Anthropology Fossil Determination, Explanation, and Analysis

Anthropology 2- EXTRA CREDIT appointment\n\n institutionalise 1:\n fossil 1 displays characteristics of Australopithecus aethiopicus of western United St take ins Lake Turkana, Kenya. This skull shows the obvious characteristics of a really sharp sagittal spinning natural elevation along the top of the skull, a very(prenominal) wide skull in the cheek bea, and an essentially hypognathous reduce skull and jaw area. The cranial capacity also appears to be delicate, suggesting that it is of the earlier hominids.\n\nFossil 2 shows eyebrow ridges and a clarified sagittal cap concordant with human erectus. The well-nigh specify characteristic, however, is the presence of nuchal torus, a bump of trick out at the backside of the skull where muscles are attached to clinch the head up, suggesting a systematically bipedal creature.\n\nFossil 3 is a small skull cover no sagittal crest or nuchal torus. There are eyebrow ridges apparent and the pillowcase is lissomely prog nathic. The skull most most resembles the skull kindred that of the Taung child (Jurmain 203). The skull of the Taung child, a variety known as the gracile australopithecine, or A. africanus, exhibits little brain capacity, accounting for the smaller skull.\n\nThe fourth fossil has a small skull be conveys the characteristics of piece sapien, therefore may be a child. At the top of the skull, the bone has not fully come together, consistent with children, and very young human being sapien. The dentition are very small but are shovel-shaped like modern valet de chambres teeth, adapted to tear and sparking plug softer foods than those eaten by earlier valet de chambre and other hominids. The skull shows little to no prognathism consistent with humans.\n\nSTATION 2:\nFossil 1 at this station showed postorbital constriction, excess bone behind the eyebrows protecting the eyes. The skull showed slight prognathism, which is the protrusion of the jaw and lower skull. I predicted that the skull was Homo erectus; however, I noted that the African form, Homo ergaster, characteristically shows postorbital constriction whereas Homo erectus does not.\n\nFossil 2 showed slight prognathism, a skull more near resembling modern Homo. However, the brow ridges symbolize were more pronounced that in modern Homo. The small shovel-shaped teeth also are example of an early Homo sapien because they ate more cooked vegetation and meat, their teeth were used less for the scratch of hard, brittle vegetation. The fossil most closely displays the characteristics of Cro-Magnon, or Homo sapiens sapiens (Jurmain 281).\n\nSTATION 3:\nThe first mandible is very robust and shows extreme molarization,...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:

Need assistance with such assignment as write my paper? Feel free to contact our highly qualified custom paper writers who are always eager to help you complete the task on time.