DOCSLIB.ORG

Homo Ergaster

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Homo Ergaster HOMO ERGASTER Homo ergaster was the first of our ancestors to look more like modern humans. ‘Turkana Boy’ Homo ergaster skull Photographer: Stuart Humphreys © Australian Museum These people were generally tall and slender and may also have been relatively hairless. Not everyone accepts this species name, some still prefer to use the term African Homo erectus. Background to discovery Age The core group within this species lived between 1.5 and 1.9 million years ago although some classifications include additional individuals that extends their range to between about 700,000 and 2 million years ago. Important fossil discoveries Homo ergaster was first proposed as a new species in 1975 after scientists re-examined a fossil jaw previously identified as Homo habilis. Colin Groves and Vratislav Mazák noticed some unique features about this jaw that made it different to our other human ancestors. These same features were later recognised in a group of fossils that had initially been thought to be early forms of Homo erectus from Africa. All these fossils have now been reclassified as Homo ergaster. New fossil discoveries have since been made and this species is now represented by fossils from males and females as well as adults and juveniles. Important specimens [email protected] 99899 66744 www.sosinclasses.com • ‘Turkana Boy’ KNM-WT 15000 – skeleton discovered in 1984 by Kamoya Kimeu in Nariokotome, West Turkana, Kenya. The Turkana Boy or ‘Nariokotome Boy’ as he is sometimes called, lived about 1.5 million years ago. He was about 8 to 10 years of age when he died but was already 1.6 metres tall and may have reached 1.85 metres as an adult. Almost 90% of his skeleton was recovered and has provided valuable information on this species’ body size, proportions and development. The Turkana Boy had a tall, slender body adapted for striding out across the extensive savannah plains. He also had a more human-like face with a nose that projected outwards and a larger braincase. • SK 847 – a partial skull discovered in 1969 in Swartkrans, South Africa by Ronald Clark. This skull was found in a cave with many fossils from another species, Paranthropus robustus. Stone tools and burned bones were also found at this site. The tool maker was probably Homo ergaster. Fire may have been used here about 1.5 million years ago by Homo ergaster, although the burned bones may have resulted from a natural fire rather than from a controlled man-made fire. • KNM-ER 3733 – skull discovered in 1975 by Bernard Ngeneo and Richard Leakey in Koobi Fora, East Turkana, Kenya. This is the skull of an adult female. Females had less robust features compared with males such as ‘Turkana Boy’. • KNM-ER 992 – a lower jaw discovered in 1971 by Bernard Ngeneo in Koobi Fora, East Turkana, Kenya. This lower jaw is the ‘type specimen’ or official representative of this species. It was first classified as Homo habilis, but was reclassified as Homo ergaster in 1975 because it showed advanced features such as a lightly built jaw and relatively small premolar and molar teeth. • KNM-ER 42700 - A 1.5-million-year-old skull of a young adult discovered in Ileret in Kenya in 2000 (described in 2007). The skull has a very small brain of about 691cc, the smallest for any Homo ergaster. This indicates that this species came in a variety of sizes, with males being much larger than females, which was unexpected for this species. It also shows features that had previously only been found in Asian Homo erectus, such as the ridge on the frontal and parietal skull bones. This mix of traits blurs the distinction between Asian Homo erectus and African Homo ergaster and has caused some experts to rethink whether these should be separate species. • BSN49/P27 – a female pelvis from Gona, Afar in Ethiopia, dated to 1.8 million years old. The size of this pelvis suggest the female was quite short at only about 130cm in height, much smaller than has been estimated for females prior to this discovery. The size and shape also indicate the female could have given birth to a young with a brain 30-50% the size of an adult’s. This suggests that the growth rate of the brain in the womb was similar to that of a modern human but slowed down in the first few years of life to a rate intermediate between modern humans and living chimpanzees. • Various fossils found in Eurasia at Dmanisi in the Republic of Georgia may belong to Homo ergaster. These Dmanisi fossils are significant because they currently represent the earliest evidence for the emergence of early humans from Africa into Eurasia 1.75 million years ago. Key specimens include: Skull D2700 (discovered in 2001) with a brain size of 600 cc; Skull D2280 (discovered in 1999) with a brain szie of 780 cc and features similar to Homo ergaster specimens KNM-WT 15000 and KNM-ER 3733; and Skull D2282 (discovered in 1999) with a brain size of about 650 cc and features similar to KNM-WT 15000 and KNM-ER 3733. • Fossil footprints from Ileret, Kenya, dated to 1.5 million years ago. These are the oldest known evidence of an essentially modern human-like foot anatomy and differ from the Laetoli footprints left by australopithecines 3.6 million years ago. The size and shape suggest that they were made by Homo ergaster, which also makes them the oldest surviving footprints made by a human species. What the name means Homo, is a Latin word meaning ‘human’ or ‘man’. It is the same genus or group name as the one given to modern humans, which indicates the close relationship between this species and our own. The word ergaster is based on a Greek word meaning ‘work’, so the name Homo ergaster means ‘workman’. This name was used because large stone tools were found near some of its fossils. Distribution Fossils of this