Human taxonomy
Homo ("humans") | |
---|---|
Scientific classification | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Chordata |
Class: | Mammalia |
Order: | Primates |
Suborder: | Haplorhini |
Infraorder: | Simiiformes |
Family: | Hominidae |
Subfamily: | Homininae |
Tribe: | Hominini |
Genus: | Homo Linnaeus, 1758 |
Type species | |
Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758
| |
Species | |
other species or subspecies suggested | |
Synonyms | |
Synonyms
|
million years ago ) |
Human taxonomy is the classification of the
Since the introduction of systematic names in the 18th century, knowledge of
The genus Homo is placed in the
A proposal by Wood and Richmond (2000) would introduce Hominina as a subtribe alongside Australopithecina, with Homo the only known genus within Hominina. Alternatively, following Cela-Conde and Ayala (2003), the "pre-human" or "proto-human" genera of Australopithecus, Ardipithecus, Praeanthropus, and possibly Sahelanthropus, may be placed on equal footing alongside the genus Homo. An even more extreme view rejects the division of Pan and Homo as separate genera, which based on the
Categorizing humans based on
History
Human taxonomy on one hand involves the placement of humans within the taxonomy of the
The discovery of the first extinct archaic human species from the fossil record dates to the mid 19th century:
The introduction of
Other proposed genera, now mostly considered part of Homo, include:
The genus Homo has been taken to originate some two million years ago, since the discovery of
Wood and Richmond (2000) proposed that Gray's tribe Hominini ("hominins") be designated as comprising all species after the chimpanzee–human last common ancestor by definition, to the inclusion of Australopithecines and other possible pre-human or para-human species (such as Ardipithecus and Sahelanthropus) not known in Gray's time.[14] In this suggestion, the new subtribe of Hominina was to be designated as including the genus Homo exclusively, so that Hominini would have two subtribes, Australopithecina and Hominina, with the only known genus in Hominina being Homo. Orrorin (2001) has been proposed as a possible ancestor of Hominina but not Australopithecina.[15]
Designations alternative to Hominina have been proposed: Australopithecinae (Gregory & Hellman 1939) and Preanthropinae (Cela-Conde & Altaba 2002);[16]
Species
At least a dozen species of Homo other than Homo sapiens have been proposed, with varying degrees of consensus. Homo erectus is widely recognized as the species directly ancestral to Homo sapiens.[citation needed] Most other proposed species are proposed as alternatively belonging to either Homo erectus or Homo sapiens as a subspecies. This concerns Homo ergaster in particular.[17][18] One proposal divides Homo erectus into an African and an Asian variety; the African is Homo ergaster, and the Asian is Homo erectus sensu stricto. (Inclusion of Homo ergaster with Asian Homo erectus is Homo erectus sensu lato.)[19] There appears to be a recent trend, with the availability of ever more difficult-to-classify fossils such as the Dmanisi skulls (2013) or Homo naledi fossils (2015) to subsume all archaic varieties under Homo erectus.[20][21][22]
Lineages | Temporal range (kya) |
Habitat | Adult height | Adult mass | Cranial capacity (cm3) |
Fossil record | Discovery | Publication of name |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H. habilis membership in Homo uncertain |
2,100–1,500[a][b] | Tanzania | 110–140 cm (3 ft 7 in – 4 ft 7 in) | 33–55 kg (73–121 lb) | 510–660 | Many | 1960 | 1964 |
H. rudolfensis membership in Homo uncertain |
1,900 | Kenya | 700 | 2 sites | 1972 | 1986 | ||
