Feed Icon RSS Syndication

Latest Entries

Archives

Geographic Blog Roll
Intelligent Travel
Adventure Blog
NG News—Chief Editor Blog
NG News—Breaking Orbit Blog
Great Apes Blog
Allroads Project Blog
The Green Guide Blog
Genographic Project Blog
NG Channel Explorer Blog
NG Kids—Hands on Explorer
NG Kids—GlobalBros
Contours—Nat Geo Maps
My Wonderful World Blog

Read the latest from our editors and photographers, get photo tips, or comment on the latest issue.
A European Ancestor to African Great Apes and Humans?
Posted Jun 11,2009

Dryopithecus.lr Rudapithecus hungaricus, above, may be the ancestor of African great apes, including humans, but it lived in Europe. Artwork © John Gurche.


While the spotlight of the day might rest on the newly announced Miocene ape, Anoiapithecus brevirostris, another important early great ape is sitting in the shadows. It is Rudapithecus hungaricus, which, along with Dryopithecus and Anoiapithecus, is considered by some to be related to living great apes. Rudapithecus may be the closest we have yet come to finding the ancestor of African great apes and humans. All of these fossil apes were found in Europe.

Rudapithecus, nicknamed Gabi, was discovered through the work of National Geographic grantee David Begun of the University of Toronto and his collaborator at the Geological Institute in Budapest, László Kordos. The fossil is known from an almost complete skull and mandible (the only such set from a Miocene ape in Europe) and some skeletal parts, including a pelvis, two thigh bones, and wrist bones.

Begun has long championed the idea that the ancestors of African apes evolved in Eurasia. In his view, Anoiapithecus adds more evidence to support his hypothesis. Begun suggests, however, that Anoiapithecus is very similar to Dryopithecus, and may not deserve the status of a new genus. Furthermore, while Anoiapithecus, which is 12 million years old, is presented as ancestral to all great apes, Rudapithecus, which is 10 million years old, is ancestral only to a subfamily of great apes that excludes orangutans but includes humans. Thus Rudapithecus is key to the argument that the earliest members of the African great ape lineage we evolved from appeared first in Europe before returning to Africa.

Scientists who disagree with Begun discount the significance of the Miocene apes of Europe, including Rudapithecus, because they think African great apes evolved in Africa. Unfortunately, there is a gap in the fossil record in Africa between Miocene apes living there before 14 million years ago and the appearance of hominins in Africa between 7 and 5 million years ago. So there is little fossil evidence to support the view that great apes evolved from earlier African apes in Africa. To remedy this paleontologists are scouring Africa for fossil apes that lived there between 12 and 5 million years ago, when the lineages of gorillas, chimps, and humans diverged. And in Hungary, Begun and Kordos will keep searching for more remains of Rudapithecus, hoping they will provide further evidence for their "Out of Europe" hypothesis. They are confident that more of Gabi's skeleton remains buried at the site, which is near Rudabánya. National Geographic is funding their continued excavations there.

The fossil skull of the Rudapithecus specimen nicknamed Gabi (below) is remarkably well preserved and shares features with gorillas, such as short lower parts of the face. Photo © David Begun.
Rudypithecus-2.lr

Posted by Chris Sloan | Comments (3)
Filed Under: Stones, Bones ‘n Things
   Subscribe to RSS feed

Comments

brian
Jun 11, 2009 10PM #

It would make sense to me that for major evolution to occur, an entirely new enviroment, isolated from previous areas of inhabitation, would be required, especially where conditions would inspire change like eurasia.

brian
Jun 11, 2009 10PM #

I'm perplexed by several unexplored aspects of Neanderthals. Wouldn't it make sense that these small isolated groups would have little exposure to pathogens, similar to other isolated groups of humans, who were decimated? I think it is likely interbreeding happened, however, disease likely left the Neanderthals and offspring not viable.
Neanderthals, squat and powerful, would likely hunt by ambush, which means they would need cover. The rocky outcrops where caves are found make logistical sense. Since the last outposts found are in southern Iberia, why is it not assumed that the Neanderthals continued south, living much longer in caves that are now submerged by the rising seas 12,000 years ago? Several myths speak of giants living in the earth along the coasts. Why not explore these for clues too?

Anna
Jun 11, 2009 10PM #

Can't help noticing that wherever the specimens may be from they continue to look like my African Descent relatives...To me this new quandry looks like an not unfamiliar European inability to accept reality that Europe is not the center of the known and unknown world.

Post a Comment

- Advertisement -
National Geographic Twitter
Please note all comments are reviewed by the blog moderator before posting.