直立人的命名:回顾

IF 3.1 1区 地球科学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of Human Evolution Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103516
Eduard Pop , Sofwan Noerwidi , Fred Spoor
{"title":"直立人的命名:回顾","authors":"Eduard Pop ,&nbsp;Sofwan Noerwidi ,&nbsp;Fred Spoor","doi":"10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Following the discovery of hominin fossils at Trinil (Java, Indonesia) in 1891 and 1892, Eugène Dubois named a new species, now known as <em>Homo erectus</em>. Although the main historical events are well-known, there appears to be no consensus regarding two important aspects of the naming of the species, including what constitutes the original publication of the name, and what is the name-bearing type specimen. These issues are addressed in this paper with reference to original sources and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Our review confirms earlier studies that cite the published quarterly fieldwork report covering the 3rd quarter of 1892 as the original publication naming the species <em>erectus</em>. However, until recently, the correct publication year of 1893 has consistently been cited as 1892, and it has rarely been recognized that the author of the publication was anonymous, even though the author of the species is specifically named. Importantly, Dubois assigns all three hominin fossils found at Trinil up to that moment to the new species, explicitly stating that they belong to a single individual. The three fossils, a molar, a calotte, and a femur, therefore jointly constitute the original holotype. However, the femur most likely derives from younger strata than the other hominins and shows fully modern human-like morphology, unlike subsequently discovered <em>H. erectus</em> femora. Moreover, there is no consensus over the affinities of the molar, and if it is <em>H. erectus</em> rather than an extinct ape, there is no evidence that it belongs to the same individual as the calotte. Excluding these two fossils from the holotype, the calotte is the appropriate fossil to retain the role as name-bearing specimen.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54805,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Evolution","volume":"190 ","pages":"Article 103516"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248424000241/pdfft?md5=955372a302190d944f1777935c32710c&pid=1-s2.0-S0047248424000241-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naming Homo erectus: A review\",\"authors\":\"Eduard Pop ,&nbsp;Sofwan Noerwidi ,&nbsp;Fred Spoor\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103516\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Following the discovery of hominin fossils at Trinil (Java, Indonesia) in 1891 and 1892, Eugène Dubois named a new species, now known as <em>Homo erectus</em>. Although the main historical events are well-known, there appears to be no consensus regarding two important aspects of the naming of the species, including what constitutes the original publication of the name, and what is the name-bearing type specimen. These issues are addressed in this paper with reference to original sources and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Our review confirms earlier studies that cite the published quarterly fieldwork report covering the 3rd quarter of 1892 as the original publication naming the species <em>erectus</em>. However, until recently, the correct publication year of 1893 has consistently been cited as 1892, and it has rarely been recognized that the author of the publication was anonymous, even though the author of the species is specifically named. Importantly, Dubois assigns all three hominin fossils found at Trinil up to that moment to the new species, explicitly stating that they belong to a single individual. The three fossils, a molar, a calotte, and a femur, therefore jointly constitute the original holotype. However, the femur most likely derives from younger strata than the other hominins and shows fully modern human-like morphology, unlike subsequently discovered <em>H. erectus</em> femora. Moreover, there is no consensus over the affinities of the molar, and if it is <em>H. erectus</em> rather than an extinct ape, there is no evidence that it belongs to the same individual as the calotte. Excluding these two fossils from the holotype, the calotte is the appropriate fossil to retain the role as name-bearing specimen.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54805,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Evolution\",\"volume\":\"190 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103516\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248424000241/pdfft?md5=955372a302190d944f1777935c32710c&pid=1-s2.0-S0047248424000241-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Evolution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248424000241\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248424000241","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1891 年和 1892 年,尤金-杜波依斯(Eugène Dubois)在特里尼尔(印度尼西亚爪哇岛)发现了类人猿化石,之后他命名了一个新物种,即现在的直立人。尽管主要的历史事件众所周知,但关于该物种命名的两个重要方面似乎还没有达成共识,包括什么是该名称的最初公布,什么是命名的模式标本。本文将参考原始资料来源和《国际动物命名法》来探讨这些问题。我们的回顾证实了早先的研究,这些研究将 1892 年第三季度发表的野外考察季度报告作为命名直立人物种的原始出版物。然而,直到最近,正确的出版年份 1893 年一直被引用为 1892 年,而且很少有人承认该出版物的作者是匿名的,尽管该物种的作者被明确命名。重要的是,杜波依斯将截至当时在特里尼尔发现的所有三件类人猿化石都归入了这个新物种,明确指出它们属于同一个个体。因此,臼齿、卡洛特和股骨这三块化石共同构成了最初的主模式。然而,这根股骨很可能来自比其他类人猿更年轻的地层,并显示出完全类似现代人的形态,与后来发现的直立人股骨不同。此外,关于臼齿的亲缘关系还没有达成共识,如果它是直立人而不是已灭绝的猿类,也没有证据表明它与卡洛特属于同一个个体。如果将这两件化石排除在原型之外,卡洛特化石是保留作为命名标本的合适化石。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Naming Homo erectus: A review

Following the discovery of hominin fossils at Trinil (Java, Indonesia) in 1891 and 1892, Eugène Dubois named a new species, now known as Homo erectus. Although the main historical events are well-known, there appears to be no consensus regarding two important aspects of the naming of the species, including what constitutes the original publication of the name, and what is the name-bearing type specimen. These issues are addressed in this paper with reference to original sources and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Our review confirms earlier studies that cite the published quarterly fieldwork report covering the 3rd quarter of 1892 as the original publication naming the species erectus. However, until recently, the correct publication year of 1893 has consistently been cited as 1892, and it has rarely been recognized that the author of the publication was anonymous, even though the author of the species is specifically named. Importantly, Dubois assigns all three hominin fossils found at Trinil up to that moment to the new species, explicitly stating that they belong to a single individual. The three fossils, a molar, a calotte, and a femur, therefore jointly constitute the original holotype. However, the femur most likely derives from younger strata than the other hominins and shows fully modern human-like morphology, unlike subsequently discovered H. erectus femora. Moreover, there is no consensus over the affinities of the molar, and if it is H. erectus rather than an extinct ape, there is no evidence that it belongs to the same individual as the calotte. Excluding these two fossils from the holotype, the calotte is the appropriate fossil to retain the role as name-bearing specimen.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Human Evolution
Journal of Human Evolution 生物-进化生物学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
15.60%
发文量
104
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Human Evolution concentrates on publishing the highest quality papers covering all aspects of human evolution. The central focus is aimed jointly at paleoanthropological work, covering human and primate fossils, and at comparative studies of living species, including both morphological and molecular evidence. These include descriptions of new discoveries, interpretative analyses of new and previously described material, and assessments of the phylogeny and paleobiology of primate species. Submissions should address issues and questions of broad interest in paleoanthropology.
期刊最新文献
Shanidar 3 ‘rings the bell’: Virtual ribcage reconstruction and its implications for understanding the Neanderthal bauplan Divergent otolithic systems in the inner ear of Paranthropus robustus and Australopithecus africanus Interpreting statistical significance in hominin dimorphism: Power and Type I error rates for resampling tests of univariate and missing-data multivariate size dimorphism estimation methods in the fossil record The Grotte du Bison Neandertals (Arcy-sur-Cure, France) New modern and Pleistocene fossil micromammal assemblages from Swartkrans, South Africa: Paleobiodiversity, taphonomic, and environmental context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1