species have been found in Africa and Eurasia. Important sites include regions around Lake Turkana and Lake Victoria, Koobi Fora, Nariokotome, Olorgesailie, Swartkrans and Dmanisi, Georgia. [email protected] 99899 66744 www.sosinclasses.com Relationships with other species Some people do not recognise Homo ergaster as a species and instead classify these fossils as Homo erectus. Those who do accept Homo ergaster consider this species to be the common ancestor of two groups of humans that took different evolutionary paths. One of these groups was Homo erectus, the other group ultimately became our own species Homo sapiens. Some fossils including the ‘type specimen’ (a jaw known as KNM-ER 992) were formerly classified as Homo habilis. Finds from Dmanisi in Georgia are currently attributed by most scientists to this species, although new finds led to the suggestion in 2002 that these belong in a new species, Homo georgicus. However, this is not widely accepted. More recently, skull KNM-ER 42700, dating to 1.5 million years old and discovered in Ileret in Kenya in 2000 (but described in 2007), blurs the distinction between Asian Homo erectus and African Homo ergaster. It shows features that had previously only been found in Asian Homo erectus specimens, such as the ridge on the frontal and parietal skull bones. This mix of traits caused some experts to rethink the whether these should be separate species. Key physical features This species’ tall, long-legged body, with a flatter face, a projecting nose and a somewhat expanded brain was well along the evolutionary path leading to modern humans but it still possessed a number of intermediate features. Body size and shape • the body is usually considered to be tall and slender with long legs which may have been an adaptation to maximise cooling of the body in a hot, dry environment. However, a pelvis found in 2000 suggests that females at least were broad-hipped and short. • females grew to about 160 centimetres in height whereas males reached about 180 centimetres in height. • the body may have been relatively hairless as a way of improving body cooling by sweating. • ribcage was like that of modern humans in being barrel-shaped rather than cone-shaped as in earlier species. Along with changes to the shoulders, chest and waist, this new body shape improved the body’s balance and made it possible to run. Brain • average brain size was approximately 860 cubic centimetres and made up about 1.6% of their body weight Skull • had developed a more human-like shape including a higher, more domed cranium or braincase. Unlike modern humans, the cranium had a moderate post-orbital constriction (indents behind the eye sockets). This feature is linked to brain size. As our ancestors’ brains expanded, their skulls became fuller and more rounded with increasingly smaller post-orbital constrictions. • face projected outward but to a smaller degree than in earlier ancestors • distinct double-arched brow ridge lay above the eyes and a relatively distinct groove was located between the brow ridge and forehead • nose was human-like for the first time. It now projected outward whereas earlier species had flat noses Jaws and teeth • jaw was shorter and more lightly built than those of earlier species, resulting in a flatter, shorter face [email protected] 99899 66744 www.sosinclasses.com • like earlier species, the front of the lower jaw sloped backward and did not form a pointed chin like that of modern humans • arrangement of the teeth within the jaws was intermediate between that of apes and modern humans in that the side rows of teeth were much further apart at the back of the jaw than at the front • canine teeth were modern in form, being short and blunt like those of modern humans • premolar and molar teeth were smaller and more human-like than those of earlier species.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Language Evolution to Revolution: from a Slowly Developing Finite Communication System with Many Words to Infinite Modern Language
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/166520; this version posted July 20, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Language evolution to revolution: from a slowly developing finite communication system with many words to infinite modern language Andrey Vyshedskiy1,2* 1Boston University, Boston, USA 2ImagiRation LLC, Boston, MA, USA Keywords: Language evolution, hominin evolution, human evolution, recursive language, flexible syntax, human language, syntactic language, modern language, Cognitive revolution, Great Leap Forward, Upper Paleolithic Revolution, Neanderthal language Abstract There is overwhelming archeological and genetic evidence that modern speech apparatus was acquired by hominins by 600,000 years ago. There is also widespread agreement that modern syntactic language arose with behavioral modernity around 100,000 years ago. We attempted to answer two crucial questions: (1) how different was the communication system of hominins before acquisition of modern language and (2) what triggered the acquisition of modern language 100,000 years ago. We conclude that the communication system of hominins prior to 100,000 years ago was finite and not- recursive. It may have had thousands of words but was lacking flexible syntax, spatial prepositions, verb tenses, and other features that enable modern human language to communicate an infinite number of ideas. We argue that a synergistic confluence of a genetic mutation that dramatically slowed down the prefrontal cortex (PFC) development in monozygotic twins and their spontaneous invention of spatial prepositions 100,000 years ago resulted in acquisition of PFC-driven constructive imagination (mental synthesis) and converted the finite communication system of their ancestors into infinite modern language.
