Functional and Phylogenetic Features of the Forelimb in Miocene Hominoids

  • Michael D. Rose
Part of the Advances in Primatology book series (AIPR)

Abstract

The forelimb is the most versatile part of the locomotor system in primates. As such, its functional morphology varies widely among taxa with different locomotor specializations. It is therefore an attractive region for investigations of phylogeny, function, and their interrelationships. In addition, forelimb elements are relatively abundant in the catarrhine fossil record. This is especially true for the humerus, which will form the focus of what follows. In this discussion, only major references are cited: more complete bibliographies are included in Rose (1993a, 1994). Characters identified in the text by parenthesized letters, e.g., (a) or (a′), are listed in Table I, and their states in the taxa discussed are listed in Table II. Characters identified with a prime indicate the derived state. Many of the humeral characters are illustrated in Fig. 1.

Keywords

Radial Head Humeral Shaft Medial Epicondyle Distal Humerus Ulnar Deviation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiello, L. C. 1981. Locomotion in the Miocene Hominoidea. In: C. B. Stringer (ed.), Aspects of Human Evolution, pp. 63–97. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, P., and Simons, E. L. 1977. A new Miocene gibbon-like genus, Dendropithecus (Hominoidea, Primates) with distinctive postcranial adaptations: Its significance to origin of Hylobatidae. Folia Primatol. 28: 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, P., and Walker, A. 1976. The primate and other fauna from Fort Ternan, Kenya. In: G. L. Isaac and E. McCown (eds.), Human Origins, pp. 279–304.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin, Menlo Park, CA. Beard, K. C., Teaford, M. F., and Walker, A. 1986. New wrist bones of Proconsul africanus and P. nyanzae from Rusinga Island, Kenya. Folia Primatol. 47: 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Begun, D. R. 1987. A Review of the Genus Dryopithecus. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  6. Begun, D. R. 1988. Catarrhine phalanges from the Late Miocene (Vallesian) of Rudabânya, Hungary. J. Hum. Evol. 17: 413–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Begun, D. R. 1992. Phyletic diversity and locomotion in primitive European hominids. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 87: 311–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Begun, D. R. 1993. New catarrhine phalanges from Rudabânya (northeastern Hungary) and the problem of parallelism and convergence in hominoid postcranial morphology. J. Hum. Evol. 24: 373–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Begun, D. R. 1994. Relations among the great apes and humans: New interpretations based on the fossil great ape Dryopithecus. Yearb. Phys. Anthropol. 37: 11–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Begun, D. R., Teaford, M. F., and Walker, A. 1993. Comparative and functional anatomy of Proconsul phalanges from the Kasawanga Primate Site, Rusinga Island, Kenya./ Hum. Evol. 25: 89–165.Google Scholar
  11. Clark, W. E. L., and Leakey, L. S. B. 1951. The Miocene Hominoidea of East Africa. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. Fossil Mamm. Afr. 1: 1–117.Google Scholar
  12. Clark, W. E. L., and Thomas, D. P. 1951. Associated jaws and limb bones of Limnopithecus macinnesi. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. Fossil Mamm. Afr. 3: 1–27.Google Scholar
  13. Conroy, G. C. 1976. Primate postcranial remains from the Oligocene of Egypt. Contrib. Primatol. 8: 1–134.Google Scholar
  14. Ehrensberg, K. 1938. Austriacopithecus, ein neuer menschen-affenartiger Primate aus dem Miozan von Klein-Hadersdorf bei Poysdorf in Niederösterreich (Nider-Donau). Sitzungsber. Oesterr. Akad. Wiss. Math. Naturwiss. Kl. 147: 71–110.Google Scholar
  15. Feldsman, M. R. 1982. Morphometric analysis of the distal humerus of the some Cenzoic catarrhines: The late divergence hypothesis revisited. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 59: 173–195.Google Scholar
  16. Ferembach, D. 1958. Les limnopithèques du Kenya. Ann. Paleontol. 44: 149–249.Google Scholar
  17. Fleagle, J. G. 1983. Locomotor adaptations of Oligocene and Miocene hominoids and their phyletic implications. In: R. L. Ciochon and R. S. Corruccini (eds.), New Interpretations of Ape and Human Ancestry, pp. 301–324. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fleagle, J. G. 1986. The fossil record of early catarrhine evolution. In: B. Wood, L. Martin, and P. Andrews (eds.), Major Topics in Primate and Human Evolution, pp. 130–149. Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
