Search

It has been just over 10 years since the first fossils attributed to Homo naledi were recovered from the Rising Star Cave system in South Africa's Cradle of Humankind. The hominin fossil evidence for H. naledi displays a distinctive combination of primitive and derived morphology, yet for a time-averaged fossil sample it is remarkable for its relatively low level of variation. Thus-unusually for palaeoanthropology-there has been little pushback against the decision to recognize a single novel taxon for all of the material recovered from the Rising Star Cave system. However, almost everything else claimed about H. naledi-its age, burial context and behaviour-has been controversial. Here we examine the strength of the evidence for these claims., (© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.)

The announcement in 1925 by Raymond Dart of the discovery of the Taung juvenile's skull in a quarry in sub-Saharan Africa is deservedly a classic publication in the history of palaeoanthropology. Dart's paper-which designated Taung as the type specimen of the early hominin species Australopithecus africanus -provided the first fossil evidence supporting Charles Darwin's 1871 prediction that Africa was where the human lineage originated. The Taung juvenile's combination of ape and human characteristics eventually led to a paradigm shift in our understanding of human evolution. This contribution focuses on the milieu in which Dart's paper appeared (i.e. what was understood in 1925 about human evolution), the fossil evidence as set out by Dart, his interpretation of how a species represented by a fossilized juvenile's skull fitted within prevailing narratives about human evolution and the significance of the fossil being found in an environment inferred to be very different from that occupied by living apes. We also briefly review subsequent fossil finds that have corroborated the argument Dart made for having discovered evidence of a hitherto unknown close relative of humans, and summarize our current understanding of the earliest stages of human evolution and its environmental context.

This contribution focuses on a 1928 multiauthor paper reporting the discovery of a child's skull at Devil's Tower cave on the Rock of Gibraltar. It was ground-breaking. Two of the lead authors, Dorothy Garrod and Dorothea Bate, were women, and it was one of the earliest reports of a fossil hominin to incorporate and integrate detailed information about its stratigraphic and environmental context., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The announcement of a fossilized child's skull discovered in a quarry in 1924 sub-Saharan Africa might not have seemed destined to be a classic paper. This contribution focuses on anatomist Raymond Dart's 1925 paper in which he designated the Taungs skull the type specimen of Australopithecus africanus. We combine an account of Dart's training and experience, with a telling of the fossil's discovery, analysis, the initial response of a mostly skeptical community, and a review of subsequent discoveries that consolidated the case Dart made for a hitherto unknown human close relative. Dart's paper presented evidence that confirmed the prescience of Charles Darwin's prediction that Africa was the birthplace of modern humans. The Taungs skull's unique mix of great ape and human attributes eventually led to a paradigm shift in our understanding of human evolution., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

A partial left femur (TM 266-01-063) was recovered in July 2001 at Toros-Menalla, Chad, at the same fossiliferous location as the late Miocene holotype of Sahelanthropus tchadensis (the cranium TM 266-01-060-1). It was recognized as a probable primate femur in 2004 when one of the authors was undertaking a taphonomic survey of the fossil assemblages from Toros-Menalla. We are confident the TM 266 femoral shaft belongs to a hominid. It could sample a hominid hitherto unrepresented at Toros-Menalla, but a more parsimonious working hypothesis is that it belongs to S. tchadensis. The differences between TM 266 and the late Miocene Orrorin tugenensis partial femur BAR 1002'00, from Kenya, are consistent with maintaining at least a species-level distinction between S. tchadensis and O. tugenensis. The results of our preliminary functional analysis suggest the TM 266 femoral shaft belongs to an individual that was not habitually bipedal, something that should be taken into account when considering the relationships of S. tchadensis. The circumstances of its discovery should encourage researchers to check to see whether there is more postcranial evidence of S. tchadensis among the fossils recovered from Toros-Menalla., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Modern humans originated in Africa, but where exactly? So far, East Africa harbored the oldest fossil and archaeological evidence. Now, fossils and stone tools from a cave in Morocco challenge the notion that East Africa was the birthplace of modern humans., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Despite uncontested evidence for fossils belonging to the early hominin genus Australopithecus in East Africa from at least 4.2 million years ago (Ma), and from Chad by 3.5 Ma, thus far there has been no convincing evidence of Australopithecus, Paranthropus or early Homo from the western (Albertine) branch of the Rift Valley. Here we report the discovery of an isolated upper molar (#Ish25) from the Western Rift Valley site of Ishango in Central Africa in a derived context, overlying beds dated to between ca. 2.6 to 2.0 Ma. We used µCT imaging to compare its external and internal macro-morphology to upper molars of australopiths, and fossil and recent Homo. We show that the size and shape of the enamel-dentine junction (EDJ) surface discriminate between Plio-Pleistocene and post-Lower Pleistocene hominins, and that the Ishango molar clusters with australopiths and early Homo from East and southern Africa. A reassessment of the archaeological context of the specimen is consistent with the morphological evidence and suggest that early hominins were occupying this region by at least 2 Ma.