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Erectus Infancy and Childhood the Turning Point in the Evolution of Behavioral Development in Hominids
    10 Homo erectus Infancy and Childhood The Turning Point in the Evolution of Behavioral Development in Hominids Sue Taylor Parker In man, attachment is mediated by several different sorts of behaviour of which the most obvious are crying and calling, babbling and smiling, clinging, non-nutritional sucking, and locomotion as used in approach, following and seeking. —John Bowlby, Attachment The evolution of hominid behavioral ontogeny can be recon - structed using two lines of evidence: first, comparative neontological data on the behavior and development of living hominoid species (humans and the great apes), and second, comparative paleontolog- ical and archaeological evidence associated with fossil hominids. (Although behavior rarely fossilizes, it can leave significant traces.) 1 In this chapter I focus on paleontological and neontological evi - dence relevant to modeling the evolution of the following hominid adaptations: (1) bipedal locomotion and stance; (2) tool use and tool making; (3) subsistence patterns; (4) growth and development and other life history patterns; (5) childbirth; (6) childhood and child care; and (7) cognition and cognitive development. In each case I present a cladistic model for the origins of the characters in question. 2 Specifically, I review pertinent data on the following widely recog - nized hominid genera and species: Australopithecus species (A. afarensis , A. africanus , and A. robustus [Paranthropus robustus]) , early Homo species (Australopithecus gahri , Homo habilis , and Homo rudolfensis) , and Middle Pleistocene Homo species (Homo erectus , Homo ergaster , and others), which I am calling erectines . Copyrighted Material www.sarpress.org 279 S UE TAYLOR PARKER Table 10.1 Estimated Body Weights and Geological Ages of Fossil Hominids _______________________________________________________________________ Species Geologic Age Male Weight Female Weight (MYA) (kg) (kg) _______________________________________________________________________ A.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • 1843 KMS Kenya Past and Present Issue 43
    Kenya Past and Present Issue 43 Kenya Past and Present Editor Peta Meyer Editorial Board Marla Stone Patricia Jentz Kathy Vaughan Kenya Past and Present is a publication of the Kenya Museum Society, a not-for-profit organisation founded in 1971 to support and raise funds for the National Museums of Kenya. Correspondence should be addressed to: Kenya Museum Society, PO Box 40658, Nairobi 00100, Kenya. Email: [email protected] Website: www.KenyaMuseumSociety.org Statements of fact and opinion appearing in Kenya Past and Present are made on the responsibility of the author alone and do not imply the endorsement of the editor or publishers. Reproduction of the contents is permitted with acknowledgement given to its source. We encourage the contribution of articles, which may be sent to the editor at [email protected]. No category exists for subscription to Kenya Past and Present; it is a benefit of membership in the Kenya Museum Society. Available back issues are for sale at the Society’s offices in the Nairobi National Museum. Any organisation wishing to exchange journals should write to the Resource Centre Manager, National Museums of Kenya, PO Box 40658, Nairobi 00100, Kenya, or send an email to [email protected] Designed by Tara Consultants Ltd ©Kenya Museum Society Nairobi, April 2016 Kenya Past and Present Issue 43, 2016 Contents KMS highlights 2015 ..................................................................................... 3 Patricia Jentz To conserve Kenya’s natural and cultural heritage ........................................ 9 Marla Stone Museum highlights 2015 ............................................................................. 11 Juliana Jebet and Hellen Njagi Beauty and the bead: Ostrich eggshell beads through prehistory .................................................. 17 Angela W.
