) tall and an estimate 80kg (176lb). (Smithsonian 2007c). Neanderthals also differed from modern Homo Sapiens in that they had a low forehead, double arched brow ridge, larger nasal area, projecting cheek region, weak chin, obvious space behind the third molar, heavily-built bones, broad scapula, short lower leg and arm bones relative to the upper portions, occasional bowing of the limb bones, the hip rotated outward, a long and thin pubic bone, and large joint surfaces of the toes and long bones. (Smithsonian 2007c). Neanderthals had noses that were broad and very large. They had limb bones that were thick and had large joints which indicate they had strongly muscled arms and legs. The shin bones and forearms tended to be shorter than those of modern humans. The pelvis was wider from side to side

The overall stature of Australopithecines compared to of that of Paranthropus, is smaller. Based on the estimates of Johanson and Edgar, 2006; Jungers, 1988, I created a table (Figure 1) illustrating the size of both genera. The average weight of a male in the genus Australopithecines is 43 kg and for Paranthropus is 44.5 kg. The average weight of a female in the genus Australopithecines is 29.5 kg and for Paranthropus is 33 kg. The average male height for Australopithecines is 1.45 m and for Paranthropus it is 1.35 m. The average female height for genus Australopithecines is 1.10 m and for the genus Paranthropus it is 1.15 m. Both genera have sexual dimorphism, where the females are of smaller stature and weight. This type of sexual dimorphism

Aside from the fossil being one of the most complete discovered to date, it also helps to prove to many skeptics that fossil was in fact an ancestor to the modern day humans. Something that many scientist had discovered was that this fossil showed relations to another famous fossil, Taung Child. Mrs. Ples is believed to be a grown up version of its fellow fossil Taung Child. Both fossils have been classified as australopithecus africanus. One of the fascinating arguments that comes from the talks of Mrs. Ples is that some scientists believe that she was actually a he. Some scientists and researchers believe that she was actually a juvenile male due to the size of the hole where the canine tooth would normally be. While this has been widely debated, some researchers have concluded that Broom was right by naming the fossil Mrs rather than Mr. The reason why this debate has been so important is because that the Australopithecus Africanus is one of the species studied that show sexual dimorphism. There are many things that are up for debate when it comes to this fossil, but the one thing that is for sure, is that this fossils discovery holds much importance and helps give researchers a view into the

fossils, burial sites, caves, and other sources of information. It is important to learn about

The ancient relative of humanity dubbed "Lucy" may have been one of a harem of girls that mated with a single male, according to research that suggests her species was polygynous.Among the earliest known relatives of humanity whose skeletons were made for walking upright was Australopithecus afarensis, the species that included Lucy.Members of the Australopithecus lineage, known as australopithecines, are among the leading candidates for direct ancestors of the human lineage, living about 2.9 million to 3.8 million years ago in East Africa.To learn more about Lucy's species, researchers investigated the area of Laetoli in northern Tanzania, which previously showed the earliest known footprints belonging to hominins humans and related species

Australopithecus afarensis was discovered in Ethiopia on November 24, 1974 by paleoanthropologists Donald Johanson, Maurice Taieb, Yves Coppens, and Tom Gray in the Afar Depression in Ethiopia, Africa. The first fossil was found by Johanson in ’71 when he discovered a shinbone and femur. They returned in 1974 and the team found several hundred fragments of bones all belonging to a single individual. The individual was deemed to be a female based on the width of the pelvic opening. The fossil samples were argon-argon dated by Robert Walter in 1992 and it was determined that “she” was approximately 3.22-3.18 million years old. The species itself lived between 3.85 and 2.95 million years ago. This specimen was named “Lucy” after the

The robust australopithecines or paranthropines had a curved face with a arch for the cheek bones that are formed by connecting the zygomatic and the temporal bones together. The robust australopithecines had a bone ridge on top of their skull called a sagittal crest, which is also attached to the jaw muscles. They had a flexable base just above were their jaw bone connected to their cheek bone. With their really large back teeth (below the cheek bone) the robust australopithecines fossils were known to the researchers as the “nutcracker man”. They used these really large back teeth to eat tough foods and nuts. And their teeth in the front were smaller.