Recent studies suggest that the hypodigms representing the two earliest Australopithecus (Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis) form an ancestor-descendant lineage. Understanding the details of this possible transition is important comparative evidence for assessing the likelihood of other examples of ancestor-descendant lineages within the hominin clade. To this end we have analyzed crown and cusp base areas of high resolution replicas of the mandibular molars of Au. anamensis (Allia Bay and Kanapoi sites) and those of Au. afarensis (Hadar, Laetoli, and Maka). We found no statistically significant differences in crown areas between these hypodigms although the mean of M(1) crowns was smaller in Au. anamensis, being the smallest of any Australopithecus species sampled to date. Intraspecies comparison of the areas of mesial cusps for each molar type using Wilcoxon signed rank test showed no differences for Au. anamensis. Significant differences were found between the protoconid and metaconid of Au. afarensis M(2)s and M(3)s. Furthermore, the area formed by the posterior cusps as a whole relative to the anterior cusps showed significant differences in Au. afarensis M(1)s and in Au. anamensis M(2)s but no differences were noted for M(3)s of either taxon. Developmental information derived from microstructural details in enamel shows that M(1) crown formation in Au. anamensis is similar to Pan and shorter than in H. sapiens. Taken together, these data suggests that the overall trend in the Au. anamensis-Au. afarensis transition may have involved a moderate increase in M(1) crown areas with relative expansion of distal cusps., (Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The Omo-Turkana Basin, including the hominin fossil sites around Lake Turkana and the sites along the lower reaches of the Omo River, has made and continues to make an important contribution to improving our murky understanding of human evolution. This review highlights the various ways the Omo-Turkana Basin fossil record has contributed to, and continues to challenge, interpretations of human evolution. Despite many diagrams that look suspiciously like comprehensive hypotheses about human evolutionary history, any sensible paleoanthropologist knows that the early hominin fossil record is too meager to do anything other than offer very provisional statements about hominin taxonomy and phylogeny. If history tells us anything, it is that we still have much to learn about the hominin clade. Thus, we summarize the current state of knowledge of the hominin species represented at the Omo-Turkana Basin sites. We then focus on three specific topics for which the fossil evidence is especially relevant: the origin and nature of Paranthropus; the origin and nature of early Homo; and the ongoing debate about whether the pattern of human evolution is more consistent with speciation by cladogenesis, with greater taxonomic diversity or with speciation by anagenetic transformation, resulting in less taxonomic diversity and a more linear interpretation of human evolutionary history., (Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Previous research into tooth crown dimensions and cusp proportions has proved to be a useful way to identify taxonomic differences in Pliocene and Pleistocene fossil hominins. The present study has identified changes in both M(1) crown size and cusp proportions within the genus Homo, with M(1) overall crown size reduction apparently occurring in two main stages. The first stage (a reduction of ca. 17%) is associated with the emergence of Homo ergaster and Homo erectus sensu stricto. The second stage (a reduction of ca. 10%) occurs in Homo sapiens, but the reduced modern human M(1) tooth crown size was only attained in Upper Paleolithic times. The absolute sizes of the individual cusps are highly positively correlated with overall crown size and dental reduction produces a reduction in the absolute size of each of the cusps. Most of the individual cusps scale isometrically with crown size, but the paracone shows a negative allometric relationship, indicating that the reduction in paracone size is less than in the other M(1) cusps. Thus, the phylogenetically oldest cusp in the upper molars also seems to be the most stable cusp (at least in the M(1)). The most striking change in M(1) cusp proportions is a change in the relative size of the areas of the paracone and metacone. The combination of a small relative paracone and a large relative metacone generally characterizes specimens attributed to early Homo, and the presence of this character state in Australopithecus and Paranthropus suggests it may represent the primitive condition for the later part of the hominin clade. In contrast, nearly all later Homo taxa, with the exception of Homo antecessor, show the opposite condition (i.e. a relatively large paracone and a relatively small metacone). This change in the relationship between the relative sizes of the paracone and metacone is related to an isometric reduction of the absolute size of the metacone. This metacone reduction occurs in the context of relative stability in the paracone as crown size decreases. Among later Homo taxa, both Homo heidelbergensis and Homo neanderthalensis show a further reduction of the metacone and an enlargement of the hypocone. Fossil and contemporary H. sapiens samples show a trend toward increasing the relative size of the protocone and decreasing the relative size of the hypocone. In Europe, modern human M(1) cusp proportions are essentially reached during the Upper Paleolithic. Although some variation was documented among the fossil taxa, we suggest that the relative size of the M(1) paracone and metacone areas may be useful for differentiating the earliest members of our genus from subsequent Homo species.

Mandibular corpora are well represented in the hominin fossil record, yet few studies have rigorously assessed the utility of mandibular corpus morphology for species recognition, particularly with respect to the linear dimensions that are most commonly available. In this study, we explored the extent to which commonly preserved mandibular corpus morphology can be used to: (i) discriminate among extant hominid taxa and (ii) support species designations among fossil specimens assigned to the genus Homo. In the first part of the study, discriminant analysis was used to test for significant differences in mandibular corpus shape at different taxonomic levels (genus, species and subspecies) among extant hominid taxa (i.e. Homo, Pan, Gorilla, Pongo). In the second part of the study, we examined shape variation among fossil mandibles assigned to Homo (including H. habilis sensu stricto, H. rudolfensis, early African H. erectus/H. ergaster, late African H. erectus, Asian H. erectus, H. heidelbergensis, H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens). A novel randomization procedure designed for small samples (and using group 'distinctness values') was used to determine whether shape variation among the fossils is consistent with conventional taxonomy (or alternatively, whether a priori taxonomic groupings are completely random with respect to mandibular morphology). The randomization of 'distinctness values' was also used on the extant samples to assess the ability of the test to recognize known taxa. The discriminant analysis results demonstrated that, even for a relatively modest set of traditional mandibular corpus measurements, we can detect significant differences among extant hominids at the genus and species levels, and, in some cases, also at the subspecies level. Although the randomization of 'distinctness values' test is more conservative than discriminant analysis (based on comparisons with extant specimens), we were able to detect at least four distinct groups among the fossil specimens (i.e. H. sapiens, H. heidelbergensis, Asian H. erectus and a combined 'African Homo' group consisting of H. habilis sensu stricto, H. rudolfensis, early African H. erectus/H. ergaster and late African H. erectus). These four groups appear to be distinct at a level similar to, or greater than, that of modern hominid species. In addition, the mandibular corpora of H. neanderthalensis could be distinguished from those of 'African Homo', although not from those of H. sapiens, H. heidelbergensis, or the Asian H. erectus group. The results suggest that the features most commonly preserved on the hominin mandibular corpus have some taxonomic utility, although they are unlikely to be useful in generating a reliable alpha taxonomy for early African members of the genus Homo.

This paper begins by reviewing the fossil evidence for human evolution. It presents summaries of each of the taxa recognized in a relatively speciose hominin taxonomy. These taxa are grouped in grades, namely possible and probable hominins, archaic hominins, megadont archaic hominins, transitional hominins, pre-modern Homo and anatomically modern Homo. The second part of this contribution considers some of the controversies that surround hominin taxonomy and systematics. The first is the vexed question of how you tell an early hominin from an early panin, or from taxa belonging to an extinct clade closely related to the Pan-Homo clade. Secondly, we consider how many species should be recognized within the hominin fossil record, and review the philosophies and methods used to identify taxa within the hominin fossil record. Thirdly, we examine how relationships within the hominin clade are investigated, including descriptions of the methods used to break down an integrated structure into tractable analytical units, and then how cladograms are generated and compared. We then review the internal structure of the hominin clade, including the problem of how many subclades should be recognized within the hominin clade, and we examine the reliability of hominin cladistic hypotheses. The last part of the paper reviews the concepts of a genus, including the criteria that should be used for recognizing genera within the hominin clade.

