Time of occurrence of Australopithecus. Higher anthropoid primates: the way of life of Australopithecus

The transition to upright posture had important consequences for the evolution of primates. The two-legged creatures no longer needed thick hair to protect their backs from the relentless sunbeams. Gradually they turned into naked monkeys.;
But most importantly, the transition to upright posture allowed the higher apes to move their own brain to a cooler environment, which made it possible for it to develop into a larger and more active one. In 1924, in a lime quarry near Towns in South Africa were found bone remains of Australopithecus - extinct higher primates, whose age is 1-5 million years.
Australopithecus, which lived about 3 million years ago, is considered the predecessor of man. These creatures averaged 122-152 cm tall and were upright, as evidenced by the shape of their long bones in their legs and arms. At the same time, the volume of their skull was no more than that of modern chimpanzees or gorillas.
Scientists attribute the emergence of australopithecines to the onset of a cold snap, during which rainforests gradually began to be replaced by savannahs. The ancestors of Australopithecus are called forms of late driopithecus. The latter were less adapted to the woody environment and therefore switched to living in more open areas. Bipedal locomotion significantly complicated the anatomical structure of the brain in Australopithecus, changed the position of the head and eyes. This ensured the expansion of the field of vision - the prerequisites appeared for improving the forms of perception of reality in specific images.
The straightening of the skeleton also contributed to the release of the forelimbs and their transformation into a hand - an organ labor activity who had importance for further evolution. These features provided Australopithecus with clear advantages in the struggle for existence. Australopithecus lived in African savannas in close-knit groups of 25-30 individuals, eating not only vegetable, but also animal food. They learned to use various objects such as stones, sticks or bones for hunting and protection from enemies.

Together with the remains of these creatures, primitive bone and stone tools were found, proving that Australopithecus had great intelligence, as opposed to simple animal quick wits. With repeated use, the stones inevitably broke off fragments with a cutting, sharp edge, which were much more effective than conventional ones. natural stones. Stone and bone processing operations were probably at first isolated cases in Australopithecus, but gradually gained a foothold. natural selection and turned into the skills of the entire primitive herd.
Around the same time, other creatures lived on the planet - paranthropus (Paranthropus), who ate exclusively plant food and had a more massive physique. But they, unlike Australopithecus, apparently did not make any tools. The extinct bipedal apes, Australopithecus, turned out to be the first reliable representatives of the evolutionary branch that ultimately led to the emergence of Homo sapiens.

Australopithecus are extinct bipedal apes, the remains of which were first discovered in South Africa. It is worth noting that these apes lived about 1 million years ago. According to historians, the ancestors of Australopithecus were driopithecus. exact date when australopithecines appeared, no.

Early Australopithecus

It is worth noting that these creatures are the first representatives of the evolutionary branch of that time. Among distinctive features Australopithecus can be called bipedal, which significantly distinguished them from other creatures of that time. Historians argue that the most ancient Australopithecus lived in the East African zone, they did not have an arboreal way of life. In this area, archaeologists have discovered many remains of such creatures.

Late Australopithecus

This type of Australopithecus lived approximately 3 to 1 million years ago in South Africa. Among the differences between such Australopithecus can be called their powerful physique. For example, males were quite tall, but females had small stature. If we talk about their brain, it was much smaller than that of modern man(almost three times). For protection from animals, these individuals used various natural objects, for example, animal bones, horns, wooden objects, etc.

Australopithecus and a skilled man

Some scientists argue that these ancient apes were the early representatives of modern man. Basically, such individuals are classified as smart person. If we talk about their size, then they practically did not differ in any way from ordinary classic Australopithecus. The main part of Australopithecus had a fairly large brain, they were engaged in the manufacture of various tools, processed pebbles, etc. They lived, on average, for about twenty years.

Australopithecus life

It should be noted that australopithecines are the first creatures that moved on two legs, like modern man. In general, the gait of such individuals was quite bouncing, since when walking they strongly bent their legs. Most they spent their time not on land, but in trees. Such apes ate various plants, edible roots, insects, baboons, herbivores, etc. Today, Australopithecus photos can be seen on the Internet.

According to the excavations, it became known that our ancestors loved the marrow, as many broken skulls and bones were found. By the way, they broke bones with the help of sticks, stones and many other improvised means. It is unlikely that these individuals were engaged in murder. Scientists suggest that Australopithecus very rarely killed animals, basically, they ate up the prey of predators. Also, predators rarely attacked Australopithecus.

