Fossil Primates Emit Elusive Species Clues

By Bower, Bruce | Science News, April 13, 1991 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Fossil Primates Emit Elusive Species Clues

Bower, Bruce, Science News

Fossil primates emit elusive species clues

Paleoanthropologists who attempt to decipher the evolutionary history of humans and other primates, express increasing skepticism concerning their ability to identify long-extinct species from fossil evidence alone. New glimpses of the pitfalls of trying to squeeze primate species out of bone emerged last week at the American Association of Physical Anthropologists' annual meeting in Milwaukee.

Even the concept of "species" provokes dispute among investigators. Many assume a species consists of organisms that look alike and can mate to produce fertile offspring. But skeletal anatomy often changes rapidly in response to environmental influences, making a simple list of skeletal traits unreliable as a guidepost to species recognition, asserts William H. Kimbel of the Institute of Human Origins in Berkeley, Calif.

Moreover, the primate fossil record -- largely made up of partial skulls and teeth -- often yields underestimates of the number of related species represented in a collection of bones, says Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.

Tattersall and Jeffrey Schwartz of the University of Pittsburgh examines 77 skulls from the seven modern lemur species making up the genus Lemur. Each species has distinctive external features, Tattersall notes. But identifying the species on the basis of skulls and teeth alone proved extremely difficult, he reports. In fact, Tattersall contends that most investigators would classify no more than three species in this skeletal sample. The major problem: Different lemur species share numerous anatomical features of the head and teeth that apparently evolved independently, thus shrouding the boundaries between species.

"The genus is the [meaningful] category with regards to teeth and crania, Tattersall says.

He argues that cranial and dental analyses may have led to an inappropriate lumping together of separate species of hominids, the evolutionary family that includes modern humans. For instance, he holds that fossils classed as Homo erectus -- a hominid species that lived in Africa and Asia from about 1.6 million to 300,000 years ago -- actually encompass several species, only one of which represents a direct human ancestor (SN: 4/25/87, p.264).

Terry Harrison of New York University concurs with Tattersall's cautions about deriving species from bones, but he sees no reason to split up H.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Fossil Primates Emit Elusive Species Clues


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?