ライフサイエンスコーパス: Australopithecus

1 with reference to African apes, humans, and Australopithecus.

2 traints on neural and cranial development in Australopithecus.

3 trial bipedality more primitive than that of Australopithecus.

4 , thereby accentuating the derived nature of Australopithecus.

5 Ar. ramidus was more primitive than in later Australopithecus.

6 is not more closely related to Homo than to Australopithecus.

7 able carbon isotopic data from 20 samples of Australopithecus afarensis from Hadar and Dikika, Ethiop

8 The skeleton is thus coeval with early Australopithecus afarensis in eastern Africa.

9 cies that does not match the contemporaneous Australopithecus afarensis in its morphology and inferre

10 The substantial fossil record for Australopithecus afarensis includes both an adult partia

11 Analyses of Australopithecus afarensis metatarsals reveal morphology

12 preparation, and synchrotron scanning of the Australopithecus afarensis partial skeleton DIK-1-1, fro

13 Notably, both scapulae of the juvenile Australopithecus afarensis skeleton from Dikika, Ethiopi

14 ong and narrow dental arcade more similar to Australopithecus afarensis than to the derived parabolic

15 from Ethiopia, Kenya, and Chad indicate that Australopithecus afarensis was not the only hominin spec

16 The Pliocene fossil 'Lucy' (Australopithecus afarensis) was discovered in the Afar r

17 ecus sediba) and partial hands from another (Australopithecus afarensis), fundamental questions remai

18 ary trend that began in earlier taxa such as Australopithecus afarensis, and presumably facilitated u

19 Specimens of Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus,

20 atyops in addition to the well-known species Australopithecus afarensis.

21 scovered in 1978 at Site G and attributed to Australopithecus afarensis.

22 ns, thoracic form, and locomotor heritage in Australopithecus afarensis.

23 and hindlimb elements has been reported for Australopithecus afarensis.

24 The type specimen for Australopithecus africanus (Taung) includes a natural en

25 Here we show that Australopithecus africanus (~3 to 2 million years ago) a

26 ified as a homology of South African species Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus robustus

27 d that our results of human-like hand use in Australopithecus africanus are not novel.

28 carpal trabecular bone structure, argue that Australopithecus africanus employed human-like dexterity

29 s, microwear texture analysis indicates that Australopithecus africanus microwear is more anisotropic

30 us holds that the 3-million-year-old hominid Australopithecus africanus subsisted on fruits and leave

31 and they put an emphasis on the Taung Child (Australopithecus africanus) as evidence for the antiquit

32 human microcephalic, specimen number Sts 5 (Australopithecus africanus), and specimen number WT 1700

33 Specimens of Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, and Australopithecus boisei

34 Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus sediba, and

35 ntein, South Africa, tentatively assigned to Australopithecus africanus, is approximately 515 cubic c

36 panzees and in fossil hominins attributed to Australopithecus africanus, Paranthropus robustus/early

37 stus as well as additional ear ossicles from Australopithecus africanus.

38 present evidence that fossils attributed to Australopithecus anamensis (KNM-ER 20419) and A. afarens

39 rliest hominin species in the Turkana Basin, Australopithecus anamensis, derived nearly all of its di

40 fied in these fossil hominins is shared with Australopithecus and early Homo but not with modern huma

41 o have a relatively short basicranium, as in Australopithecus and Homo.

42 ze in australopiths (including Ardipithecus, Australopithecus and Paranthropus).

43 , and were part of a prominent adaptation of Australopithecus and Paranthropus, extinct genera of the

44 hard-object feeding and a dichotomy between Australopithecus and Paranthropus, have been challenged.