Of great importance for such individuals was poultry meat, thanks to which the brain of apes developed well. The fact is that such meat is rich in protein, which is especially necessary for the body in Everyday life. The extraction of poultry meat was quite a difficult task for Australopithecus, in contrast to the plucked fruit from a tree. To catch birds, they needed to work hard with their heads. Australopithecus brain volume can be easily compared with brain volume common chimpanzee. Their sizes were almost identical. According to historians, there were also quite gigantic australopithecines, whose skulls were first found in Kenya. From the skull, it became clear that these creatures had fairly large muscles. It can be easily called that the indigenous peoples of Africa are Australopithecus. From this article it became clear that Australopithecus appeared for the first time in Africa.

Video: Evolution: Australopithecus

Read also:

• 

  It is no secret that buffoons were the first authors and performers of ritual songs in Ancient Russia. It is worth noting that ancient Russian music is unique, because it is directly related to various beliefs, as well as rituals. In addition, historical songs ancient rus connected

• 

  World Heritage is a property that provides value to the whole world according to certain international conventions. So let's find out what it is world heritage Russia. Consider the brightest sights.

• 

  AT modern times many people use geographic and maps, especially schoolchildren. The distant ancient times were no exception, where there were also maps to help people navigate the areas. For example, the ancient maps of Russia of the 9th-14th centuries show which territories were occupied by

Mankind has always wondered about its origin, because that's how Homo sapiens works. He needs to understand everything, comprehend and, having passed through the prism of his own worldview, give a reasonable explanation to any phenomenon or fact. modern science points to Australopithecus as one of our distant ancestors. This topic is relevant and causes a lot of different disputes, giving rise to new hypotheses. It is necessary to make a short digression into history and trace the evolution of Australopithecus in order to understand what this group of hominids has in common and different with modern humans.

Adaptation to upright posture

Science gives quite interesting characteristic australopithecines. On the one hand, she considers them an upright bipedal monkey, but very highly organized. And on the other, he calls them primitive but with a monkey head. Australopithecus skulls found during excavations differ little from modern gorillas or chimpanzees. Based scientific research it was established that the brain of Australopithecus was primitive and did not exceed 550 cm 3 in its volume. The jaws were quite large and well developed. chewing muscles. The teeth looked more massive, but in their structure they already resembled teeth modern people.

The most heated debate in the scientific community is raised by the upright posture of Australopithecus. The structure of his body, determined on the basis of the remains and traces found in volcanic ash, has been determined quite fully. It is possible with a high degree of probability to say that when walking hip joint the australopithecine did not fully unbend, and the soles of its feet crossed. But his heel was well formed, there was a pronounced arch of the foot and thumb. These anatomical features Australopithecus in the structure of the heel and foot make us similar.

It is not completely known what prompted Australopithecus to move to a straight gait. Various versions are called, but basically they boil down to the fact that they were prompted to switch to a straight gait by the need to increasingly use their front paws, for example, to take cubs, food, etc. Another interesting hypothesis was put forward that bipedalism in the "southern monkeys" - their adaptations in conditions of constant being in shallow water. The shallow water provided them with abundant food. In favor of this version, as an argument, for some reason, the ability of people to spontaneously hold their breath is given.

As an explanation of the issue of bipedalism, a version is proposed that bipedalism is one of necessary elements for better adaptability to life in trees. But more authentic version looks like climate change, which, according to scientists, occurred about 11 million years ago. During that period, the number of forests decreased sharply and a lot of open space appeared. This condition served as a trigger that spurred the monkeys, the ancestors of Australopithecus, to develop the land.

Height and dimensions

It cannot be said that this group of hominids was distinguished by its large size. Their height did not exceed 150 cm, with a weight of 25 kg to 50 kg. But there is one interesting feature: male australopithecines were very different in size from females. They were almost half as heavy. This also played a role in the characteristics of behavior and reproduction. If we talk about hair, scientists believe that they began to lose their fur when they left the forests. Australopithecus began to be more active and wool in such conditions only interfered. Sweating in a modern person is a protective mechanism of the body against overheating and, in a way, compensation for the loss of the natural “fur coat” by our ancestors.

It is necessary to touch on the topic of childbearing - important characteristic Australopithecus, allowing this species not only to survive, but also to evolve. Switching to a less energy-intensive mode of movement - a straight gait, the Australopithecus pelvis became similar to a human one. But there has been a gradual evolution. Increasingly, children with large heads began to appear. This is primarily due to the fact that living conditions have changed and required greater organization and mastery of primitive tools.