H. gautengensis also classified as H. habilis |
1,900–600 | South Africa | 100 cm (3 ft 3 in) | 3 individuals[25][c] | 2010 | 2010 | ||
H. erectus | 1,900–140[26][d][27][e] | Eurasia
|
180 cm (5 ft 11 in) | 60 kg (130 lb) | 850 (early) – 1,100 (late) | Many[f][g] | 1891 | 1892 |
H. ergaster African H. erectus |
1,800–1,300[29] | East and Southern Africa | 700–850 | Many | 1949 | 1975 | ||
H. antecessor | 1,200–800 | Western Europe | 175 cm (5 ft 9 in) | 90 kg (200 lb) | 1,000 | 2 sites | 1994 | 1997 |
H. heidelbergensis early H. neanderthalensis |
600–300[h] | Europe, Africa | 180 cm (5 ft 11 in) | 90 kg (200 lb) | 1,100–1,400 | Many | 1907 | 1908 |
H. cepranensis a single fossil, possibly H. heidelbergensis |
c. 450[30] | Italy | 1,000 | 1 skull cap | 1994 | 2003 | ||
H. longi | 309–138[31] | Northeast China | 1,420[32] | 1 individual | 1933 | 2021 | ||
H. rhodesiensis early H. sapiens |
c. 300 | Zambia
|
1,300 | Single or very few | 1921 | 1921 | ||
H. naledi | c. 300[33] | South Africa | 150 cm (4 ft 11 in) | 45 kg (99 lb) | 450 | 15 individuals | 2013 | 2015 |
H. sapiens (anatomically modern humans) |
c. 300–present[i] | Worldwide | 150–190 cm (4 ft 11 in – 6 ft 3 in) | 50–100 kg (110–220 lb) | 950–1,800 | (extant) | —— | 1758 |
H. neanderthalensis |
240–40[36][j] | Europe, Western Asia | 170 cm (5 ft 7 in) | 55–70 kg (121–154 lb) (heavily built) |
1,200–1,900 | Many | 1829 | 1864 |
H. floresiensis classification uncertain |
190–50 | Indonesia | 100 cm (3 ft 3 in) | 25 kg (55 lb) | 400 | 7 individuals | 2003 | 2004 |
Nesher Ramla Homo classification uncertain |
140–120 | Palestine | several individuals | 2021 | ||||
H. tsaichangensis possibly H. erectus or Denisova |
c. 100[k] | Taiwan | 1 individual | 2008(?) | 2015 | |||
H. luzonensis |
c. 67[39][40] | Philippines | 3 individuals | 2007 | 2019 | |||
Denisova hominin
|
40 | Siberia | 2 sites | 2000 |
2010[l] |
Subspecies
Homo sapiens subspecies
The recognition or nonrecognition of
A subspecies cannot be recognized independently: a species will either be recognized as having no subspecies at all or at least two (including any that are extinct). Therefore, the designation of an extant subspecies Homo sapiens sapiens only makes sense if at least one other subspecies is recognized. H. s. sapiens is attributed to "Linnaeus (1758)" by the taxonomic
There were variations and additions to the categories of Linnaeus, such as H. s. tasmanianus for the native population of Australia.
There are a number of proposals of extinct varieties of Homo sapiens made in the 20th century. Many of the original proposals were not using explicit
After World War II, the practice of dividing extant populations of Homo sapiens into subspecies declined. An early authority explicitly avoiding the division of H. sapiens into subspecies was Grzimeks Tierleben, published 1967–1972.[53] A late example of an academic authority proposing that the human racial groups should be considered taxonomical subspecies is John Baker (1974).[54] The trinomial nomenclature Homo sapiens sapiens became popular for "modern humans" in the context of Neanderthals being considered a subspecies of H. sapiens in the second half of the 20th century. Derived from the convention, widespread in the 1980s, of considering two subspecies, H. s. neanderthalensis and H. s. sapiens, the explicit claim that "H. s. sapiens is the only extant human subspecies" appears in the early 1990s.[55]
Since the 2000s, the extinct
Homo erectus subspecies
Homo erectus since its introduction in 1892 has been divided into numerous subspecies, many of them formerly considered individual species of Homo. None of these subspecies have universal consensus among paleontologists.
- Homo erectus yuanmouensis (Yuanmou Man) (Li et al., 1977)
- Homo erectus lantianensis (Lantian Man) (Woo Ju-Kang, 1964)
- Homo erectus nankinensis (Nanjing Man) (1993)
- Homo erectus pekinensis (Peking Man) (1970s)[58]
- Homo erectus palaeojavanicus (Meganthropus) (Tyler, 2001)
- Homo erectus soloensis (Solo Man) (Oppenoorth, 1932)
- Homo erectus tautavelensis (Tautavel Man) (de Lumley and de Lumley, 1971)
- Homo erectus georgicus(1991)
- Homo erectus bilzingslebenensis (Vlček, 2002)[59]
See also
Footnotes
- ^ Confirmed H. habilis fossils are dated to between 2.1 and 1.5 million years ago. This date range overlaps with the emergence of Homo erectus.[23][24]
- ^ Hominins with "proto-Homo" traits may have lived as early as 2.8 million years ago, as suggested by a fossil jawbone classified as transitional between Australopithecus and Homo discovered in 2015.
- ^ A species proposed in 2010 based on the fossil remains of three individuals dated between 1.9 and 0.6 million years ago. The same fossils were also classified as H. habilis, H. ergaster or Australopithecus by other anthropologists.
- ^ H. erectus may have appeared some 2 million years ago. Fossils dated to as much as 1.8 million years ago have been found both in Africa and in Southeast Asia, and the oldest fossils by a narrow margin (1.85 to 1.77 million years ago) were found in the Caucasus, so that it is unclear whether H. erectus emerged in Africa and migrated to Eurasia, or if, conversely, it evolved in Eurasia and migrated back to Africa.
- Java, is considered the latest known survival of H. erectus. Formerly dated to as late as 50,000 to 40,000 years ago, a 2011 study pushed back the date of its extinction of H. e. soloensis to 143,000 years ago at the latest, more likely before 550,000 years ago. [28]
- ^ Now also included in H. erectus are Peking Man (formerly Sinanthropus pekinensis) and Java Man (formerly Pithecanthropus erectus).
- Homo erectus georgicus. The distinction from descendant species such as Homo ergaster, Homo floresiensis, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensisand indeed Homo sapiens is not entirely clear.
- ^ The type fossil is Mauer 1, dated to ca. 0.6 million years ago. The transition from H. heidelbergensis to H. neanderthalensis between 300 and 243 thousand years ago is conventional, and makes use of the fact that there is no known fossil in this period. Examples of H. heidelbergensis are fossils found at Bilzingsleben (also classified as Homo erectus bilzingslebensis).
- ^ The age of H. sapiens has long been assumed to be close to 200,000 years, but since 2017 there have been a number of suggestions extending this time to as high as 300,000 years. In 2017, fossils found in Jebel Irhoud (Morocco) suggest that Homo sapiens may have speciated by as early as 315,000 years ago.[34] Genetic evidence has been adduced for an age of roughly 270,000 years.[35]
- ^ The first humans with "proto-Neanderthal traits" lived in Eurasia as early as 0.6 to 0.35 million years ago (classified as H. heidelbergensis, also called a chronospecies because it represents a chronological grouping rather than being based on clear morphological distinctions from either H. erectus or H. neanderthalensis). There is a fossil gap in Europe between 300 and 243 kya, and by convention, fossils younger than 243 kya are called "Neanderthal".[37]
- ^ younger than 450 kya, either between 190–130 or between 70–10 kya[38]
- ^ provisional names Homo sp. Altai or Homo sapiens ssp. Denisova.
References
- S2CID 26693109.
- ^ "Herto skulls (Homo sapiens idaltu)". talkorigins org. Retrieved June 7, 2016.
- PMID 27298468.
- ^ Jared Diamond in The Third Chimpanzee (1991), and Morris Goodman (2003) Hecht, Jeff (May 19, 2003). "Chimps are human, gene study implies". New Scientist. Retrieved December 8, 2011.
- PMID 27874171.
- ^ "AAA Statement on Race". American Anthropological Association.
- S2CID 33066198.
- ^ J. E. Gray, "An outline of an attempt at the disposition of Mammalia into Tribes and Families, with a list of genera apparently appertaining to each Tribe", Annals of Philosophy, new series (1825), pp. 337–344.
- PMID 12794185.
- ^ Introduced for the Florisbad Skull (discovered in 1932, Homo florisbadensis or Homo helmei). Also the genus suggested for a number of archaic human skulls found at Lake Eyasi by Weinert (1938). Leaky, Journal of the East Africa Natural History Society (1942), p. 43.
- PMID 25739410.. Some paleoanthropologists regard the H. habilis taxon as invalid, made up of fossil specimens of Australopithecus and Homo. Tattersall, I. & Schwartz, J.H., Extinct Humans, Westview Press, New York, 2001, p. 111.
- PMID 10213682.
- S2CID 87482930. Retrieved August 8, 2012.
- PMID 10999270.
- ISBN 9781107019959.
- S2CID 1316969. Cela-Conde, C.J.; Ayala, F.J. (2003). "Genera of the human lineage".PMID 12794185. Wood, B.; Lonergan, N. (2008). "The hominin fossil record: taxa, grades and clades" (PDF).PMID 18380861.
- ^ Hazarika, Manji (16–30 June 2007). "Homo erectus / ergaster and Out of Africa: Recent Developments in Paleoanthropology and Prehistoric Archaeology" (PDF).
- ISBN 0226439631.
- PMID 14666536.
By the 1980s, the growing numbers of H. erectus specimens, particularly in Africa, led to the realization that Asian H. erectus (H. erectus sensu stricto), once thought so primitive, was in fact more derived than its African counterparts. These morphological differences were interpreted by some as evidence that more than one species might be included in H. erectus sensu lato (e.g., Stringer, 1984; Andrews, 1984; Tattersall, 1986; Wood, 1984, 1991a, b; Schwartz and Tattersall, 2000) ... Unlike the European lineage, in my opinion, the taxonomic issues surrounding Asian vs. African H. erectus are more intractable. The issue was most pointedly addressed with the naming of H. ergaster on the basis of the type mandible KNM-ER 992, but also including the partial skeleton and isolated teeth of KNM-ER 803 among other Koobi Fora remains (Groves and Mazak, 1975). Recently, this specific name was applied to most early African and Georgian H. erectus in recognition of the less-derived nature of these remains vis à vis conditions in Asian H. erectus (see Wood, 1991a, p. 268; Gabunia et al., 2000a). At least portions of the paratype of H. ergaster (e.g., KNM-ER 1805) are not included in most current conceptions of that taxon. The H. ergaster question remains famously unresolved (e.g., Stringer, 1984; Tattersall, 1986; Wood, 1991a, 1994; Rightmire, 1998b; Gabunia et al., 2000a; Schwartz and Tattersall, 2000), in no small part because the original diagnosis provided no comparison with the Asian fossil record.
- ^ "Skull suggests three early human species were one". News & Comment. Nature.
- S2CID 20435482.
- ^ Switek, Brian (17 October 2013). "Beautiful skull spurs debate on human history". National Geographic. Archived from the original on October 17, 2013. Retrieved 22 September 2014.
- ISBN 978-3-540-32474-4.
- S2CID 43455561.
- PMID 20466364.
- ISBN 978-0-495-38190-7.
- PMID 21646521.
- PMID 21738710.
- ^ Hazarika M (2007). "Homo erectus/ergaster and Out of Africa: Recent Developments in Paleoanthropology and Prehistoric Archaeology" (PDF). EAA Summer School eBook. Vol. 1. European Anthropological Association. pp. 35–41.
Intensive Course in Biological Anthrpology, 1st Summer School of the European Anthropological Association, 16–30 June, 2007, Prague, Czech Republic
- .
- PMID 34557772.
- PMID 34557770.
- PMID 28483040.
- . Retrieved 11 June 2017.
- PMID 28675384.
- ISSN 0305-4403.
- PMID 9614635.
- PMID 25625212.
- S2CID 106411053.
- ^ Zimmer C (10 April 2019). "A new human species once lived in this Philippine cave – Archaeologists in Luzon Island have turned up the bones of a distantly related species, Homo luzonensis, further expanding the human family tree". The New York Times. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
- ^ Ralph, Bob (February 19, 1987). "Conforming to type". New Scientist. No. 1548. p. 59.
as far as I know, there is no type material for Homo sapiens. To be fair to Linnaeus, the practice of setting type specimens aside doesn't seem to have developed until a century or so later.
- ^ "article 46.1". ICZN glossary (4th ed.). International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Archived from the original on 2016-03-03. Retrieved 2018-06-04.
Statement of the Principle of Coordination applied to species-group names. A name established for a taxon at either rank in the species group is deemed to have been simultaneously established by the same author for a taxon at the other rank in the group; both nominal taxa have the same name-bearing type, whether that type was fixed originally or subsequently.
Homo sapiens sapiens is rarely used before the 1940s. In 1946, John Wendell Bailey attributes the name to Linnaeus (1758) explicitly: "Linnaeus. Syst. Nat. ed. 10, Vol. 1. pp. 20, 21, 22, lists five races of man, viz: Homo sapiens sapiens (white — Caucasian) [...]", This is a misattribution, but H. s. sapiens has since often been attributed to Linnaeus. In actual fact, Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. ed. 10 Vol. 1. p. 21 does not have Homo sapiens sapiens, the "white" or "Caucasian" race being instead called Homo sapiens Europaeus. This is explicitly pointed out in Bulletin der Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Anthropologie und Ethnologie Volume 21 (1944), p. 18 (arguing not against H. s. sapiens but against "H. s. albus L." proposed by von Eickstedt and Peters): "die europide Rassengruppe, als Subspecies aufgefasst, [würde] Homo sapiens eurpoaeus L. heissen" ("the Europid racial group, considered as a subspecies, would be named H. s. europeaeus L."). See also: John R. Baker, Race, Oxford University Press (1974), 205. - ^ Linné, Carl von (1758). Systema naturæ. Regnum animale (10 ed.). pp. 18ff.
- ^ See e.g. John Wendell Bailey, The Mammals of Virginia (1946), p. 356.; Journal of Mammalogy 26-27 (1945), p. 359.; J. Desmond Clark (ed.), The Cambridge History of Africa, Cambridge University Press (1982), p. 141 (with references).
- ^ Annals of Philosophy 11, London (1826), p. 71
- ^ Frederick S. Szalay, Eric Delson, Evolutionary History of the Primates (2013), 508
- ^ Pääbo, Svante (2014). Neanderthal Man: In Search of Lost Genomes. New York: Basic Books. p. 237.
- OCLC 62265494.
- ISBN 9781489937452.
- ^ M. R. Drennan, "An Australoid Skull from the Cape Flats", The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Vol. 59 (Jul. - Dec., 1929), 417-427.
- ISBN 9781135582272.
- PMID 6410925.
- ^ English translation (1972–1975): Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia, Volume 11, p. 55.
- ^ John R. Baker, Race, Oxford University Press (1974).
- ^ Kitahara, Michio (1991). The tragedy of evolution: the human animal confronts modern society. p. xi.
We are the only surviving subspecies of Homo sapiens
- S2CID 26693109.
- PMID 19805257. Harvati, K.; Frost, S.R.; McNulty, K.P. (2004). "Neanderthal taxonomy reconsidered: implications of 3D primate models of intra- and interspecific differences".PMID 14745010. "Homo neanderthalensis King, 1864". Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Human Evolution. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. 2013. pp. 328–331.
- ^ ISBN 9783110810691.
- ^ Emanuel Vlček: Der fossile Mensch von Bilzingsleben (= Bilzingsleben. Bd. 6 = Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas 35). Beier & Beran, Langenweißbach 2002.