Lague M R, Jungers W L
Program in Anthropological Sciences, State University of New York at Stony Brook 11794, USA.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Nov;101(3):401-27. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199611)101:3<401::AID-AJPA8>3.0.CO;2-0.
The magnitude and meaning of morphological variation among Plio-Pleistocene hominid distal humeri have been recurrent points of disagreement among paleoanthropologists. Some researchers have found noteworthy differences among fossil humeri that they believe merit taxonomic separation, while others question the possibility of accurately sorting these fossils into different species and/or functional groups. Size and shape differences among fossil distal humeri are evaluated here to determine whether the magnitude and patterns of these differences can be observed within large-bodied, living hominoids. Specimens analyzed in this study have been assigned to various taxa (Australopithecus afarensis, A. africanus, A. anamensis, Paranthropus, and early Homo) and include AL 288-1m, AL 288-1s, AL 137-48a, AL 322-1, Gomboré IB 7594, TM 1517, KNM-ER 739, KNM-ER 1504, KMN-KP 271 (Kanapoi), and Stw 431. Five extant hominoid populations are sampled to provide a standard by which to consider differences found between the fossils, including two modern human groups (Native American and African American), one group of Pan troglodytes, and two subspecies of Gorilla gorilla (G.g. beringei, G.g. gorilla). All possible pairwise d values (average Euclidena distances) are calculated within each of the reference populations using an exact randomization procedure. This is done using both raw linear measurements as well as scale-free shape data created as ratios of each measurement to the geometric mean. Differences between each pair of fossil humeri are evaluated by comparing their d values to the distribution of d values found within each of the reference populations. Principal coordinate analysis and an unweighted pair group method with arithmetic averages (UPGMA) cluster analysis are utilized to further assess similarities and differences among the fossils. Finally, canonical variates analysis and discriminant analysis are employed using all hominoid samples in order to control for correlations among variables and to identify those variables that discriminate among groups; possible affinities of individual fossils with specific extant species are also examined. The largest size differences, those between the small Hadar specimens and the two largest fossils (KNM-ER 739, IB 7594), can be accommodated easily within the ranges of variation of the two Gorilla samples, but are extreme relative to the other reference samples. The d values between most of the fossils based on shape data, with the notable exception of those associated with KNM-ER 739 and KNM-ER 1504, can be sampled safely within all five reference samples. Subsequent analyses further support the inference that KNM-ER 739 and KNM-ER 1504 are different from the other hominid humeri and possess a unique total morphometric pattern. In overall shape, the distal humeri of the other fossils (non-Koobi Fora) are most similar to living chimpanzees. The distal humerus of Paranthropus from Kromdraai (TM 1517e) is most similar to one of the Hadar specimens of A. afarensis (AL 137-48a), whereas the first specimen of A. africanus from Sterkfontein (Stw 431) is not closely linked to any of the other australopithecines. The A. anamensis humerus from Kanapoi exhibits no special affinities to A. afarensis or to modern humans.
上新世 - 更新世灵长类动物肱骨远端形态变异的程度和意义一直是古人类学家之间反复出现的分歧点。一些研究人员在化石肱骨中发现了值得注意的差异,他们认为这些差异值得进行分类区分,而另一些人则质疑能否准确地将这些化石归入不同的物种和/或功能组。本文评估了化石肱骨远端的大小和形状差异,以确定在体型较大的现存类人猿中是否能观察到这些差异的程度和模式。本研究分析的标本已被归入各种分类群(阿法南方古猿、非洲南方古猿、阿纳姆南方古猿、傍人属和早期人属),包括AL 288 - 1m、AL 288 - 1s、AL 137 - 48a、AL 322 - 1、贡博雷IB 7594、TM 1517、KNM - ER 739、KNM - ER 1504、KMN - KP 271(卡纳波伊)和Stw 431。对五个现存类人猿种群进行了采样,以提供一个标准,据此来考量化石之间的差异,其中包括两个现代人类群体(美洲原住民和非裔美国人)、一组黑猩猩以及大猩猩的两个亚种(山地大猩猩、西部大猩猩)。使用精确随机化程序在每个参考种群内计算所有可能的成对d值(平均欧几里得距离)。这一过程既使用了原始线性测量数据,也使用了通过将每个测量值与几何平均值之比创建的无尺度形状数据。通过将每对化石肱骨的d值与每个参考种群内的d值分布进行比较,来评估每对化石肱骨之间的差异。利用主坐标分析和算术平均的非加权配对组法(UPGMA)聚类分析来进一步评估化石之间的异同。最后,使用所有类人猿样本进行典型变量分析和判别分析,以控制变量之间的相关性,并识别出区分不同组的变量;还考察了单个化石与特定现存物种之间可能的亲缘关系。最大的尺寸差异,即来自哈达尔的小标本与两个最大的化石(KNM - ER 739、IB 7594)之间的差异,很容易在两个大猩猩样本的变异范围内得到体现,但相对于其他参考样本而言则较为极端。基于形状数据,大多数化石之间的d值,KNM - ER 739和KNM - ER 1504相关的d值是显著例外,在所有五个参考样本中都能安全采样。后续分析进一步支持了以下推断:KNM - ER 739和KNM - ER 1504与其他灵长类动物肱骨不同,具有独特的整体形态测量模式。在整体形状上,其他化石(非科比福拉)的肱骨远端与现存黑猩猩最为相似。来自克罗马德莱的傍人属肱骨(TM 1517e)与阿法南方古猿的一个哈达尔标本(AL 137 - 48a)最为相似,而来自斯特克方丹的非洲南方古猿的第一个标本(Stw 431)与其他任何南方古猿都没有紧密联系。来自卡纳波伊的阿纳姆南方古猿肱骨与阿法南方古猿或现代人类没有特殊亲缘关系。