Les premiers représentants du genre Homo, en quête d’une identité. Apports de l’étude morphologique et de l’analyse cladistique
No consensus has been achieved concerning the taxonomic significance of the species Homo habilis. Four main hypotheses have been advanced: (1) the specimens from Olduvai, East Turkana and Omo belong to the same palaeospecies: Homo habilis sensu lato; (2) the hypodigm is heterogenous; two species co...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Société d'Anthropologie de Paris
2004-06-01
|
| Series: | Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.openedition.org/bmsap/586 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | No consensus has been achieved concerning the taxonomic significance of the species Homo habilis. Four main hypotheses have been advanced: (1) the specimens from Olduvai, East Turkana and Omo belong to the same palaeospecies: Homo habilis sensu lato; (2) the hypodigm is heterogenous; two species could be defined : Homo habilis sensu stricto and Homo rudolfensis; (3) these specimens do not belong to the genus Homo but to Australopithecus or (4) Kenyanthropus.The goal of this study is to critically re-evaluate the hypotheses concerning the taxonomy of the specimens attributed to early Homo, and to test whether they belong to the genus Homo or to another genus. A morphological study and numerical cladistic analyses on 122 morphological characteristics were carried out on the original Plio-Pleistocene specimens. The Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) is defined by the fossil specimen rather than the species in the absence of consensus concerning the taxonomic attribution of the fossil specimens studied. Indeed, because no consensus concerning the hypodigm of Homo habilis has been achieved, the creation of OTU on the basis of shared anatomy would have introduced circularity into our analysis. The results of these analyses show that: (a) two species could be defined: habilis and rudolfensis; (b) the specimens belonging to these two taxa are included in the clade of Homo ; (c) the conclusions concerning the revision of the genus Homo and the inclusion of the specimens of habilis and rudolfensis to the genus Australopithecus or Kenyanthropus are questioned. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1777-5469 |