Discrete dental traits are used as proxies for biological relatedness among modern human populations and for alpha taxonomy and phylogeny reconstruction within the hominin clade. We present a comparison of the expression of lower molar dental traits (cusp 6, cusp 7, trigonid crest pattern, and protostylid) at the enamel-dentine junction (EDJ) in a variety of extant and fossil hominoid taxa, in order to assess the contribution of the EDJ to the morphology of these traits at the outer enamel surface (OES). Molars (n=44) were imaged nondestructively using high-resolution microCT, and three-dimensional surface models of the EDJ and OES were created to compare trait expression at each surface. Our results indicate that these dental traits originate at the EDJ, and that the EDJ is primarily responsible for their degree of expression at the OES. Importantly, variable trait morphology at the EDJ (often not easily recognizable at the OES) indicates that different developmental processes can produce traits that appear similar at the enamel surface, suggesting caution in intra- and intertaxonomic comparisons. The results also highlight the importance of the EDJ for understanding the morphological development of discrete traits, and for establishing graded scales of variation to compare trait frequency among groups for the purpose of taxonomic and/or phylogenetic analysis. Finally, this study demonstrates that imaging the EDJ of both worn and unworn fossil hominin teeth provides a novel source of information about tooth development and variation in crown morphology.

Homoiologies are phylogenetically misleading morphological similarities that are due to nongenetic factors. It has been claimed that homoiologies are common in the hominin skull, especially in regions affected by masticatory strain, and that their prevalence is one reason why reconstructing hominin phylogenetic relationships is difficult. To evaluate this "homoiology hypothesis," we performed analyses on a group of extant primates for which a robust molecular phylogeny is available--the hominoids. We compiled a data set from measurements that developmental considerations and experimental evidence suggest differ in their likelihood of exhibiting masticatory-strain-induced phenotypic plasticity. We then used the coefficient of variation and t-tests to evaluate the phenotypic plasticity of the measurements. We predicted that, if the hypothesis is correct, the measurements of skeletal features that do not remodel and therefore are unaffected by phenotypic plasticity should be less variable than the measurements of skeletal features that remodel and are subject to low-to-moderate strains, and that the latter should be less variable than the measurements of skeletal features that remodel and are subject to moderate-to-high strains. Subsequently, we performed phylogenetic analyses on character state data derived from the measurements and compared the resulting phylogenetic hypotheses to the consensus molecular phylogeny for the hominoids. We predicted that, if the hypothesis is correct, agreement between the phylogenies should be best for the non-phenotypically-plastic characters, intermediate for the low-to-moderate-strain characters, and worst for the moderate-to-high-strain characters. The results of the coefficient of variation/t-test analyses were consistent with the predictions of the hypothesis to the extent that the moderate-to-high-strain measurements exhibited significantly more variability than the non-phenotypically-plastic and low-to-moderate-strain measurements. In contrast, the results of the phylogenetic analyses were not those predicted. The phylogeny derived from the moderate-to-high-strain characters matched the molecular phylogeny better than those obtained using the non-phenotypically-plastic and low-to-moderate-strain characters. Thus, our study supports the suggestion that mechanical loading results in phenotypic plasticity in the hominin skull, but it does not support the notion that homoiologies have a significant negative impact on hominin phylogenetics.

The majority of attempts to reconstruct the evolutionary history of the hominin clade proceed as if the hominin fossil record is a precise, accurate, and comprehensive record of human evolutionary history. In this contribution we review the various ways in which the apparent scarcity of early hominins on the landscape means that the existing hominin fossil record almost certainly falls short of this assumption, especially with respect to taxic diversity, as well as the spatial and temporal distribution of known taxa. We also suggest that interpretations of the hominin fossil record are particularly affected by practices that likely violate the principles of reproducibility, as well as by confirmation bias. The hominin fossil record should be seen for what it is; an incomplete record of human evolutionary history that limits what should be said about it. Generated narratives should be treated as heuristic devices, not as accurate and comprehensive descriptions of past events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Enamel has long been of interest for its functional and phylogenetic significance among fossil hominins and other primates. Previous studies demonstrated that enamel incremental features distinguish among hominin fossil taxa, suggesting utility for highlighting taxonomy. However, not all features appear to be useful in mixed samples of fossils, living humans, and apes. Here we tested enamel incremental data from closely related primate taxa to determine which features, if any, distinguish among them. Enamel incremental variables were measured from the M 2 of 40 living primate taxa, and we tested our variables using discriminant function analysis at the taxonomic ranks of parvorder, family, tribe, and genus. We then included enamel incremental data from Australopithecus afarensis , Australopithecus africanus , Paranthropus aethiopicus , Paranthropus boisei , and Paranthropus robustus to determine if these features distinguished fossil taxa from living humans and apes. Our initial results show