Major groups of Australopithecus

Where and when did Australopithecus live? Various dating of the appearance of Australopithecus on our Earth is called. The numbers are called from 7 million years BC - up to 4 million years BC. But anthropologists date the earliest remains of humanoid creatures to 6 million years BC. e. They stumbled upon the remains of the earliest Australopithecus in the area of ​​their settlement covers not only the entire center of the African continent, but also reaches the northern part. Their skeletons are also found in the east. That is, they felt great in the jungle and in the shroud. The main condition for their habitat was the presence of water nearby.

Modern anthropology distinguishes three types of them, distinguishing not only by the anatomical features of Australopithecus, but also by different dating.

1. Australopithecus Anamus. This is the earliest form of humanoid hominids. Presumably lived 6 million years ago BC.
2. Australopithecus African. Represented by the sensational skeleton of a female Australopithecus. To a wide audience, he is known as Lucy. Her death was clearly violent. Its remains are dated to about 2 million years BC.
3. Australopithecus sediba. This is the most major representative these primates. The approximate time of its existence is voiced in the range from 2.5 to 1 million years BC.

Evolution and change in the behavior of Australopithecus

Australopithecus felt equally good, both on the ground and on a tree. As night fell, he climbed a tree for safety, even while living on the ground. In addition, the trees gave him food. Therefore, he tried not to go far from them. The lifestyle of Australopithecus has changed. The changes affected not only his manner of moving, but also the ways to get food. The need to lead a predominantly daytime lifestyle also changed their vision. The need for orientation at night disappeared, but color vision appeared as compensation. The ability to distinguish colors made it possible to accurately find more ripe fruit, but they were not the main food of Australopithecus. Many scientists attribute the development of the brain to the appearance of a sufficient amount of protein in its diet. Where could he get it? Perhaps, hunting for smaller representatives of the animal world. Although there is an opinion that the remains of the feast of other larger predators were the main food of Australopithecus.

Dietary Diversity Is the Basis for Behavior Change

At that time they ruled large predators from the cat family: saber teeth and lions. They could not be seen, so the need to adapt was not only for a single individual, but for the whole group. And this, in turn, involuntarily forced to improve the interaction between all members. It was only through organized action that it was possible to compete with other scavengers, as well as to be warned in case of danger. Even then, hyenas lived - the main competitor of Australopithecus for leftover food. It is difficult to fight them in open battle, so it was necessary to get to the place of the feast earlier.

The variety in the ways of movement (on the ground and trees) also gave a variety in obtaining the necessary food. it important point. Scientists, studying the structure of teeth, jaws, and also the skull in places of attachment of muscles, conducting isotope analysis of bones and the ratio of trace elements in them, came to the conclusion that these hominids are omnivorous. An individual was found among Australopithecus - sediba, who ate even the bark of trees, and this is not characteristic of any primates. The range of "dishes" also makes Australopithecus related to modern man, because humans are also omnivores. It is believed that this ability was laid in us at an early stage of evolution. Australopithecus did not know how to prepare food for the future, so they had to lead a nomadic lifestyle in constant search for food.

Tools

There is evidence that Australopithecus already knew how to use tools. These were bones, stones, sticks. Modern primates, and not only them, also use improvised means to achieve various goals: they get food, climb up, etc. This, of course, does not make them highly organized creatures. They just use what they have turned up in this situation. Australopithecus also did not make tools. In behavior and habits, he differed little from his relatives - monkeys. If he used stones, then for throwing or for splitting bones.

New skills - the basis of survival in the wild

Diversity of food obtained through upright gait, use of primitive implements and organization of the group are not all skills. To answer the questions: what did Australopithecus know, which allowed them to adapt and continue the path of evolution, it is necessary to pay close attention to the upper limbs of these hominins. The main characteristic of Australopithecus gracile was that this distant human ancestor, having lost most of the main simian features, was already a purebred upright. And this gave him some advantages. For example, he could move some kind of cargo for a short distance. Moving during daylight hours, they were more likely to avoid encountering hyenas, which are predominantly nocturnal. It is argued that due to their upright posture, Australopithecus had an advantage in foraging over hyenas, as they covered a greater distance in a shorter period of time, but this is a rather controversial point of view.

Did Australopithecus have sign language?

When asked about the interaction within the herd, in particular, whether the members of the group had at least a primitive sign language, scientists cannot unambiguously answer. Although, watching primates, you can notice at first glance how pronounced their facial expressions are. Yes, and they are trained in sign language. Therefore, it is impossible to exclude the possibility that the distant ancestors of man had the opportunity to transmit information not only by cries, but also by gestures and facial expressions. The lifestyle of Australopithecus differed little from that of a monkey, but a developed thumb, which helps not only to successfully grab objects, a straight gait that frees hands - all these factors together could serve as an impetus for the development of sign language in their environment. There is a high probability that a Neanderthal spoke such a language. Australopithecus, presumably, too.