  19. Fleagle, J. G., and Simons, E. L. 1982. The humerus of Aegyptopithecus zeuxis: A primitive anthropoid. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 59: 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gebo, D. L., Teaford, M. F., Walker, A., Larson, S. G., Jungers, W. L., and Fleagle, J. G. 1988. A hominoid proximal humerus from the Early Miocene of Rusinga Island, Kenya. J. Hum. Evol. 17: 393–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison, T. 1982. Small-Bodied Apes from the Miocene of East Africa. Ph.D. dissertation, University of London.Google Scholar
  22. Harrison, T. 1986. A reassessment of the phylogenetic relationships of Oreopithecus bambolii Gervais. J. Hum. Evol. 15: 541–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harrison, T. 1991. The implications of Oreopithecus bambolii for the origins of bipedalism. In: Y. Coppens and B. Senut (eds.), Origine(s) de la Bipédie chez les Hominidés. Cahiers de Paléoanthropologie, pp. 235–244. Editions du CNRS, Paris.Google Scholar
  24. Kelley, J. 1995. A functional interpretive framework for the early hominoid postcranium. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Suppl. 20: 205.Google Scholar
  25. Kretzoi, M. 1975. New ramapithecines and Pliopithecus from the lower Pliocene of Rudabânya in north-eastern Hungary. Nature 257: 578–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Larson, S. G. 1988. Subscapularis function in gibbons and chimpanzees: Implications for interpretation of humeral head torsion in hominoids. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 76: 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leakey, R. E., Leakey, M. G., and Walker, A. C. 1988a. Morphology of Turkanapithecus kalakolensis from Kenya. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 76: 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leakey, R. E., Leakey, M. G., and Walker, A. C. 1988b. Morphology of Afropithecus turkanensis from Kenya. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 76: 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lin, Y., Wang, S., Gao, Z., and Zhang, L. 1987. The first discovery of the radius of Sivapithecus lufengensis in China. Geol. Rev. 33: 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McCrossin, M. L. 1994. The Phylogenetic Relationships, Adaptations, and Ecology of Kenyapithecus. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  31. McHenry, H. M., and Corruccini, R. S. 1975. Distal humerus in hominoid evolution. Folia Primatol. 23: 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meldrum, D. J., and Pan, Y. 1988. Manual proximal phalanx of Laccopithecus robustus from the Latest Miocene site of Lufeng. J. Hum. Evol. 18: 719–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morbeck, M. E. 1983. Miocene hominoid discoveries from Rudabânya: Implications from the postcranial skeleton. In: R. L. Ciochon and R. S. Corruccini (eds.), New Interpretations of Ape and Human Ancestry, pp. 369–404. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Napier, J. R., and Davis, P. R. 1959. The forelimb skeleton and associated remains of Proconsul africanus. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. Fossil Mamm. Afr. 16: 1–69.Google Scholar
  35. Nengo, I. O., and Rae, T. C. 1992. New hominoid fossils from the early Miocene site of Songhor, Kenya. J. Hum. Evol. 23: 423–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pilbeam, D. R., and Simons, E. L. 1971. Humerus of Dryopithecus from Saint Gaudens, France. Nature 229: 406–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pilbeam, D. R., Rose, M. D., Badgley, C., and Lipschutz, B. 1980. Miocene hominoids from Pakistan. Postilla 181: 1–94.Google Scholar
  38. Pilbeam, D. R., Rose, M. D., Barry, J. C., and Shah, S. M. I. 1990. New Sivaphithecus humeri from the Chinji Formation of Pakistan and the relationship of Sivapithecus and Pongo. Nature 348: 237–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Robertson, M. 1985. A comparison of pronation-supination mobility in Proconsul and Pliopithecus vindobonensis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 66: 219.Google Scholar
