Structural analysis of the Kresna 11 Homo erectus femoral shaft (Sangiran, Java)

Puymérail, Laurent; Ruff, Christopher B.; Bondioli, Luca; Widianto, Harry; Trinkaus, Erik; Macchiarelli, Roberto

doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.08.003

Cited by 60 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…comm. ; 6) Bermudez de Castro et al, 2012 [74]; 7) Carretero et al, 1997 [75]; 8) Ruff et al, 1999 [79]; 9) Dominguez-Rodrigo et al, 2013 [77]; 10) Puymerail et al, 2012 [78]; Ruff et al, in press [80]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy")

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there is broad agreement that early hominins practiced some form of terrestrial bipedality, there is also evidence that arboreal behavior remained a part of the locomotor repertoire in some taxa, and that bipedal locomotion may not have been identical to that of modern humans. It has been difficult to evaluate such evidence, however, because of the possibility that early hominins retained primitive traits (such as relatively long upper limbs) of little contemporaneous adaptive significance. Here we examine bone structural properties of the femur and humerus in the Australopithecus afarensis A.L. 288–1 ("Lucy", 3.2 Myr) that are known to be developmentally plastic, and compare them with other early hominins, modern humans, and modern chimpanzees. Cross-sectional images were obtained from micro-CT scans of the original specimens and used to derive section properties of the diaphyses, as well as superior and inferior cortical thicknesses of the femoral neck. A.L. 288–1 shows femoral/humeral diaphyseal strength proportions that are intermediate between those of modern humans and chimpanzees, indicating more mechanical loading of the forelimb than in modern humans, and by implication, a significant arboreal locomotor component. Several features of the proximal femur in A.L. 288–1 and other australopiths, including relative femoral head size, distribution of cortical bone in the femoral neck, and cross-sectional shape of the proximal shaft, support the inference of a bipedal gait pattern that differed slightly from that of modern humans, involving more lateral deviation of the body center of mass over the support limb, which would have entailed increased cost of terrestrial locomotion. There is also evidence consistent with increased muscular strength among australopiths in both the forelimb and hind limb, possibly reflecting metabolic trade-offs between muscle and brain development during hominin evolution. Together these findings imply significant differences in both locomotor behavior and ecology between australopiths and later Homo.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy")

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…MM is a landmark-free geometric morphometric method that permits dense sampling of data from smooth surfaces. It is thus well suited to quantify even subtle morphological differences in femoral shaft form between different taxa and/or developmental stages [87], [91], [92], [93]. To correct for size differences between specimens, size is normalized by diaphyseal length and the median value of the radius of curvature.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phenotypic Variation in Infants, Not Adults, Reflects Genotypic Variation among Chimpanzees and Bonobos

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies comparing phenotypic variation with neutral genetic variation in modern humans have shown that genetic drift is a main factor of evolutionary diversification among populations. The genetic population history of our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees and bonobos, is now equally well documented, but phenotypic variation among these taxa remains relatively unexplored, and phenotype-genotype correlations are not yet documented. Also, while the adult phenotype is typically used as a reference, it remains to be investigated how phenotype-genotye correlations change during development. Here we address these questions by analyzing phenotypic evolutionary and developmental diversification in the species and subspecies of the genus Pan. Our analyses focus on the morphology of the femoral diaphysis, which represents a functionally constrained element of the locomotor system. Results show that during infancy phenotypic distances between taxa are largely congruent with non-coding (neutral) genotypic distances. Later during ontogeny, however, phenotypic distances deviate from genotypic distances, mainly as an effect of heterochronic shifts between taxon-specific developmental programs. Early phenotypic differences between Pan taxa are thus likely brought about by genetic drift while late differences reflect taxon-specific adaptations.

show abstract

“…3. For the extant taxa and Neanderthals, they represent consensus maps generated by merging the available individual records into a single dataset and subsequently calculating the interpolation (Puymerail, 2011;Puymerail et al, 2012aPuymerail et al, , 2012b. Because each MM is scaled according to the maximal value of the analysed tooth, the patterns expressed by the dm2s and the M1s are independent from the absolute and relative enamel thickness values.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To visualize similarities vs. differences in enamel thickness topography within an assemblage of such variably sized and shaped teeth, ad hoc imaging techniques were used to virtually unroll lateral enamel and to project it into standardized morphometric maps Bondioli et al, 2010;Macchiarelli et al, 2013; for similar imaging techniques, see also Dowdeswell et al, 2017;Morita et al, 2016Morita et al, , 2017Puymerail, 2011;Puymerail et al, 2012aPuymerail et al, , 2012bTsegai et al, 2017). Because each morphometric map (MM) is scaled according to the maximal value of the analysed tooth, the patterns expressed by the dm2s and the M1s are independent from the absolute and relative enamel thickness values.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the deciduous/permanent molar enamel thickness ratio a taxon-specific indicator in extant and extinct hominids?

Zanolli

Bayle

Bondioli

et al. 2017

Comptes Rendus Palevol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Handled by Roberto Macchiarelli and Clément ZanoliiKeywords: Enamel Dm2 M1 "Diphyodontic index" Hominids abstract In Primates, enamel thickness variation stems from an evolutionary interplay between functional/adaptive constraints (ecology) and the strict control mechanisms of the morphogenetic program. Most studies on primate enamel thickness have primarily considered the permanent teeth, while the extent of covariation in tooth enamel thickness distribution between deciduous and permanent counterparts remains poorly investigated. In this test study on nine extant and fossil hominids we investigated the degree of covariation in enamel proportions between 25 pairs of mandibular dm2 and M1 by a so-called "lateral enamel thickness diphyodontic index". The results did not provide an unambiguous picture, but rather suggest complex patterns likely resulting from the influence of many interactive factors. Future research should test the congruence of the "diphyodontic signal" between the anterior and the postcanine dentition, as well as between enamel and the enamel-dentine junction topography.

show abstract

Structural analysis of the Kresna 11 Homo erectus femoral shaft (Sangiran, Java)

Cited by 60 publications

References 46 publications

Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy")

Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy")

Phenotypic Variation in Infants, Not Adults, Reflects Genotypic Variation among Chimpanzees and Bonobos

Is the deciduous/permanent molar enamel thickness ratio a taxon-specific indicator in extant and extinct hominids?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About