45 nd Homo and most strongly resembles those of Australopithecus and Paranthropus, indicating that O. tu

46 d compared with earlier members of the genus Australopithecus and similar to that of the Nariokotome

47 de of the pattern that A. sediba shares with Australopithecus and thus is reasonably assigned to the

48 ods in hominin diets, beginning at 3.8 Ma in Australopithecus and, slightly later, Kenyanthropus This

49 Canals of gracile Australopithecus, and possibly Homo habilis, fall within

50 tive skull and tooth morphology of the genus Australopithecus, and the evolution of the genus Homo by

51 wo decades, particularly after the naming of Australopithecus bahrelghazali and Kenyanthropus platyop

52 Carbon isotope data show that Australopithecus bahrelghazali individuals from Koro Tor

53 s afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, and Australopithecus boisei also have hypoglossal canals tha

54 Although Australopithecus boisei usually lacks an external pillar

55 Here we recognize a new hominin species (Australopithecus deyiremeda sp. nov.) from 3.3-3.5-milli

56 Ar. ramidus shares with Australopithecus each of these human-like modifications.

57 Australopithecus evinced longer hind limbs, extended lim

58 arge infants may have limited arboreality in Australopithecus females and may have selected for allop

59 Australopithecus females, in contrast, had significantly

60 minid canine yet recovered, and the earliest Australopithecus femur.

61 in contain one of the richest assemblages of Australopithecus fossils in the world, including the nea

62 athic morphological changes that distinguish Australopithecus from Ardipithecus, but it occurs amid a

63 What has not been clear is whether Australopithecus had 12 thoracic vertebrae as in most hu

64 Hominid fossils predating the emergence of Australopithecus have been sparse and fragmentary.

65 a unique phylogenetic relationship with the Australopithecus + Homo clade based on nonhoning canine

66 morphological markers of the Ardipithecus + Australopithecus + Homo clade.

67 relatively rapid shift from Ardipithecus to Australopithecus in this region of Africa, involving eit

68 than contemporaneous hominins of the genera Australopithecus, Kenyanthropus, and Homo; however, Ther

69 nasomaxillary complex) differs markedly from Australopithecus, Paranthropus, early Homo and from KNM-

70 rican species Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus robustus.

71 The discovery of a relatively complete Australopithecus sediba adult female skeleton permits a

72 ed forelimb remains of 1.98-million-year-old Australopithecus sediba from Malapa, South Africa, contr

73 Two partial vertebral columns of Australopithecus sediba grant insight into aspects of ea

74 Australopithecus sediba has been hypothesized to be a cl

75 To characterize further the Australopithecus sediba hypodigm, we describe 22 dental

76 Hawks et al. argue that our analysis of Australopithecus sediba mandibles is flawed and that spe

77 r, certain measurements and observations for Australopithecus sediba mandibles presented are incorrec

78 ly hominin species (Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus sediba) and partial hands from another

79 Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus sediba, and Homo erectus all had zygapo

80 Since the announcement of the species Australopithecus sediba, questions have been raised over

81 d the discovery site of the hominin species, Australopithecus sediba.

82 ni and the hominins Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus sediba.

83 DIK-1-1 is the only known Australopithecus skeleton to preserve all seven cervical

84 Australopithecus species differ markedly from extant Afr

85 The earliest described Australopithecus species is Au. anamensis, the probable

86 idence for arches in the earliest well-known Australopithecus species, A. afarensis, has long been de

87 late-vomer architecture) is similar to other Australopithecus species.

88 ot be distinguished from this, or any other, Australopithecus species.

89 imorphic morphologies in fossil vertebrae of Australopithecus suggest that this adaptation to fetal l

90 The origin of Australopithecus, the genus widely interpreted as ancest

91 a time corresponding to the transition from Australopithecus to Homo and the beginning of neocortex

92 We find that the facial skeleton of the Australopithecus type species, A. africanus, is well sui

93 ristics further establish that bipedality in Australopithecus was highly evolved and that thoracic fo

94 Furthermore, the vocal abilities of Australopithecus were not advanced significantly over th

95 imen combines primitive traits seen in early Australopithecus with derived morphology observed in lat

96 the evidence for a southern African clade of Australopithecus would be strengthened, and support woul