Tag: Laetoli

Hominin footprints in Kenya confirm two species occupied the same ecosystem the same time

Published on by zooks777Leave a comment

For the last forty thousand years anatomically modern humans have been the only primates living on Planet Earth with a sophisticated culture; i.e. using tools, fire, language, art etcetera. Since Homo sapiens emerged some 300 ka ago, they joined at least two other groups of humans – Neanderthals and Denisovans – and not only shared Eurasia with them, but interbred as well. In fact no hominin group has been truly alone since Pliocene times, which began 5.3 Ma ago. Sometimes up to half a dozen species occupied the habitable areas of Africa. Yet we can never be sure whether or not they bumped into one another. Dates for fossils are generally imprecise; give or take a few thousand years. The evidence is merely that sedimentary strata of roughly the same age in various places have yielded fossils of several hominins, but that co-occupation has never been proved in a single stratum in the same place: until now.

Footprints from Koobi Fora: left – right foot of H. erectus; right – left foot of Paranthropus boisei. Credit: Kevin Hatala. Chatham University

The Koobi Fora area near modern Lake Turkana has been an important, go-to site, courtesy of the Leakey palaeoanthropology dynasty (Louis and Mary, their son and daughter-in-law Richard and Meave, and granddaughter Louise). They discovered five hominin species there dating from 4.2 to 1.4 Ma. So there was a chance that this rich area might prove that two of the species were close neighbours in both space and time. In 2021 Kenyan members of the Turkana Basin Institute based in Nairobi spotted a trackway of human footprints on a bedding surface of sediments that had been deposited about 1.5 Ma ago. Reminiscent of the famous, 2 million years older Laetoli trackway of Australopithecus afarensis in Tanzania, that at Koobi Fora is scientifically just as exciting  for it shows footprints of two hominin species Homo erectus and Paranthropus boisei who had walked through wet mud a few centimetres below the surface of Lake Turkana’s ancient predecessor (Hatala, K.G. and 13 others, 2024. Footprint evidence for locomotive diversity and shared habitats among early Pleistocene hominins. Science, v. 386, p. 1004-1010; DOI: 10.1126/science.ado5275). The trackway is littered with the footprints of large birds and contains evidence of zebra.

One set of prints attributed to H. erectus suggest the heels struck the surface first, then the feet rolled forwards before pushing off with the soles: little different from our own, unshod footprints in mud. They are attributed to H. erectus. The others also show a bipedal gait, but different locomotion. The feet that made them were significantly flatter than ours and had a big toe angled away from the smaller toes. They are so different that no close human relative could have made them. The local fossil record includes paranthropoids (Paranthropus boisei), whose fossil foot bones suggest an individual of that speciesmade those prints. It also turns out that a similar, dual walkers’ pattern was found 40 km away in lake sediments of roughly the same age. The two species cohabited the same terrain for a substantial period of time. As regards the Koobi Fora trackway, it seems the two hominins plodded through the mud only a few hours apart at most: they were neighbours.

Artists’ reconstructions of: left – H. erectus; right – Paranthropus boisei. Credits: Yale University, Roman Yevseyev respectively

From their respective anatomies they were very different. Homo erectus was, apart from having massive brow ridges, similar to us. Paranthropus boisei had huge jaws and facial muscles attached to a bony skull crest. So how did they get along? The first was probably omnivorous and actively hunted or scavenged meaty prey: a bifacial axe-wielding hunter-gatherer. Paranthropoids seem to have sought and eaten only vegetable victuals, and some sites preserve bone digging sticks. They were not in competition for foodstuffs and there was no reason for mutual intolerance. Yet they were physically so different that intimate social relations were pretty unlikely. Also their brain sizes were very different, that of P. Boisei’s being far smaller than that of H. erectus , which may not have encouraged intellectual discourse. Both persist in the fossil record for a million years or more. Modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans, as we know, sometimes got along swimmingly, possibly because they were cognitively very similar and not so different physically.

Since many hominin fossils are associated with riverine and lake-side environments, it is surprising that more trackways than those of Laetoli and Koobi Fora have been found. Perhaps that is because palaeoanthropologists are generally bent on finding bones and tools! Yet trackways show in a very graphic way how animals behave and interrelate with their environment, for example dinosaurs. Now anthropologists have learned how to spot footprint trace fossils that will change, and enrich the human story.

