After a recent fossil discovery, we now have new insights into the behaviors of a group of prehistoric humans.
A team of international researchers working with the Evolutionary Studies Institute at the University of Witwatersand have uncovered a major find about early human ancestors. In a study published in The Journal of Human Evolution, it is revealed that Paranthropus robustus, a species of prehistoric human, were bipedal and walked upright much like we do today.
This finding helps scientists learn more about the daily lives and activities of Paranthropus robustus and adds more complexity to the story of human evolution.
A New Prehistoric Ancestor
Although scientists have been researching the fossil remains of Paranthropus robustus since the 1940s, they still had a narrow understanding of the species’ stature, posture, and mobility. The new fossil findings, which include a hipbone, thigh bone, and shin bone, change that.
The group of fossils, belonging to a single, young adult, prove that Paranthropus robustus were habitual upright walkers, much like modern humans and their Homo ergaster neighbors. The new discovery also confirms that this species of prehistoric human was incredibly small.
In a press release, Professor Pickering from the University of Wisconsin-Madison estimates that “this individual, probably a female, was only about a meter tall and 27 kg (60 lbs) when it died, making it even smaller than adults from other diminutive early human species, including those represented by the famous ‘Lucy.’”
The new fossils have also confirmed another suspicion about Paranthropus robustus. Scientists theorized that this species’ small stature likely made them at high risk for attacks from local predators, like sabertooth cats and giant hyenas. Damage on the surface of the recent fossil finds confirm this theory, as they show evidence of tooth marks and chewing damage made by leopards.
Read More: How Leopard Kills Rewrite Our Prehistory
Who Are Paranthropus robustus?
Paranthropus robustus are a prehistoric human group who lived in South Africa about two million years ago. They also lived alongside Homo ergaster, the direct ancestor of modern humans.
Evidence of their existence is often found in Swartkrans Cave, which is located between Johannesburg and Pretoria, and there is a lot of evidence!
Up until now, most of the fossils found from this group are skulls and teeth. These fossils have been incredibly insightful for scientists, who have been able to piece together a lot of information about Paranthropus robustus’ diet and social organization.
For example, some of the fossils have indicated that this prehistoric group was able to survive in situations where food quality was low. Their heavy jaws and sturdy teeth would’ve allowed them to eat food that was difficult to chew in times when more digestible food was in short supply.
Additionally, many of the skulls and teeth found are unusually large. The fossil size reveals that this prehistoric society would’ve been made up of large males and small females. This organizational structure also suggests that they likely participated in polygyny, a mating system where one dominant male would mate with multiple females.
Future Research
There is still much for scientists to learn about this prehistoric population. Paranthropus robustus fossils are often found within close proximity to bone and stone tools. One big question researchers have is whether or not these tools were made by this species, by neighboring species, like Homo ergaster, or by both.
The research team behind this discovery also plans to continue investigating the new fossils using CT-scan analyses. They hope these analyses will provide additional insight into Paranthripus robustus’ patterns of growth and development and will add more details to the story of how they lived.
Read More: Two-Million-Year-Old Tooth Widens the Ancient Human Family Tree
Article Sources
Our writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:
