Humans and Chimps evolved from an ancestor with suspensory adaptations

Angela

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,328
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
See:
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/9/eabf2474.full

"Ardipithecus[FONT=&quot] hand provides evidence that humans and chimpanzees evolved from an ancestor with suspensory adaptations"

"[/FONT][h=2]Abstract[/h]The morphology and positional behavior of the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees are critical for understanding the evolution of bipedalism. Early 20th century anatomical research supported the view that humans evolved from a suspensory ancestor bearing some resemblance to apes. However, the hand of the 4.4-million-year-old hominin Ardipithecus ramidus purportedly provides evidence that the hominin hand was derived from a more generalized form. Here, we use morphometric and phylogenetic comparative methods to show that Ardipithecus retains suspensory adapted hand morphologies shared with chimpanzees and bonobos. We identify an evolutionary shift in hand morphology between Ardipithecus and Australopithecus that renews questions about the coevolution of hominin manipulative capabilities and obligate bipedalism initially proposed by Darwin. Overall, our results suggest that early hominins evolved from an ancestor with a varied positional repertoire including suspension and vertical climbing, directly affecting the viable range of hypotheses for the origin of our lineage."

So, the tree is more muddied than ever?
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
 
Thanks for this. I interpreted the paper as saying that the tree is actually less muddied now because their comparative study of hand morphology showed that early hominin hands were more similar to the hands of chimpanzees and bonobos than they were to the hands of any other primates.

The paper presents evidence against earlier studies suggesting that early hominin hands were more monkey-like than ape-like, and that's compatible with DNA studies that show that chimpanzees and bonobos are the closest living relatives of homo sapiens.

As an aside, I find it interesting that scientists in 2021 still use the term ape in a way that excludes hominins. Chimpanzees and bonobos are most closely related to each other, but they are closer cousins of humans than they are of gorillas. In turn, gorillas are closer cousins of humans than they are of orang utans. Orang utans are closer cousins of humans than they are of gibbons. How, then, can taxonomists exclude humans from the ape family? Human pride perhaps? We've accepted the idea that we descend from apes but we're reluctant to admit that we still are apes.
 
Tamakore said:
Chimpanzees and bonobos are most closely related to each other, but they are closer cousins of humans than they are of gorillas. In turn, gorillas are closer cousins of humans than they are of orangutans. Orang utans are closer cousins of humans than they are of gibbons. How, then, can taxonomists exclude humans from the ape family? Human pride perhaps? We've accepted the idea that we descend from apes but we're reluctant to admit that we still are apes.
Click to expand...

Are we still apes?? That says we form a cluster of advanced mammals. But that doesn't necessarily mean we're still primates.

We have gone through enough speciation to say orangutans, gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees are a subgroup.

And humans(along with extinct Homo species) are a differentiated subgroup in the same cluster.

But I don't think that
names like ape, monkey or primate are appropiate to describe Hominin species.

Since They're too related to a kind of animals with clear behavioral differences, such as living inside forests; as opposed to refuges in caves or houses.
Or climbing in trees, instead of walking and manipulating tools. And I know that chimps use natural 'spears'...

But that is a non developed skill. It highlights the evolutionary link, but They're different.
 
Mmiikkii said:
Are we still apes?? That says we form a cluster of advanced mammals. But that doesn't necessarily mean we're still primates.

We have gone through enough speciation to say orangutans, gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees are a subgroup.

And humans(along with extinct Homo species) are a differentiated subgroup in the same cluster.

But I don't think that
names like ape, monkey or primate are appropiate to describe Hominin species.

Since They're too related to a kind of animals with clear behavioral differences, such as living inside forests; as opposed to refuges in caves or houses.
Or climbing in trees, instead of walking and manipulating tools. And I know that chimps use natural 'spears'...

But that is a non developed skill. It highlights the evolutionary link, but They're different.
Click to expand...

Modern taxonomy is not based on behavioural differences, but on shared evolutionary history and increasingly on shared DNA. Are penguins no longer birds because they can't fly, live in cold environments and have other behavioural differences compared with other birds?

Beavers have unique behavioural differences compared with other rodents. Beavers are the only rodents that build complex dams and lodges, but does that mean that they are no longer rodents?

To me, the claim that humans are no longer primates and no longer apes makes as much sense as claiming that humans are no longer mammals or no longer vertebrates. We are mammals because we descend from the first mammals and we are apes because we descend from the first apes.
 
Tamakore said:
To me, the claim that humans are no longer primates and no longer apes makes as much sense as claiming that humans are no longer mammals or no longer vertebrates. We are mammals because we descend from the first mammals and we are apes because we descend from the first apes.
Click to expand...

Well, what I was saying is that at some point we have to be differentiated by something.
For example, we descend from the first mammals, but that is an species extinct in that form, and we're no longer that.

Besides, humans are the mental and cultural animal. I think that characteristic is enough to see a difference, apart from anatomy(where we're also very different).
 
I agree that humans have some unique characteristics, such as syntactic speech and complex technology, but we are not the only species of animal with unique characteristics.

Our anatomy is not that different from chimpanzees. I remember a man with a pet chimpanzee who said if his chimpanzee was sick he took him to a doctor not a vet because chimpanzees and humans had such similar physiology.

I recommend the book "The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee" by Jared Diamond. He pointed out that humans should be classified as a third species of chimpanzee, alongside the common chimpanzee and pygmy chimpanzee (bonobo).
 
Early 20th century anatomical research supported the view that humans evolved from a suspensory ancestor bearing some resemblance to apes. However, the hand of the 4.4-million-year-old hominin Ardipithecus ramidus purportedly provides evidence that the hominin hand was derived from a more generalized form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 2977 times.

Back
Top