Suppr超能文献

上新世/更新世过渡时期的早期古人类物种形成。

Early hominin speciation at the Plio/Pleistocene transition.

作者信息

Cameron D W

机构信息

School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia 0200.

出版信息

Homo. 2003;54(1):1-28. doi: 10.1078/0018-442x-00057.

Abstract

Over the last half-decade or so, there has been an explosion in the recognition of hominin genera and species. We now have the late Miocene genera Orrorin and Sahelanthropus, the mid Pliocene genus Kenyanthropus, three new Pliocene species of Australopithecus (A. anamensis, A. garhi and A. bahrelghazali) and a sub species of Ardipithecus (Ar. r. kadabba) to contend with. Excepting also the more traditional species allocated to Paranthropus, Australopithecus and early Homo we are approaching around 15 species over 5 million years (excluding hominin evolution over the last one million years). Can such a large number of hominin species be justified? An examination of extant hominid (Gorilla gorilla, Pan troglodytes, and Pan paniscus) anatomical variability indicates that the range of fossil hominin variability supports the recognition of this large number of fossil species. It is also shown that not all hominins are directly related to the emergence of early Homo and as such have become extinct. Indeed the traditional australopithecine species 'A'. anamensis, 'A'. afarensis and 'A'. garhi are considered here to belong to a distinct genus Praeanthropus. They are also argued not be hominins, but rather an as yet undefined hominid group from which the more derived hominins evolved. The first hominin is represented by A. africanus or a hominin very much like it. The Paranthropus clade is defined by a derived heterochronic condition of peramorphosis, associated with sequential progenesis (contraction of successive growth stages) in brain and dental development, but a mixture of peramorphic and paedomorphic features in its craniofacial anatomy. Conversely, Kenyanthropus and Homo both share a pattern of peramorphosis, associated with sequential hypermorphosis (prolongation of successive growth stages) in brain development, and paedomorphosis processes in cranial, facial and dental development. This suggests, that these two clades share an important synapomorphy not recognised in the parsimony analyses, suggesting that they may form a sister group relationship to the exclusion of Paranthropus. This highlights the need to re-interpret phylogenetic results in terms of function and development. The rapid speciation and extinction as argued here is in keeping with other fossil groups in Africa at the Plio/Pleistocene transition. This emphasises that we must approach the pre-australopithecines and hominins as part of the endemic African fauna, and not in isolation to the evolutionary and climatic processes that were operating all around them.

摘要

在过去大约五年左右的时间里,对人亚科属和种的认知出现了激增。我们现在有晚中新世的欧兰猿属(Orrorin)和撒海尔人属(Sahelanthropus)、上新世中期的肯尼亚人属(Kenyanthropus)、三种新的上新世南方古猿物种(南方古猿湖畔种(A. anamensis)、南方古猿惊奇种(A. garhi)和南方古猿巴赫雷扎利种(A. bahrelghazali))以及阿迪猿属的一个亚种(阿迪猿卡达巴亚种(Ar. r. kadabba))需要应对。除了分配给傍人属、南方古猿属和早期人属的更传统物种外,在超过五百万年的时间里我们正在接近15个物种(不包括过去一百万年的人亚科进化)。如此众多的人亚科物种是否合理呢?对现存灵长类动物(大猩猩(Gorilla gorilla)、黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)和倭黑猩猩(Pan paniscus))解剖变异的研究表明,化石人亚科变异范围支持认可如此众多的化石物种。研究还表明,并非所有的人亚科都与早期人属的出现直接相关,因此已经灭绝。实际上,传统的南方古猿物种“湖畔南方古猿”('A'. anamensis)、“阿法南方古猿”('A'. afarensis)和“惊奇南方古猿”('A'. garhi)在这里被认为属于一个独特的属——原人属(Praeanthropus)。它们也被认为不是人亚科,而是一个尚未明确的灵长类群体,更多衍生的人亚科由此进化而来。第一个人亚科由南方古猿非洲种(A. africanus)或与其非常相似的人亚科代表。傍人分支的定义是一种衍生的异时条件,即形态过度发育,与大脑和牙齿发育中的连续幼态持续(连续生长阶段的收缩)相关,但在其颅面解剖结构中存在形态过度发育和幼态特征的混合。相反,肯尼亚人属和人属都具有形态过度发育的模式,与大脑发育中的连续超形态发育(连续生长阶段的延长)以及颅骨、面部和牙齿发育中的幼态过程相关。这表明,这两个分支共享一个在简约分析中未被识别的重要共衍征,表明它们可能形成一个姐妹群关系,将傍人排除在外。这突出了根据功能和发育重新解释系统发育结果的必要性。这里所说的快速物种形成和灭绝与上新世/更新世过渡时期非洲的其他化石类群一致。这强调我们必须将原南方古猿和人亚科视为非洲特有动物群的一部分,而不是孤立地看待它们周围发生的进化和气候过程。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验