Comparative 3D quantitative analyses of trapeziometacarpal joint surface curvatures among living catarrhines and fossil hominins.

Comparisons of joint surface curvature at the base of the thumb have long been made to discern differences among living and fossil primates in functional capabilities of the hand. However, the complex shape of this joint makes it difficult to quantify differences among taxa. The purpose of this study is to determine whether significant differences in curvature exist among selected catarrhine genera and to compare these genera with hominin fossils in trapeziometacarpal curvature. Two 3D approaches are used to quantify curvatures of the trapezial and metacarpal joint surfaces: (1) stereophotogrammetry with nonuniform rational B-spline (NURBS) calculation of joint curvature to compare modern humans with captive chimpanzees and (2) laser scanning with a quadric-based calculation of curvature to compare modern humans and wild-caught Pan, Gorilla, Pongo, and Papio. Both approaches show that Homo has significantly lower curvature of the joint surfaces than does Pan. The second approach shows that Gorilla has significantly more curvature than modern humans, while Pongo overlaps with humans and African apes. The surfaces in Papio are more cylindrical and flatter than in Homo. Australopithecus afarensis resembles African apes more than modern humans in curvatures, whereas the Homo habilis trapezial metacarpal surface is flatter than in all genera except Papio. Neandertals fall at one end of the modern human range of variation, with smaller dorsovolar curvature. Modern human topography appears to be derived relative to great apes and Australopithecus and contributes to the distinctive human morphology that facilitates forceful precision and power gripping, fundamental to human manipulative activities.

The foot of Homo floresiensis.

Homo floresiensis is an endemic hominin species that occupied Liang Bua, a limestone cave on Flores in eastern Indonesia, during the Late Pleistocene epoch. The skeleton of the type specimen (LB1) of H. floresiensis includes a relatively complete left foot and parts of the right foot. These feet provide insights into the evolution of bipedalism and, together with the rest of the skeleton, have implications for hominin dispersal events into Asia. Here we show that LB1's foot is exceptionally long relative to the femur and tibia, proportions never before documented in hominins but seen in some African apes. Although the metatarsal robusticity sequence is human-like and the hallux is fully adducted, other intrinsic proportions and pedal features are more ape-like. The postcranial anatomy of H. floresiensis is that of a biped, but the unique lower-limb proportions and surprising combination of derived and primitive pedal morphologies suggest kinematic and biomechanical differences from modern human gait. Therefore, LB1 offers the most complete glimpse of a bipedal hominin foot that lacks the full suite of derived features characteristic of modern humans and whose mosaic design may be primitive for the genus Homo. These new findings raise the possibility that the ancestor of H. floresiensis was not Homo erectus but instead some other, more primitive, hominin whose dispersal into southeast Asia is still undocumented.

Descriptions of the upper limb skeleton of Homo floresiensis.

Several bones of the upper extremity were recovered during excavations of Late Pleistocene deposits at Liang Bua, Flores, and these have been attributed to Homo floresiensis. At present, these upper limb remains have been assigned to six different individuals - LB1, LB2, LB3, LB4, LB5, and LB6. Several of these bones are complete or nearly so, but some are quite fragmentary. All skeletal remains recovered from Liang Bua were extremely fragile, but have now been stabilized and hardened in the laboratory in Jakarta. They are now curated in museum-quality containers at the National Research and Development Centre for Archaeology in Jakarta, Indonesia. These skeletal remains are described and illustrated photographically. The upper limb presents a unique mosaic of derived (human-like) and primitive morphologies, the combination of which is never found in either healthy or pathological modern humans.

A 3D quantitative comparison of trapezium and trapezoid relative articular and nonarticular surface areas in modern humans and great apes.

The structure and functions of the modern human hand are critical components of what distinguishes Homo sapiens from the great apes (Gorilla, Pan, and Pongo). In this study, attention is focused on the trapezium and trapezoid, the two most lateral bones of the distal carpal row, in the four extant hominid genera, representing the first time they have been quantified and analyzed together as a morphological-functional complex. Our objective is to quantify the relative articular and nonarticular surface areas of these two bones and to test whether modern humans exhibit significant shape differences from the great apes, as predicted by previous qualitative analyses and the functional demands of differing manipulative and locomotor strategies. Modern humans were predicted to show larger relative first metacarpal and scaphoid surfaces on the trapezium because of the regular recruitment of the thumb during manipulative behaviors; alternatively, great apes were predicted to show larger relative second metacarpal and scaphoid surfaces on the trapezoid because of the functional demands on the hands during locomotor behaviors. Modern humans were also expected to exhibit larger relative mutual joint surfaces between the trapezoid and adjacent carpals than do the great apes because of assumed transverse loads generated by the functional demands of the modern human power grip. Using 3D bone models acquired through laser digitizing, the relative articular and nonarticular areas on each bone are quantified and compared. Multivariate analyses of these data clearly distinguish modern humans from the great apes. In total, the observed differences between modern humans and the great apes support morphological predictions based on the fact that this region of the human wrist is no longer involved in weight-bearing during locomotor behavior and is instead recruited solely for manipulative behaviors. The results provide the beginnings of a 3D comparative standard against which further extant and fossil primate wrist bones can be compared within the contexts of manipulative and locomotor behaviors.

Functional capabilities of modern and fossil hominid hands: three-dimensional analysis of trapezia.

Three-dimensional (3D) trapezium models from Homo sapiens, Gorilla gorilla, Pan troglodytes, Australopithecus afarensis (A.L.333-80), and Homo habilis (O.H.7-NNQ) were acquired through laser digitizing. Least-square planes were generated for each articular surface, and the angles between the planes were compared. Each extant species displays an overall pattern that distinguishes it from the others. The observed angles in G. gorilla and P. troglodytes are more similar to one other than either is to H. sapiens. Our results, obtained from using new 3D modeling and analytical tools, raise interesting questions about the functional capabilities of the fossil trapezia. Multivariate statistical analyses indicate that A.L.333-80 is morphologically more similar to that of modern humans, whereas the O.H.7 trapezium is more similar to that of the gorilla. Significant differences between A.L.333-80 and the extant species occur, but some similarities to humans suggest the ability to form the distinctively human forceful pad-to-side and three-jaw chuck grips. Some key morphological differences from humans highlighted and quantified by our research suggest limitations in the functional capabilities of the O.H.7 trapezium, particularly in those that facilitate pronation at the base of the second metacarpal. If the O.H.7 trapezium represents part of the hand responsible for manufacturing and using the stone tools found at Olduvai, our results suggest that the hand manipulated the stones in a way for which we have no modern analog. Alternative considerations are that the O.H.7 trapezium is not representative of other trapezia from its species (i.e., N=1), or that it represents another primate or hominid species.