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Heidelbergensis: the Ot Ol to Our Success Alexander Burkard Virginia Commonwealth University
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Auctus: The ourJ nal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Scholarship 2016 Homo heidelbergensis: The oT ol to Our Success Alexander Burkard Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/auctus Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons, and the Biology Commons © The Author(s) Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/auctus/47 This Social Sciences is brought to you for free and open access by VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Auctus: The ourJ nal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Scholarship by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Homo heidelbergensis: The Tool to Our Success By Alexander Burkard Homo heidelbergensis, a physiological variant of the species Homo sapien, is an extinct spe- cies that existed in both Europe and parts of Asia from 700,000 years ago to roughly 300,000 years ago (carbon dating). This “subspecies” of Homo sapiens, as it is formally classified, is a direct ancestor of anatomically modern humans, and is understood to have many of the same physiological characteristics as those of anatomically modern humans while still expressing many of the same physiological attributes of Homo erectus, an earlier human ancestor. Since Homo heidelbergensis represents attributes of both species, it has therefore earned the classifica- tion as a subspecies of Homo sapiens and Homo erectus. Homo heidelbergensis, like anatomically modern humans, is the byproduct of millions of years of natural selection and genetic variation. It is understood through current scientific theory that roughly 200,000 years ago (carbon dat- ing), archaic Homo sapiens and Homo erectus left Africa in pursuit of the small and large animal game that were migrating north into Europe and Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Cave Bear Ecology and Interactions With
    CAVEBEAR ECOLOGYAND INTERACTIONSWITH PLEISTOCENE HUMANS MARYC. STINER, Department of Anthropology,Building 30, Universityof Arizona,Tucson, AZ 85721, USA,email: [email protected] Abstract:Human ancestors (Homo spp.), cave bears(Ursus deningeri, U. spelaeus), andbrown bears (U. arctos) have coexisted in Eurasiafor at least one million years, andbear remains and Paleolithic artifacts frequently are found in the same caves. The prevalenceof cave bearbones in some sites is especiallystriking, as thesebears were exceptionallylarge relative to archaichumans. Do artifact-bearassociations in cave depositsindicate predation on cave bearsby earlyhuman hunters, or do they testify simply to earlyhumans' and cave bears'common interest in naturalshelters, occupied on different schedules?Answering these and other questions aboutthe circumstancesof human-cave bear associationsis made possible in partby expectations developedfrom research on modem bearecology, time-scaledfor paleontologicand archaeologic applications. Here I review availableknowledge on Paleolithichuman-bear relations with a special focus on cave bears(Middle Pleistocene U. deningeri)from YarimburgazCave, Turkey.Multiple lines of evidence show thatcave bearand human use of caves were temporallyindependent events; the apparentspatial associations between human artifacts andcave bearbones areexplained principally by slow sedimentationrates relative to the pace of biogenicaccumulation and bears' bed preparationhabits. Hibernation-linkedbehaviors and population characteristics of cave
    [Show full text]
  • K = Kenyanthropus Platyops “Kenya Man” Discovered by Meave Leaky
    K = Kenyanthropus platyops “Kenya Man” Discovered by Meave Leaky and her team in 1998 west of Lake Turkana, Kenya, and described as a new genus dating back to the middle Pliocene, 3.5 MYA. A = Australopithecus africanus STS-5 “Mrs. Ples” The discovery of this skull in 1947 in South Africa of this virtually complete skull gave additional credence to the establishment of early Hominids. Dated at 2.5 MYA. H = Homo habilis KNM-ER 1813 Discovered in 1973 by Kamoya Kimeu in Koobi Fora, Kenya. Even though it is very small, it is considered to be an adult and is dated at 1.9 MYA. E = Homo erectus “Peking Man” Discovered in China in the 1920’s, this is based on the reconstruction by Sawyer and Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History. Dated at 400-500,000 YA. (2 parts) L = Australopithecus afarensis “Lucy” Discovered by Donald Johanson in 1974 in Ethiopia. Lucy, at 3.2 million years old has been considered the first human. This is now being challenged by the discovery of Kenyanthropus described by Leaky. (2 parts) TC = Australopithecus africanus “Taung child” Discovered in 1924 in Taung, South Africa by M. de Bruyn. Raymond Dart established it as a new genus and species. Dated at 2.3 MYA. (3 parts) G = Homo ergaster “Nariokotome or Turkana boy” KNM-WT 15000 Discovered in 1984 in Nariokotome, Kenya by Richard Leaky this is the first skull dated before 100,000 years that is complete enough to get accurate measurements to determine brain size. Dated at 1.6 MYA.