See also: Ashworth, J. Fossil footprints of different ancient humans found together for the first time. Natural History Museum News 28 November 2024; Marshall, M. Ancient footprints show how early human species lived side by side. New Scientist, 28 November 2024

Feet of the ancients

Published on by zooks777Leave a comment

Cast of Footprints, Laetoli Museum
Cast of footprints, probably of Au. afrensis, from the famous trackway of Laetoli in Tanzania (Photo credit: GIRLintheCAFE)

Much of what palaeoanthropologists have surmised about the evolution of humans and their hominin forebears has come from fossils of their heads. Crania, jaws and teeth can reveal a lot about human ancestors and related species, and inevitably smart modern humans would dearly like to know how brainy and clever they were and when possible intellectual changes, such as the acquisition of language, might have taken place. But only the rest of the body gives us clues about what they did and potentially might have done. If, like Darwin, and following his lead Frederick Engels (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1876/part-played-labour/index.htm), we believe that the single most important development was adopting an upright gait and thereby freeing the hands to manipulate the world, then fossil hands and feet are of very high importance. Yet they are among the most fragile appendages consisting of a great many separate bones, each being small enough to be transported by flowing water once soft tissues decay and a corpse falls apart. And they are easily bitten off by scavengers.  Heads are a lot bigger, heavier and robust, and being round and smooth, quite difficult for, say, a hyena or porcupine to gnaw. Moreover, disaggregated hominin foot and hand bones are not easy to recognise in fossiliferous sediments, especially if they have been scattered far and wide: the big prize being heads jaws and teeth, professional hominin hunters become expert at spotting them, but not necessarily the other 80% of skeletons.

Ardi (Ardipithecus ramidus)
Artists reconstruction of female Ardipithecus ramidus (Photo credit: Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com)

So, the discovery of hominin hands or feet is a rare cause for celebration. A new partial foot has turned up in the hominin ‘bran-tub’ that is the Afar depression of NE Ethiopia (Haile-Selassie, Y. et al. 2012. A new hominin foot from Ethiopia shows multiple Pliocene bipedal adaptations. Nature, v. 483, p. 565-569) and has caused quite a stir. It is significantly different from the few other feet known from the hominin record. Moreover, it adds a sixth design to those already know, leaving out those of chimps, taken as likely to be similar to those of our shared common ancestor, Homo sapien, Neanderthals and H. erectus whose feet are much the same. While being easily distinguished from the feet of Homo species, those of australopithecines are sufficiently like them in basic morphology to suggest that Au. africanus and sediba both walked the savannas as upright as we do. But one of the earlier hominins, Ardipithecus ramidus, also from Afar but dated at more than 4 Ma, has provided an almost complete foot whose geometry , including a spayed-out, short big toe capable of grasping, almost certainly indicates that the creature was equally at home in trees as it was on the ground. Ardipithecus walked upright, but probably could not run as its gait placed the side of the foot on the ground, much like a chimpanzee, instead of proceeding heel-to-toe as we do (Lieberman, D.E. 2012. Those feet in ancient times. Nature, v. 483, p. 550-551). The new find seems similar, although better adapted for upright walking. Yet no other body parts have been found so it has not been assigned to a species, though it almost certainly represents a new one. The excitement concerns its age, which at 3.4 Ma is within the time range of Australopithecus afarensis, a family of which left the famous trackway at Laetoli in Tanzania whose foot prints strongly suggest full adaptation to human-like gait: walking, running and abandonment of partially habitual life in the trees.

It seems therefore that the multiplicity of co-existing hominins from 2 million years ago to very recently existed much further back in their evolutionary history. That raises several possibilities, among which is the possibility of repeated evolution of bipedality, hinted at by some similarities to the feet of modern gorillas in that of the newly found foot. Another implication is that simply being able to walk upright did not lead quickly to a tool-making ability because the earliest stone tools capable of cutting through meat, skin and sinew did not arise until 2.6 Ma. Like fossils of feet, those of hominin hands are extremely rare. The first crucial evidence of a hand with potential to manipulate objects delicately and with purpose is around 2 Ma, with the astonishingly well preserved hand of a young Au. sediba unearthed in South Africa (http://earth-pages.co.uk/2011/10/12/another-candidate-for-earliest-direct-human-ancestor/). Frustratingly, the 2.6 Ma tools are not associated with fossil hominins, and the Au. sediba skeletons had no tools.

Related articles