Randomization procedures and sexual dimorphism inAustralopithecus afarensis

Lockwood, Charles A.; Richmond, Brian G.; Jungers, William L.; Kimbel, William H.

doi:10.1006/jhev.1996.0078

Cited by 146 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We previously concluded that skeletal size dimorphism in Australopithecus afarensis was significantly lower than that of gorillas and could not be statistically distinguished from that of modern humans (Reno et al 2003(Reno et al , 2005. These findings, which contrast with previous assessments (Zihlman & Tobias 1985;McHenry 1991;Lockwood et al 1996), were achieved through the use of the 'template method'. This method relied on the A.L.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

An enlarged postcranial sample confirms Australopithecus afarensis dimorphism was similar to modern humans

Reno

McCollum

Meindl

et al. 2010

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a previous study, we introduced the template method as a means of enlarging the Australopithecus afarensis postcranial sample to more accurately estimate its skeletal dimorphism. Results indicated dimorphism to be largely comparable to that of Homo sapiens. Some have since argued that our results were biased by artificial homogeneity in our Au. afarensis sample. Here we report the results from inclusion of 12 additional, newly reported, specimens. The results are consistent with those of our original study and with the hypothesis that early hominid demographic success derived from a reproductive strategy involving male provisioning of pair-bonded females.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

An enlarged postcranial sample confirms Australopithecus afarensis dimorphism was similar to modern humans

Reno

McCollum

Meindl

et al. 2010

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather, the range of variation in A. afarensis has been explained by a high level of sexual dimorphism, an interpretation put forth by the researchers of the earliest findings (Johanson and White, 1979;Johanson et al, 1978). This position has gained support from other researchers who have argued for a high level of body size sexual dimorphism based on posterior dentition and postcrania (Cole and Smith, 1987;Frayer and Wolpoff, 1985;Johanson and White, 1979;Johanson et al, 1978;Jungers, 1988b;Kimbel and White, 1988;Leutenegger and Shell, 1987;Lockwood et al, 1996;McHenry, 1986McHenry, , 1996Richmond and Jungers, 1995;Stern and Susman, 1983).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Some have reported a body size dimorphism level as low as that in modern humans, proposing a mating system of monogamy for the early hominids (Reno et al, 2003). Furthermore, there have been disagreements about the pattern of sexual dimorphism: the level of canine dimorphism seems to be low (Leutenegger and Shell, 1987;McHenry, 1992), which may explain the low level of dimorphism in mandibular corpus measurements (Lockwood et al, 1996;Richmond and Jungers, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of size sexual dimorphism in Australopithecus afarensis: Another look

Lee

2005

HOMO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The high (near gorilla) levels of sexual dimorphism in all early hominins for which sufficient data are available, including Australopithecus (McHenry, 1986;Lockwood et al, 1996;Lockwood, 1999;Ward et al, 2001) and Paranthropus (Silverman et al, 2001), imply that strong sexual dimorphism in body size characterized the LCA. However, these taxa appeared millions of years after the LCA, so the reconstruction of the LCA as highly sexually dimorphic must await confirmation from earlier taxa.…”

Section: Reconstruction Of the Last Common Ancestor Of Pan And Homomentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin of human bipedalism: The knuckle-walking hypothesis revisited

Richmond

Begun

Strait

2001

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.

Self Cite

223

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some of the most long-standing questions in paleoanthropology concern how and why human bipedalism evolved. Over the last century, many hypotheses have been offered on the mode of locomotion from which bipedalism originated. Candidate ancestral adaptations include monkey-like arboreal or terrestrial quadrupedalism, gibbon-or orangutan-like (or other forms of) climbing and suspension, and knuckle-walking. This paper reviews the history of these hypotheses, outlines their predictions, and assesses them in light of current phylogenetic, comparative anatomical, and fossil evidence. The functional significance of characteristics of the shoulder and arm, elbow, wrist, and hand shared by African apes and humans, including their fossil relatives, most strongly supports the knuckle-walking hypothesis, which reconstructs the ancestor as being adapted to knuckle-walking and arboreal climbing. Future fossil discoveries, and a clear understanding of anthropoid locomotor anatomy, are required to ultimately test these hypotheses. If knucklewalking was an important component of the behavioral repertoire of the prebipedal human ancestor, then we can reject scenarios on the origin of bipedalism that rely on a strictly arboreal ancestor. Moreover, paleoenvironmental data associated with the earliest hominins, and their close relatives, contradict hypotheses that place the agents of selection for bipedality in open savanna habitats. Existing hypotheses must explain why bipedalism would evolve from an ancestor that was already partly terrestrial. Many food acquisition and carrying hypotheses remain tenable in light of current evidence.

show abstract

Randomization procedures and sexual dimorphism inAustralopithecus afarensis

Cited by 146 publications

References 19 publications

An enlarged postcranial sample confirms Australopithecus afarensis dimorphism was similar to modern humans

An enlarged postcranial sample confirms Australopithecus afarensis dimorphism was similar to modern humans

Patterns of size sexual dimorphism in Australopithecus afarensis: Another look

Origin of human bipedalism: The knuckle-walking hypothesis revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About