    [Show full text]
  • Phytolith Analysed to Compare Changes in Vegetation Structure of Koobi Fora and Olorgesailie Basins Through the Mid- Pleistocene-Holocene Periods
    Phytolith analysed to Compare Changes in Vegetation Structure of Koobi Fora and Olorgesailie Basins through the Mid- Pleistocene-Holocene Periods. By KINYANJUI, Rahab N. Student number: 712138 Submitted on 28th February, 2017 Submitted the revised version on 22nd February, 2018 Declaration A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Science in fulfilment of the requirements for PhD degree. At School of Geosciences, Evolutionary Studies Institute (ESI) University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg South Africa. I declare that this is my own unaided work and has not been submitted elsewhere for degree purposes KINYANJUI, Rahab N. Student No. 712138 ii Abstract Phytolith analyses to compare changes in vegetation structure of Koobi Fora and Olorgesailie Basins through Mid-Pleistocene-Holocene Periods. By Rahab N Kinyanjui (Student No: 712138) Doctor of Philosophy in Palaeontology University of Witwatersrand, South Africa School of Geological Sciences, Evolutionary Science Institute (GEOS/ESI) Supervisor: Prof Marion Bamford. The Koobi Fora and Olorgesailie Basins are renowned Hominin sites in the Rift Valley of northern and central Kenya, respectively with fluvial, lacustrine and tuffaceous sediments spanning the Pleistocene and Holocene. Much research has been done on the fossil fauna, hominins and flora with the aim of trying to understand when and how the hominins evolved, and how the environment impacted on their behaviour, land-use and distribution over time. One of the most important factors in trying to understand the hominin-environment relationship is firstly to reconstruct the environment. Important environmental factors are the climate, rate or degree of climate change, vegetation structure and resources, floral and faunal resources. Vegetation structure/composition is a key component of the environments and, it has been hypothesized the openness and/or closeness of vegetation structure played a key role in shaping the evolutionary history not only of man but also other mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • Homo Aestheticus’
    Conceptual Paper Glob J Arch & Anthropol Volume 11 Issue 3 - June 2020 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Shuchi Srivastava DOI: 10.19080/GJAA.2020.11.555815 Man and Artistic Expression: Emergence of ‘Homo Aestheticus’ Shuchi Srivastava* Department of Anthropology, National Post Graduate College, University of Lucknow, India Submission: May 30, 2020; Published: June 16, 2020 *Corresponding author: Shuchi Srivastava, Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, National Post Graduate College, An Autonomous College of University of Lucknow, Lucknow, India Abstract Man is a member of animal kingdom like all other animals but his unique feature is culture. Cultural activities involve art and artistic expressions which are the earliest methods of emotional manifestation through sign. The present paper deals with the origin of the artistic expression of the man, i.e. the emergence of ‘Homo aestheticus’ and discussed various related aspects. It is basically a conceptual paper; history of art begins with humanity. In his artistic instincts and attainments, man expressed his vigour, his ability to establish a gainful and optimistictherefore, mainlyrelationship the secondary with his environmentsources of data to humanizehave been nature. used for Their the behaviorsstudy. Overall as artists findings was reveal one of that the man selection is artistic characteristics by nature suitableand the for the progress of the human species. Evidence from extensive analysis of cave art and home art suggests that humans have also been ‘Homo aestheticus’ since their origins. Keywords: Man; Art; Artistic expression; Homo aestheticus; Prehistoric art; Palaeolithic art; Cave art; Home art Introduction ‘Sahityasangeetkalavihinah, Sakshatpashuh Maybe it was the time when some African apelike creatures to 7 million years ago, the first human ancestors were appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Turkana National Parks - 2017 Conservation Outlook Assessment (Archived)
    IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Lake Turkana National Parks - 2017 Conservation Outlook Assessment (archived) IUCN Conservation Outlook Assessment 2017 (archived) Finalised on 26 October 2017 Please note: this is an archived Conservation Outlook Assessment for Lake Turkana National Parks. To access the most up-to-date Conservation Outlook Assessment for this site, please visit https://www.worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org. Lake Turkana National Parks عقوملا تامولعم Country: Kenya Inscribed in: 1997 Criteria: (viii) (x) The most saline of Africa's large lakes, Turkana is an outstanding laboratory for the study of plant and animal communities. The three National Parks serve as a stopover for migrant waterfowl and are major breeding grounds for the Nile crocodile, hippopotamus and a variety of venomous snakes. The Koobi Fora deposits, rich in mammalian, molluscan and other fossil remains, have contributed more to the understanding of paleo-environments than any other site on the continent. © UNESCO صخلملا 2017 Conservation Outlook Critical Lake Turkana’s unique qualities as a large lake in a desert environment are under threat as the demands for water for development escalate and the financial capital to build major dams becomes available. Historically, the lake’s level has been subject to natural fluctuations in response to the vicissitudes of climate, with the inflow of water broadly matching the amount lost through evaporation (as the lake basin has no outflow). The lake’s major source of water, Ethiopia’s Omo River is being developed with a series of major hydropower dams and irrigated agricultural schemes, in particular sugar and other crop plantations.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkana Boy: a 1.5-Million-Year-Old Skeleton
    Turkana Boy: A 1.5-Million-year-old Skeleton The Nariokotome site. Fossil hunters scouring the inhospitable terrain west of Lake Turkana in Kenya in 1984 were lured to the place by the promise of shade and a supply of underground water, not knowing that one of them would discover the almost entire skeleton of an early human. Beating the Odds Chances are stacked against the survival and recovery of the bones of early humans. For a start, they were rare creatures on the African landscape, and they did not bury their dead. Their corpses, even of those who did not succumb to predators, were quickly destroyed by scavengers and trampling animals, and the remaining bones crumbled through weathering and entanglement by vegetation. Occasionally, however, pieces of bone and, particularly, teeth survived long enough to be covered by sediments that protected them from the ravages of the open veld. Over time, minerals from the sediments seeped in and replaced their decaying organic materials until they turned to stone and became the fossil remains of once-living organisms. Then they wait — until their final resting place is exposed by erosion or excavation to the sharp eyes of a paleoanthropologist, a scientist who studies human evolution. The recovery of even a partial early human skeleton is rare; usually the remains are so fragmentary that simply trying to identify them can fuel lively debates among scientists.. Hitting the Jackpot However, luck was on the side of the paleoanthropologists who had pitched camp beside the sandy bed of the Nariokotome River some 3 miles (5 kilometers) west of Lake Turkana in northern Kenya one August day in 65 CHAPTER 2: NATURAL DEATHS RIGHT Working under the hot African sun, the excavation team Identify carefully sifts through the sediments at Nariokotome to KNM-WT recover almost all the bones of a skulls, he 1.5-million-year-old early human: position c only his feet and a few other pieces ancestor: were not found.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Members of the Genus Homo -. EXPLORATIONS: an OPEN INVITATION to BIOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
    EXPLORATIONS: AN OPEN INVITATION TO BIOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY Editors: Beth Shook, Katie Nelson, Kelsie Aguilera and Lara Braff American Anthropological Association Arlington, VA 2019 Explorations: An Open Invitation to Biological Anthropology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. ISBN – 978-1-931303-63-7 www.explorations.americananthro.org 10. Early Members of the Genus Homo Bonnie Yoshida-Levine Ph.D., Grossmont College Learning Objectives • Describe how early Pleistocene climate change influenced the evolution of the genus Homo. • Identify the characteristics that define the genus Homo. • Describe the skeletal anatomy of Homo habilis and Homo erectus based on the fossil evidence. • Assess opposing points of view about how early Homo should be classified. Describe what is known about the adaptive strategies of early members of the Homo genus, including tool technologies, diet, migration patterns, and other behavioral trends.The boy was no older than 9 when he perished by the swampy shores of the lake. After death, his slender, long-limbed body sank into the mud of the lake shallows. His bones fossilized and lay undisturbed for 1.5 million years. In the 1980s, fossil hunter Kimoya Kimeu, working on the western shore of Lake Turkana, Kenya, glimpsed a dark colored piece of bone eroding in a hillside. This small skull fragment led to the discovery of what is arguably the world’s most complete early hominin fossil—a youth identified as a member of the species Homo erectus. Now known as Nariokotome Boy, after the nearby lake village, the skeleton has provided a wealth of information about the early evolution of our own genus, Homo (see Figure 10.1).
    [Show full text]