Homo ergaster: Difference between revisions
imported>Thomas Simmons No edit summary |
imported>Thomas Simmons No edit summary |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
}} | }} | ||
Homo ergaster (Greek derivation: ''working man''), an early '''hominid''', may either have been a predecessor of '''Homo erectus''' or an early Homo erectus. H. ergaster’s presence has been dated variously and may have ranged over a period of 1.9 to 1.5 million years ago. Remains of H. ergaster have been discovered in '''Kenya''' and [[Dmanisi (paleoanthropology) |Dmanisi]] in the [[Georgia (country)|Republic of Georgia]]. | Homo ergaster (Greek derivation: ''working man''), an early '''hominid''', may either have been a predecessor of '''Homo erectus''' or an early Homo erectus. H. ergaster’s presence has been dated variously and may have ranged over a period of 1.9 to 1.5 million years ago. Remains of H. ergaster have been discovered in '''Kenya''' and [[Dmanisi (paleoanthropology) |Dmanisi]] in the [[Georgia (country)|Republic of Georgia]].<ref name=SI>[http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/ha/erg.html Homo ergaster] Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institute</ref><ref name=Heslip>[http://www.msu.edu/~heslipst/contents/ANP440/ergaster.htm Homo ergaster] Steven Heslip, Michigan State University</ref><ref name=DmanisiHominids>[http://www.dmanisi.org.ge/paleoanthropology.htm Dmanisi hominids] Dmanisi Site</ref><ref name=ASO-L_Doubting>[http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/23833?&print=yes Doubting Dmanisi] Pat Shipman (2000) American Scientist On-Line. Vol. 88: 6 (p. 491). Note: A great deal of the debate around the species found at Dmanisi has focused on the disagreement on characteristics of various species of hominid. One interpretation now has it that[[ Homo ergaster]] is shorthand for "the earliest part of the evolving ergaster/erectus lineage."</ref><ref name=SmithsonianSummary>[http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/whatshot/2000/wh2000-4.html Earliest Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia: Taxonomy, Geological Setting, and Age] L. Gabunia, A. Vekua, D. Lordkipanidze, C.C. Swisher III, R. Ferring, A. Justus, M. Nioradze, M. Tvalrelidze, S.C. Anton, G. Bosinski, O. J`ris, M.A. de Lumley, G. Majsuradzs, and A. Muskhelishvili (2000). Summary of article appearing in Science vol. 288, pages 1019-1025. May 12, 2000</ref> | ||
==Anatomical characteristics== | ==Anatomical characteristics== | ||
H. ergaster had a rounded cranium and a prominent browridge. Compared to '''Australopithecus''', Its teeth were significantly smaller. Features that distinguish H. ergaster from H. erectus were thinner bones of the skull and the lack of an obvious ''sulcus'', or depression, immediately posterior of the browridge. | H. ergaster had a rounded cranium and a prominent browridge. Compared to '''Australopithecus''', Its teeth were significantly smaller. Features that distinguish H. ergaster from H. erectus were thinner bones of the skull and the lack of an obvious ''sulcus'', or depression, immediately posterior of the browridge.<ref name=SI/><ref name=Heslip/><ref name=DmanisiHominids/> | ||
==Associated artifacts== | ==Associated artifacts== | ||
H. ergaster evidently used large cutting tools of stone, primarily hand axes and cleavers. These tools represent an advanced stage of stone tool technology known as the '''Achulean''' stone tool industry now believed to have developed after hominid migration out of the region of eastern Africa | H. ergaster evidently used large cutting tools of stone, primarily hand axes and cleavers. These tools represent an advanced stage of stone tool technology known as the '''Achulean''' stone tool industry now believed to have developed after hominid migration out of the region of eastern Africa.<ref name=SI/> | ||
==Notes== | ==Notes== |
Revision as of 17:52, 24 December 2007
Homo ergaster Fossil range: Pleistocene | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientific classification | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Binomial name | ||||||||||||||
Homo ergaster Colin Groves & Vratja Mazak, 1975 |
Homo ergaster (Greek derivation: working man), an early hominid, may either have been a predecessor of Homo erectus or an early Homo erectus. H. ergaster’s presence has been dated variously and may have ranged over a period of 1.9 to 1.5 million years ago. Remains of H. ergaster have been discovered in Kenya and Dmanisi in the Republic of Georgia.[1][2][3][4][5]
Anatomical characteristics
H. ergaster had a rounded cranium and a prominent browridge. Compared to Australopithecus, Its teeth were significantly smaller. Features that distinguish H. ergaster from H. erectus were thinner bones of the skull and the lack of an obvious sulcus, or depression, immediately posterior of the browridge.[1][2][3]
Associated artifacts
H. ergaster evidently used large cutting tools of stone, primarily hand axes and cleavers. These tools represent an advanced stage of stone tool technology known as the Achulean stone tool industry now believed to have developed after hominid migration out of the region of eastern Africa.[1]
Notes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Homo ergaster Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institute
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Homo ergaster Steven Heslip, Michigan State University
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Dmanisi hominids Dmanisi Site
- ↑ Doubting Dmanisi Pat Shipman (2000) American Scientist On-Line. Vol. 88: 6 (p. 491). Note: A great deal of the debate around the species found at Dmanisi has focused on the disagreement on characteristics of various species of hominid. One interpretation now has it thatHomo ergaster is shorthand for "the earliest part of the evolving ergaster/erectus lineage."
- ↑ Earliest Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia: Taxonomy, Geological Setting, and Age L. Gabunia, A. Vekua, D. Lordkipanidze, C.C. Swisher III, R. Ferring, A. Justus, M. Nioradze, M. Tvalrelidze, S.C. Anton, G. Bosinski, O. J`ris, M.A. de Lumley, G. Majsuradzs, and A. Muskhelishvili (2000). Summary of article appearing in Science vol. 288, pages 1019-1025. May 12, 2000