南方古猿的类人手工活动。

IF 3.1 1区 地球科学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of Human Evolution Pub Date : 2024-10-04 DOI:10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103591
{"title":"南方古猿的类人手工活动。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The evolution of the human hand is a topic of great interest in paleoanthropology. As the hand can be involved in a vast array of activities, knowledge regarding how it was used by early hominins can yield crucial information on the factors driving biocultural evolution. Previous research on early hominin hands focused on the overall bone shape. However, while such approaches can inform on mechanical abilities and the evolved efficiency of manipulation, they cannot be used as a definite proxy for individual habitual activity. Accordingly, it is crucial to examine bone structures more responsive to lifetime biomechanical loading, such as muscle attachment sites or internal bone architecture. In this study, we investigate the manual entheseal patterns of <em>Australopithecus afarensis</em>, <em>Australopithecus africanus,</em> and <em>Australopithecus sediba</em> through the application of the validated entheses-based reconstruction of activity method. Using a comparative sample of later <em>Homo</em> and three great ape genera, we analyze the muscle attachment site proportions on the thumb, fifth ray, and third intermediate phalanx to gain insight into the habitual hand use of <em>Australopithecus</em>. We use a novel statistical procedure to account for the effects of interspecies variation in overall size and ray proportions. Our results highlight the importance of certain muscles of the first and fifth digits for humanlike hand use. In humans, these muscles are required for variable in-hand manipulation and are activated during stone-tool production. The entheses of <em>A. sediba</em> suggest muscle activation patterns consistent with a similar suite of habitual manual activities as in later <em>Homo</em>. In contrast, <em>A. africanus</em> and <em>A. afarensis</em> display a mosaic entheseal pattern that combines indications of both humanlike and apelike manipulation. Overall, these findings provide new evidence that some australopith species were already habitually engaging in humanlike manipulation, even if their manual dexterity was likely not as high as in later <em>Homo</em>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54805,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Evolution","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Humanlike manual activities in Australopithecus\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhevol.2024.103591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The evolution of the human hand is a topic of great interest in paleoanthropology. As the hand can be involved in a vast array of activities, knowledge regarding how it was used by early hominins can yield crucial information on the factors driving biocultural evolution. Previous research on early hominin hands focused on the overall bone shape. However, while such approaches can inform on mechanical abilities and the evolved efficiency of manipulation, they cannot be used as a definite proxy for individual habitual activity. Accordingly, it is crucial to examine bone structures more responsive to lifetime biomechanical loading, such as muscle attachment sites or internal bone architecture. In this study, we investigate the manual entheseal patterns of <em>Australopithecus afarensis</em>, <em>Australopithecus africanus,</em> and <em>Australopithecus sediba</em> through the application of the validated entheses-based reconstruction of activity method. Using a comparative sample of later <em>Homo</em> and three great ape genera, we analyze the muscle attachment site proportions on the thumb, fifth ray, and third intermediate phalanx to gain insight into the habitual hand use of <em>Australopithecus</em>. We use a novel statistical procedure to account for the effects of interspecies variation in overall size and ray proportions. Our results highlight the importance of certain muscles of the first and fifth digits for humanlike hand use. In humans, these muscles are required for variable in-hand manipulation and are activated during stone-tool production. The entheses of <em>A. sediba</em> suggest muscle activation patterns consistent with a similar suite of habitual manual activities as in later <em>Homo</em>. In contrast, <em>A. africanus</em> and <em>A. afarensis</em> display a mosaic entheseal pattern that combines indications of both humanlike and apelike manipulation. Overall, these findings provide new evidence that some australopith species were already habitually engaging in humanlike manipulation, even if their manual dexterity was likely not as high as in later <em>Homo</em>.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54805,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Evolution\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Evolution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004724842400099X\",\"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/S004724842400099X","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

人类手部的进化是古人类学非常感兴趣的一个课题。由于手可以参与各种各样的活动,因此了解早期人类如何使用手可以获得有关生物文化进化驱动因素的重要信息。以往对早期人类手部的研究主要集中在整体骨骼形状上。然而,尽管这种方法可以提供有关机械能力和进化的操纵效率的信息,但它们不能作为个体习惯活动的确切代表。因此,研究对终生生物力学负荷更敏感的骨骼结构(如肌肉附着点或内部骨骼结构)至关重要。在这项研究中,我们通过应用经过验证的基于内含物的活动重建方法,研究了非洲澳洲人、非洲澳洲人和南非澳洲人的手动内含物模式。利用晚期智人和三个类人猿属的比较样本,我们分析了拇指、第五桡骨和第三中节指骨上肌肉附着部位的比例,以深入了解澳人猿惯用手的情况。我们使用了一种新的统计程序来解释总体尺寸和桡骨比例的种间差异的影响。我们的研究结果突显了第一和第五指骨上的某些肌肉对于像人类一样使用手的重要性。在人类中,这些肌肉是进行各种不同的手部操作所必需的,并在制作石器时被激活。sediba 猿的内含物表明,肌肉激活模式与晚期智人的一系列习惯性手部活动相一致。相比之下,非洲古人类和类人猿的内趾则显示出一种马赛克式的内趾模式,既有类似人类的操作迹象,也有类似类人猿的操作迹象。总之,这些发现提供了新的证据,证明一些澳洲石器物种已经习惯性地进行类似人类的操作,即使它们的手部灵活性可能没有晚期智人那么高。
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
Humanlike manual activities in Australopithecus
The evolution of the human hand is a topic of great interest in paleoanthropology. As the hand can be involved in a vast array of activities, knowledge regarding how it was used by early hominins can yield crucial information on the factors driving biocultural evolution. Previous research on early hominin hands focused on the overall bone shape. However, while such approaches can inform on mechanical abilities and the evolved efficiency of manipulation, they cannot be used as a definite proxy for individual habitual activity. Accordingly, it is crucial to examine bone structures more responsive to lifetime biomechanical loading, such as muscle attachment sites or internal bone architecture. In this study, we investigate the manual entheseal patterns of Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, and Australopithecus sediba through the application of the validated entheses-based reconstruction of activity method. Using a comparative sample of later Homo and three great ape genera, we analyze the muscle attachment site proportions on the thumb, fifth ray, and third intermediate phalanx to gain insight into the habitual hand use of Australopithecus. We use a novel statistical procedure to account for the effects of interspecies variation in overall size and ray proportions. Our results highlight the importance of certain muscles of the first and fifth digits for humanlike hand use. In humans, these muscles are required for variable in-hand manipulation and are activated during stone-tool production. The entheses of A. sediba suggest muscle activation patterns consistent with a similar suite of habitual manual activities as in later Homo. In contrast, A. africanus and A. afarensis display a mosaic entheseal pattern that combines indications of both humanlike and apelike manipulation. Overall, these findings provide new evidence that some australopith species were already habitually engaging in humanlike manipulation, even if their manual dexterity was likely not as high as in later Homo.
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
Jaw-muscle fiber architecture and skull form facilitate relatively wide jaw gapes in male cercopithecoid monkeys A cadaveric study of wrist-joint moments in chimpanzees and orangutans with implications for the evolution of knuckle-walking Editorial Board Corrigendum to "The effect of bi-iliac breadth on core body temperature" [J. Hum. Evol. 195 (2024) 103580]. Humanlike manual activities in Australopithecus
×
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