that enamel incremental variables distinguish among primate taxa, but with low classification rates. Further testing with jackknifing methods shows overlap between groups at all taxonomic ranks, suggesting enamel incremental variables are unreliable for taxonomy. The addition of many common enamel incremental growth variables also resulted in multicollinearity in our multivariate analysis. As the dentition and isolated teeth remain a significant portion of the hominin fossil record, verifying enamel incremental features as a useful taxonomic tool is fundamentally important for hominin paleobiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research into tooth crown dimensions and cusp proportions has proved to be a useful way to identify taxonomic differences in Pliocene and Pleistocene fossil hominins. The present study has identified changes in both M1 crown size and cusp proportions within the genus Homo, with M1 overall crown size reduction apparently occurring in two main stages. The first stage (a reduction of ca. 17%) is associated with the emergence of Homo ergaster and Homo erectus sensu stricto. The second stage (a reduction of ca. 10%) occurs in Homo sapiens, but the reduced modern human M1 tooth crown size was only attained in Upper Paleolithic times. The absolute sizes of the individual cusps are highly positively correlated with overall crown size and dental reduction produces a reduction in the absolute size of each of the cusps. Most of the individual cusps scale isometrically with crown size, but the paracone shows a negative allometric relationship, indicating that the reduction in paracone size is less than in the other M1 cusps. Thus, the phylogenetically oldest cusp in the upper molars also seems to be the most stable cusp (at least in the M1). The most striking change in M1 cusp proportions is a change in the relative size of the areas of the paracone and metacone. The combination of a small relative paracone and a large relative metacone generally characterizes specimens attributed to early Homo, and the presence of this character state in Australopithecus and Paranthropus suggests it may represent the primitive condition for the later part of the hominin clade. In contrast, nearly all later Homo taxa, with the exception of Homo antecessor, show the opposite condition (i.e. a relatively large paracone and a relatively small metacone). This change in the relationship between the relative sizes of the paracone and metacone is related to an isometric reduction of the absolute size of the metacone. This metacone reduction occurs in the context of relative stability in the paracone as crown size decreases. Among later Homo taxa, both Homo heidelbergensis and Homo neanderthalensis show a further reduction of the metacone and an enlargement of the hypocone. Fossil and contemporary H. sapiens samples show a trend toward increasing the relative size of the protocone and decreasing the relative size of the hypocone. In Europe, modern human M1 cusp proportions are essentially reached during the Upper Paleolithic. Although some variation was documented among the fossil taxa, we suggest that the relative size of the M1 paracone and metacone areas may be useful for differentiating the earliest members of our genus from subsequent Homo species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this review we attempt to reconstruct the evolutionary history of hominin life history from extant and fossil evidence. We utilize demographic life history theory and distinguish life history variables, traits such as weaning, age at sexual maturity, and life span, from life history-related variables such as body mass, brain growth, and dental development. The latter are either linked with, or can be used to make inferences about, life history, thus providing an opportunity for estimating life history parameters in fossil taxa. We compare the life history variables of modern great apes and identify traits that are likely to be shared by the last common ancestor of Pan-Homo and those likely to be derived in hominins. All great apes exhibit slow life histories and we infer this to be true of the last common ancestor of Pan-Homo and the stem hominin. Modern human life histories are even slower, exhibiting distinctively long post-menopausal life spans and later ages at maturity, pointing to a reduction in adult mortality since the Pan-Homo split. We suggest that lower adult mortality, distinctively short interbirth intervals, and early weaning characteristic of modern humans are derived features resulting from cooperative breeding. We evaluate the fidelity of three life history-related variables, body mass, brain growth and dental development, with the life history parameters of living great apes. We found that body mass is the best predictor of great ape life history events. Brain growth trajectories and dental development and eruption are weakly related proxies and inferences from them should be made with caution. We evaluate the evidence of life history-related variables available for extinct species and find that prior to the transitional hominins there is no evidence of any hominin taxon possessing a body size, brain size or aspects of dental development much different from what we assume to be the primitive life history pattern for the Pan-Homo clade. Data for life history-related variables among the transitional hominin grade are consistent and none agrees with a modern human pattern. Aside from mean body mass, adult brain size, crown and root formation times, and the timing and sequence of dental eruption of Homo erectus are inconsistent with that of modern humans. Homo antecessor fossil material suggests a brain size similar to that of Homo erectus s. s., and crown formation times that are not yet modern, though there is some evidence of modern human-like timing of tooth formation and eruption. The body sizes, brain sizes, and dental development of Homo heidelbergensis and Homo neanderthalensis are consistent with a modern human life history but samples are too small to be certain that they have life histories within the modern