There was another feature that set them apart from all other hominids - the way they copulated. They did it face to face, peering into the partner's facial expressions. And we must not forget about non-sonic methods of communication within the team (gestures, postures, facial expressions). All these are also ways of transmitting information, the ability to express emotions and attitudes (fear, threat, submission, satisfaction, etc.).

Mutual relations within the herd: close dependence on each other

Perhaps the most bright characteristic Australopithecus is a relationship with each other. If we take a flock of baboons as an example, then you can notice a strict hierarchy, where everyone obeys the alpha male. In the case of Australopithecus, this, apparently, was not observed. But this does not mean that everyone was left to himself. There was a kind of redistribution of roles. The main burden of obtaining food was shifted to the males. Females with cubs were too vulnerable. The cub, being born, was practically helpless, and this required additional attention and time from the mother. It took not months, but years, for the cub to learn to walk independently and somehow interact in the flock.

The famous and relatively well-preserved remains of Lucy are indirect evidence of close bonds within the pack. It is assumed that this "family" consisted of 13 individuals. There were adults and children. They all died together in the flood and seemed to have affection for each other.

Collective hunting, places to sleep, transferring food to a safe place - all that Australopithecus was able to do required coherence, communication and the inevitable development of a sense of elbow. Under such conditions, only members of their own pack could be trusted. The rest of the world was hostile.

Cro-Magnons

These are already early representatives of modern people, who practically do not differ from us in the structure of the bones of the skeleton and skull. According to archaeological finds, they lived in the Upper Paleolithic, that is, only about 10 thousand years ago. Between them and Australopithecus for some time there were Pithecanthropes, then Neanderthals. Each of these types of "prohuman" had some kind of progressive anatomical features that moved them higher and higher up the evolutionary ladder. As you can see, for the Australopithecus hominoid to become a Cro-Magnon man, several million years had to pass.

Alternative points of view of the theory of evolution

AT recent times distrust of Darwin's theory of evolution about the origin of man from apes is increasingly expressed. The point here is not even that the supporters of creationism, believing that God created man in his own image and likeness from clay, do not consider monkeys as their ancestors. Supporters of the theory of evolution have too often discredited themselves and their theory, engaging in banal forgery, trying to pass off wishful thinking. And the emergence of new data forces us to reconsider the theory of human origin once again. However, first things first.

In 1912, Charles Dawson made a "stunning" find (several bones and a skull) that "proved" the victory of the theory of evolution. True, there was one doubting dentist who claimed that the teeth of primitive man were slightly filed with modern tools, but who will listen to such a dirty lie? And "Piltdown Man" took pride of place in biology textbooks. That, it would seem, is all: an intermediate link between man and ape has finally been found. But in 1953 Kenneth Oakley, Joseph Weiner and Le Grosse Clark upset the public, and along with the UK. Collaboration representatives of the British University, which included a geologist, an anthropologist and an anatomy professor, established a flagrant forgery. A fluoride test was developed. He revealed that the human skull, the jaw of a monkey and other bones were treated with a chromic peak. This is the method and gave the desired " ancient view". But even after such a sensation, you can still find the image of “Piltdown Man” in textbooks.

This is not the only hoax. There were others. The American Museum of Natural History and its best representatives Henry Fairfield Osborne and Harold Cook in Nebraska discovered the molar of a half-man, half-monkey. Advertising is the engine of progress. This find, which was trumpeted by "the best and most independent American press", was enough not only to paint the alleged portrait of a distant human ancestor, but even win over creationists and others who disagree with "a real breakthrough in the field of evolution and the history of the origin of man" . Then it was announced that this was a mistake. The tooth belongs to an extinct breed of pig. And then the "extinct" breed was found in Paraguay. The local pigs didn't even know that for a long time were in the center of attention of the progressive world scientific community. And such funny embarrassments can be listed further.

In the evolutionary struggle of species among Australopithecus, baboons won

Often, not far from the remains of our alleged ancestors, the skulls of defeated baboons are found. It turns out that Australopithecus used tools not only for cracking nuts, but also for hunting their relatives. Here again unexplained questions arise. Did our ancestors descend from the tree, mastered the straight gait and better organization of their herd, on the basis of a more advanced communication ability, but in the end lost to the baboons, who already then reached their peak evolutionary development. After all, these primates are alive to this day, and Australopithecus exist only in the form of fossil remains. This fact also raises many questions from the category: “why and how is this possible?”. Years passed - the Cro-Magnons appeared. Australopithecus were found much later to tell their amazing story.

