The Primitive Wrist of Homo floresiensis and Its Implications for Hominin Evolution

@article{Tocheri2007ThePW,
  title={The Primitive Wrist of Homo floresiensis and Its Implications for Hominin Evolution},
  author={Matthew W. Tocheri and Caley Michael Orr and Susan G Larson and Thomas Sutikna and Jatmiko and E. Wahyu Saptomo and Rokus Awe Due and Tony Djubiantono and Michael J. Morwood and William L. Jungers},
  journal={Science},
  year={2007},
  volume={317},
  pages={1743 - 1745}
}
Whether the Late Pleistocene hominin fossils from Flores, Indonesia, represent a new species, Homo floresiensis, or pathological modern humans has been debated. Analysis of three wrist bones from the holotype specimen (LB1) shows that it retains wrist morphology that is primitive for the African ape-human clade. In contrast, Neandertals and modern humans share derived wrist morphology that forms during embryogenesis, which diminishes the probability that pathology could result in the normal… 
The foot of Homo floresiensis
TLDR
It is shown that LB1’s foot is exceptionally long relative to the femur and tibia, proportions never before documented in hominins but seen in some African apes, raising the possibility that the ancestor of H. floresiensis was not Homo erectus but instead some other, more primitive, hominin whose dispersal into southeast Asia is still undocumented.
Unique Dental Morphology of Homo floresiensis and Its Evolutionary Implications
TLDR
It is reported here that the dental remains from multiple individuals indicate that H. floresiensis had primitive canine-premolar and advanced molar morphologies, a combination of dental traits unknown in any other hominin species.
The Homo floresiensis Controversy
TLDR
Close analysis shows that Homo floresiensis is not only a genuinely new species, but that its closest affinities lie with Plio-Pleistocene African species such as Homo habilis, so that it documents an earlier dispersal of hominins from Africa and had hitherto been suspected.
The hominins of Flores: Insular adaptations of the lower body
TLDR
A case for island dwarfing being the most plausible scenario, with H. erectus as the mainland ancestor of Homo floresiensis is made.
Embryogenic cranial evidences in fossil hominids, taxonomical and phylogenetical implications in human palaeontology
After a long period focused on East Africa, the debate on the origins of Anatomically Modern Human, Homo sapiens sensu stricto, as well as that of the oldest species of the genus Homo, is again
The Homo floresiensis cranium (LB1): Size, scaling, and early Homo affinities
TLDR
The results are consistent with hypotheses that suggest the Liang Bua specimens represent a diminutive population closely related to either early H. erectus s.
Palaeoanthropology: Homo floresiensis from head to toe
TLDR
Daniel Lieberman discusses fossils of tiny ancient humans and a special issue of The Journal of Human Evolution, and concludes that H. floresiensis probably is a bone fide — and very interesting — species of hominin.
The affinities of Homo floresiensis based on phylogenetic analyses of cranial, dental, and postcranial characters.
TLDR
The phylogenetic data build upon those characters previously presented in support of these hypotheses by broadening the range of traits to include the crania, mandibles, dentition, and postcrania of Homo and Australopithecus and suggest H. floresiensis is an early Homo lineage.
Cranial Embryogeny and Hominin Phylogeny
TLDR
The debate on the origins of Anatomically Modern Human, Homo sapiens sensu stricto, as well as that of the oldest species of the genus Homo, is again topical due to the outstanding conditions for fossilisation and excavations of Plio-Pleistocene fossils and to the increasing research programmes in those areas of the Old World.
Conclusions: implications of the Liang Bua excavations for hominin evolution and biogeography.
TLDR
H. floresiensis is clearly not an australopithecine, but does retain many aspects of anatomy (and perhaps behavior) that are probably plesiomorphic for the genus Homo, and some of the other implications for early hominin dispersal and evolution are discussed.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 31 REFERENCES
A new small-bodied hominin from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indonesia
TLDR
The discovery of an adult hominin with stature and endocranial volume equal to the smallest-known australopithecines is reported, from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indonesia, and shows that the genus Homo is morphologically more varied and flexible in its adaptive responses than previously thought.
Further evidence for small-bodied hominins from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indonesia
TLDR
Additional H. floresiensis remains excavated from the cave in 2004 are described, demonstrating that LB1 is not just an aberrant or pathological individual, but is representative of a long-term population that was present during the interval 95–74 to 12 thousand years ago.
Archaeology and age of a new hominin from Flores in eastern Indonesia
TLDR
Dating by radiocarbon, luminescence, uranium-series and electron spin resonance methods indicates that H. floresiensis existed from before 38,000 years ago (kyr) until at least 18 kyr, and originated from an early dispersal of Homo erectus that reached Flores and then survived on this island refuge until relatively recently.
The earliest known eutherian mammal
TLDR
The skeleton of a eutherian (placental) mammal found in northeastern China has limb and foot features that are known only from scansorial and arboreal extant mammals, in contrast to the terrestrial or cursorial features of other Cretaceous eutherians.
Pygmoid Australomelanesian Homo sapiens skeletal remains from Liang Bua, Flores: Population affinities and pathological abnormalities
TLDR
It is proposed that Liang Bua 1 is drawn from an earlier pygmy H. sapiens population but individually shows signs of a developmental abnormality, including microcephaly.
Homo floresiensis: microcephalic, pygmoid, Australopithecus, or Homo?
TLDR
The affinities of LB1 are explored using cranial and postcranial metric and non-metric analyses and it is concluded that it is unlikely that LB1 is a microcephalic human, and it cannot be attributed to any known species.
Morphology‐based systematics (MBS) and problems with fossil hominoid and hominid systematics
TLDR
Hominid and hominoid fossil taxonomy and phylogeny has been based largely on preevolutionary notions and on misinterpretations of the polarity of assumed diagnostic characters, which has led many workers to lose confidence in morphology based systematics.
The Brain of LB1, Homo floresiensis
TLDR
Morphometric, allometric, and shape data indicate that LB1 is not a microcephalic or pygmy and has derived frontal and temporal lobes and a lunate sulcus in a derived position which are consistent with capabilities for higher cognitive processing.
Flores hominid: new species or microcephalic dwarf?
TLDR
Consideration of various forms of human microcephaly and of two adult specimens indicates that LB1 could well be a microcephalic Homo sapiens, the most likely explanation for the incongruous association of a small-brained recent hominid with advanced stone tools.
The new hominid species Australopithecus anamensis
TLDR
The material discovered so far displays primitive features along with more derived characteristics typical of later Australopithecus species, which suggests that A. anamensis belongs near the ancestry of this genus.
...
1
2
3
4
...