human range. As more life history-related variable information for hominin species accumulates we are discovering that they can also have distinctive life histories that do not conform to any living model. At least one extinct hominin subclade, Paranthropus, has a pattern of dental life history-related variables that most likely set it apart from the life histories of both modern humans and chimpanzees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The body proportions of extant animals help inform inferences about the behaviors of their extinct relatives, but relationships between body proportions, behavior, and phylogeny in extant primates remain unclear. Advances in behavioral data, molecular phylogenies, and multivariate analytical tools make it an opportune time to perform comprehensive comparative analyses of primate traditional limb length proportions (e.g., intermembral, humerofemoral, brachial, and crural indices), body size-adjusted long bone proportions, and principal components. In this study we used a mix of newly-collected and published data to investigate whether and how the limb length proportions of a diverse sample of primates, including monkeys, apes, and modern humans, are influenced by behavior and phylogeny. We reconfirm that the intermembral index, followed by the first principal component of traditional limb length proportions, is the single most effective variable distinguishing hominoids and other anthropoids. Combined limb length proportions and positional behaviors are strongly correlated in extant anthropoid groups, but phylogeny is a better predictor of limb length proportion variation than of behavior. We confirm convergences between members of the Atelidae and extant apes (especially Pan), members of the Hylobatidae and Pongo , and a potential divergence of Presbytis limb proportions from some other cercopithecoids, which correlate with adaptations for forelimb-dominated behaviors in some colobines. Collectively, these results substantiate hypotheses indicating that extinct hominins and other hominoid taxa can be distinguished by analyzing combinations of their limb length proportions at different taxonomic levels. From these results, we hypothesize that fossil skeletons characterized by notably disparate limb length proportions are unlikely to have exhibited similar behavioral patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A central goal of paleoanthropology is understanding the role of ecological change in hominin evolution. Over the past several decades researchers have expanded the hominin fossil record and assembled detailed late Cenozoic paleoclimatic, paleoenvironmental, and paleoecological archives. However, effective use of these data is precluded by the limitations of pattern-matching strategies for inferring causal relationships between ecological and evolutionary change. We examine several obstacles that have hindered progress, and highlight recent research that is addressing them by (i) confronting an incomplete fossil record, (ii) contending with datasets spanning varied spatiotemporal scales, and (iii) using theoretical frameworks to build stronger inferences. Expanding on this work promises to transform challenges into opportunities and set the stage for a new phase of paleoanthropological research. Research aiming to understand the role of ecological change in hominin evolution has fueled the generation of paleoclimatic and paleoenvironmental records across Africa. Limitations of conventional methods for inferring ecology–evolution relationships mean that more data have not always led to a deeper understanding of hominin evolution. We outline several challenges that have hindered progress, and highlight how recent research is addressing them. This research is confronting the limitations of the fossil record, contending with proxy records spanning a range of spatiotemporal scales, and providing a stronger inferential approach to hypothesis testing. Addressing the obstacles that have hindered progress will enable a more robust understanding of the relationships between ecological change and hominin evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reliable estimates of when hominin taxa originated and went extinct are central to addressing many paleoanthropological questions, including those relating to macroevolutionary patterns. The timing of hominin temporal ranges can be used to test chronological predictions generated from phylogenetic hypotheses. For example, hypotheses of phyletic ancestor–descendant relationships, based on morphological data, predict no temporal range overlap between the two taxa. However, a fossil taxon's observed temporal range is almost certainly underestimated due to the incompleteness of both the fossil record itself and its sampling, and this decreases the likelihood of observing temporal overlap. Here, we focus on a well-known and widely accepted early hominin lineage, Australopithecus anamensis – afarensis , and place 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on its origination and extinction dates. We do so to assess whether its temporal range is consistent with it being a phyletic descendant of Ardipithecus ramidus and/or a direct ancestor to the earliest claimed representative of Homo (i.e., Ledi-Geraru). We find that the last appearance of Ar. ramidus falls within the origination CI of Au. anamensis – afarensis , whereas the claimed first appearance of Homo postdates the extinction CI. These results are consistent with Homo evolving from Au. anamensis – afarensis , but temporal overlap between Ar. ramidus and Au. anamensis – afarensis cannot be rejected at this time. Though additional samples are needed, future research should extend our initial analyses to incorporate the uncertainties surrounding the range endpoints of Ar. ramidus and earliest Homo. Overall, our findings demonstrate the need for quantifying the uncertainty surrounding the appearances and disappearances of hominin taxa in order to better understand the timing of evolutionary events in our clade's history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]