  40. Rose, M. D. 1983. Miocene hominoid postcranial morphology: Monkey-like, ape-like, neither, or both? In: R. L. Ciochon and R. S. Corruccini (eds.), New Interpretations of Ape and Human Ancestry, pp. 405–417. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rose, M. D. 1984. Hominoid specimens from the Middle Miocene Chinji Formation, Pakistan. J. Hum. Evol. 13: 503–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rose, M. D. 1986. Further hominoid postcranial specimens from the Late Miocene Nagri Formation of Pakistan. J. Hum. Evol. 15: 333–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rose, M. D. 1988. Another look at the anthropoid elbow. J. Hum. Evol. 17:193–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rose, M. D. 1989. New postcranial specimens of catarrhines from the middle Miocene Chinji Formation, Pakistan: Descriptions and a discussion of proximal humeral functional morphology in anthropoids. J. Hum. Evol. 18: 131–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rose, M. D. 1993a. Locomotor anatomy of Miocene hominoids. In: D. Gebo (ed.), Postcranial Adaptation in Nonhuman Primates, pp. 252–272. Northern Illinois University Press, De Kalb.Google Scholar
  46. Rose, M. D. 1993b. Functional anatomy of the primate elbow and forearm. In: D. Gebo (ed.), Postcranial Adaptation in Nonhuman Primates, pp. 70–95. Northern Illinois University Press, De Kalb.Google Scholar
  47. Rose, M. D. 1994. Quadrupedalism in Miocene hominoids. J. Hum. Evol. 26: 387–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rose, M. D. 1996. Functional morphological similarities in the locomotor skeleton of Miocene catarrhines and platyrrhine monkeys. Folic Primatol. 66: 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rose, M. D., Leakey, M. G., Leakey, R. E. F., and Walker, A. C. 1992. Postcranial specimens of Simiolus enjiessi and other primitive catarrhines from the early Miocene of Lake Turkana, Kenya. J. Hum. Evol. 22: 171–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sarmiento, E. E. 1985. Functional Differences in the Skeleton of Wild and Captive Orang-Utans and their Adaptive Significance. Ph.D. dissertation, New York University.Google Scholar
  51. Sarmiento, E. E. 1987. The phylogenetic position of Oreopithecus and its significance in the origin of the Hominoidea. Am. Mus. Novit. 2881: 1–44.Google Scholar
  52. Sarmiento, E. E. 1988. Anatomy of the hominoid wrist joint: Its evolutionary and functional implications. Int. J. Primatol. 9: 281–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schultz, A. H. 1960. Einege Beobachtungen und Masse am Skelett von Oreopithecus im vergleich mit anderem catarrhinen Primaten. Z. Morphol. Anthropol. 50: 136–149.Google Scholar
  54. Senut, B. 1989. Le Coude Chez les Primates Hominoides: Anatomie, Fonction, Taxonomie et Evolution. Cahiers de Paléoanthropologie, CNRS, Paris.Google Scholar
  55. Simons, E. L., and Fleagle, J. 1973. The history of extinct gibbon-like primates. In: D. M. Rumbaugh (ed.), Gibbon and Siamang, Vol. 2, pp. 167–218. Karger, Basel.Google Scholar
  56. Spoor, C. F., Sondaar, P. Y., and Hussain, S. T. 1992. A hominoid hamate and first metacarpal from the Late Miocene Nagri Formation of Pakistan. J. Hum. Evol. 21: 413–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Straus, W. L., Jr. 1963. The classification of Oreopithecus. In: S. L. Washburn (ed.), Classification and Human Evolution, pp. 146–177. Viking Press, New York.Google Scholar
  58. Walker, A. C., and Pickford, M. 1983. New postcranial fossils of P. africanus and P. nyanzae. In: R. L. Ciochon and R. S. Corruccini (eds.), New Interpretations of Ape and Human Ancestry, pp. 325–351. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ward, C. V., Walker, A., and Teaford, M. F. 1991. Proconsul did not have a tail. J. Hum. Evol. 21: 215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wu, R., Xu, Q., and Lu, Q. 1986. Relationship between Lufeng Sivapithecus and Ramapithecus and their phylogenetic position. Acta Anthropol. Sin. 5: 1–30.Google Scholar
  61. Xiao, M. 1981. Discovery of fossil hominoid scapula at Lufeng, Yunnan. In: Yunnan Provincial Museum (ed.), Collected Papers of the 30th Anniversary of the Yunnan Provincial Museum, pp. 41–44. Yunnan Provincial Museum, Yunnan.Google Scholar
  62. Zapfe, H. 1960. Die Primatenfunde aus der Miozïanen spaltenfüllung von Neudorf an der March (Devinska Nova Ves) Tschechoslowakei. Schweiz. Palaeontol. Abh. 78: 1–293.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael D. Rose
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anatomy, Cell Biology, and Injury ScienceUniversity of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey Medical SchoolNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations