Homo gautengensis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Homo gautengensis wasproposedin May 2010 by the Australian paleoanthropologist and primatologist Darren Curnoe of the University of New South Wales as a designation for South African fossils that other researchers have assigned to Homo habilis and Homo ergaster / Homo erectus .

Naming

The name of the genus Homo is derived from the Latin homo [ ˈhɔmoː ], dt. Human. The epithet gautengensis refers to the South African province of Gauteng , whose name means "place of gold" in South Sotho and from which the fossils intended for Homo gautengensis come. Homo gautengensis consequently means “man from Gauteng”.

Initial description

As holotype was the first description the fossil Stw reported 53, Alun Hughes already on August 9, 1976 in Sterkfontein discovered and together with 1977 Phillip Tobias was scientifically described.

The heavily fragmented fossil Stw 53, which shares various features with the Homo habilis fossil OH 62 , comes from a layer that was initially dated to an age of 2.0 to 1.5 million years. It is kept at Witwatersrand University . What has been preserved are parts of the upper jaw with some molars , as well as several pieces of bone from the area of ​​the zygomatic bone , the forehead and the occiput . Since these bone fragments come from different areas of the skull and there are no connecting pieces, the reconstruction of their natural arrangement proved to be difficult. That is why some of the researchers - including Darren Curnoe in 2006 - placed the fossil as Homo habilis , while others placed it as Australopithecus africanus . The original assignment of the fossil to the 2.0 to 1.5 million year old find layer was also questioned and the fossil was assigned to the next older layer, which is 2.6 to 2.0 million years old. Darren Curnoe also published a reconstruction that deviated from the original reconstruction, but which Stw 53 together with the fossil SK 847 again expressly referred to Homo habilis ; however, the plausibility of this reconstruction was immediately questioned by a South African expert.

Interpretation as a South African special development

Although Darren Curnoe also admits that the dating of numerous South African finds is just as controversial as - because of the poor state of preservation - their reconstruction, he interpreted the fossil Stw 53 in May 2010 as a holotype of an independent ( endemic ) species of the genus that has only been documented on the basis of South African finds Homo . As additional specimen copies ( paratypes ) for the characteristics of the species, more than 20 other fossils from Sterkfontein , Swartkrans and Drimolen , some of which have been known for decades, were added to the holotype ; These paratypes include the partially preserved SK 847 skull, which is interpreted by other experts as Homo ergaster , and several lower jaws. If this regrouping and the associated renaming of the fossils continue, Homo gautengensis would be the earliest species of the genus Homo next to Homo rudolfensis .

The technical description of the species is based in particular on features of the dentition and, here, above all on the nature of the surface of the large molars . Body parts below the head could not be assigned to any of the type specimens, and no information on the habitat or food was given in the first description. However, according to a publication by the Faculty of Science at the University of New South Wales, the relatively large molars indicated the frequent consumption of relatively hard plant foods. At the same time, an adult individual was assigned a body weight of around 50 kg.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Darren Curnoe: A review of early Homo in southern Africa focusing on cranial, mandibular and dental remains, with the description of a new species (Homo gautengensis sp. Nov.). In: HOMO - Journal of Comparative Human Biology. Volume, No. 3, 2010, pp. 151–177, doi: 10.1016 / j.jchb.2010.04.002
  2. ↑ Alun R. Hughes, Phillip V. Tobias: A fossil skull probably of the genus Homo from Sterkfontein, Transvaal. In: Nature . Volume 265, 1977, pp. 310-312, doi: 10.1038 / 265310a0
  3. ↑ a b Darren Curnoe, Phillip Tobias : Description, new reconstruction, comparative anatomy, and classification of the Sterkfontein Stw 53 cranium, with discussions about the taxonomy of other southern African early Homo remains. In: Journal of Human Evolution. Volume 50, No. 1, 2006, pp. 36-77, doi: 10.1016 / j.jhevol.2005.07.008
  4. ↑ Winfried Henke , Hartmut Rothe : Stammesgeschichte des Menschen. Springer Verlag, Berlin 1999, p. 159
  5. ^ Walter W. Ferguson: Reappraisal of the taxonomic status of the cranium Stw 53 from the Plio / Pleistocene of Sterkfontein, in South Africa. In: Primates. Volume 30, No. 1, 1989, pp. 103-109, doi: 10.1007 / BF02381216
  6. ↑ a b Ron Clarke: Latest information on Sterkfontein's Australopithecus skeleton and a new look at Australopithecus. In: South African Journal of Science. Volume 104, No. 11–12, 2008, pp. 443–449, full text (PDF; 1.4 MB)
  7. ↑ Jeffrey H. Schwartz , Ian Tattersall : The Human Fossil Record, Volume II: Craniodental Morphology of Genus Homo (Africa and Asia). Wiley-Liss, 2003, p. 263, ISBN 978-0471319283
  8. ↑ New species of human ancestor identified. ( Memento of May 29, 2010 on the Internet Archive ) University of New South Wales, Faculty of Science, May 20, 2010