Anthropology and concepts of biology Kurchanov Nikolai Anatolievich

Origin and evolution of Australopithecus

At present, most anthropologists believe that the genus Homo originates from the Australopithecus group (although it should be said that some scientists deny this path). Australopithecus themselves evolved from Dryopithecines through an intermediate group, conventionally called "pre-Australopithecines". This group includes the latest findings - ardipithecus, orrorina and Sahelanthropus, which allow us to trace the evolution of hominids for 6–7 Ma. Any of them can claim the original form leading to modern man, and among anthropologists there is no consensus about this question. However, the most likely "candidate" for the role of the ancestral form of Australopithecus is ardipithecus.

At the end of the Pliocene, australopithecines were a thriving group of primates. Currently, 8 species have been identified among them. Approximately 3 million years ago, Australopithecus divided into two branches: "gracil" and "massive". The latter were a group that specialized in eating coarse plant foods. Most anthropologists distinguish them in a separate genus. Paranthropus.

After the first discovery by R. Dart in 1924 of the Australopithecus skull, numerous discoveries of the most different representatives of this kind. However, all of them cannot be compared in their social resonance with the discovery in 1974 by anthropologist D. Johanson in Ethiopia of an almost complete female Australopithecus skeleton, which lived about 3.5 million years ago. The discovery, which, according to the old tradition of anthropologists, received the name Lucy, became the most “loud” and popular anthropological discovery of the 20th century. Lucy was given the role of "the progenitor of mankind." Songs were dedicated to her, ships and cafes were given her name. For Africa, the priority of the ancestral home of man was established.

Lucy got a scientific name Australopithecus afarensis. This species lived approximately 3-3.5 million years ago, and it is considered by most scientists to be the source for all subsequent Australopithecus species. Its representatives were much smaller than a modern person and were distinguished by pronounced sexual dimorphism: men had a height of about 150 cm and a body weight of about 45 kg, and women, respectively, 110 cm and 30 kg. The volume of the brain was 380-440 cm 3 (approximately like that of a chimpanzee). Lucy's Kindred had a stable bipedal gait. From the same species, many researchers draw a direct line to modern man. Possibly, as an intermediate form, the ancestor of the genus Homo served open in Ethiopia in 1997 Australopithecus garhi. The find, which is 2.5 million years old, bears a number of unique features that make it possible to imagine it as a human ancestor (Vishnyatsky L.B., 2004).

Australopithecus afarensis, probably descended from a primitive form discovered in Kenya in 1995 and named Australopithecus anamensis. This species, which lived more than 4 million years ago, can be considered as an intermediate form between ancient primates and Australopithecus. Although the structure of the teeth and jaws of this Australopithecus is similar to fossil monkeys, the structure of the bones of the legs allows it to be considered bipedal.

In 1999, a skull of a peculiar hominid, the “Kenianthropus” was found in Kenya ( Kenyanthropus platyops). The age of the find is 3.5 million years. Together with another species ( Kenyanthropus rudolfensis) it forms an independent genus among Australopithecus. The structure of the skull in representatives of this genus has an even more "human" appearance than that of contemporary Australopithecus. But, possessing a bizarre mixture of primitive and progressive traits, Kenyanthropes represented a dead end branch of evolution. Such findings clearly show that human evolution did not have a consistently progressive and unidirectional character. There were several directions in the evolution of hominids, and the path to modern man was only one of them.

The very first australopithecine discovered by R. Dart was also a dead end branch ( A. africanus), widespread about 3 million years ago, and all "massive" forms ( Paranthropus), formed 2.7 million years ago from the original form Paranthropus aefiopicus. The latter were extremely specialized forms, adapted to feeding on coarse plant food. They had large jaws and teeth. The top of their skull had a special crest to which powerful chewing muscles were attached. "Massive" survived all other Australopithecus, and their largest species - P. boisei("zinjanthrope") - coexisted with the first representatives of the genus Homo almost a million years.

The phylogenetic relationships of Australopithecus can be represented in this way (Fig. 8.2).

Figure 8.2. Phylogenetic relationships of Australopithecus

There are other options for the initial stages of hominin evolution. So, some authors put at the base of the line leading to a person, orrorin ( Orrorin tugenensis), considering Australopithecus as a lateral branch.

CHAPTER II The Evolution or Origin (Genealogy) of Living Beings We must discuss this question here, for an incredible confusion has lately been created, thanks to the confusion of hypotheses with facts, while we want to build our assumptions not on hypotheses, but