Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Drimolen cranium DNH 155 documents microevolution in an early hominin species

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 5, pages 38–45 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Paranthropus robustus is a small-brained extinct hominin from South Africa characterized by derived, robust craniodental morphology. The most complete known skull of this species is DNH 7 from Drimolen Main Quarry, which differs from P. robustus specimens recovered elsewhere in ways attributed to sexual dimorphism. Here, we describe a new fossil specimen from Drimolen Main Quarry, dated from approximately 2.04–1.95 million years ago, that challenges this view. DNH 155 is a well-preserved adult male cranium that shares with DNH 7 a suite of primitive and derived features unlike those seen in adult P. robustus specimens from other chronologically younger deposits. This refutes existing hypotheses linking sexual dimorphism, ontogeny and social behaviour within this taxon, and clarifies hypotheses concerning hominin phylogeny. We document small-scale morphological changes in P. robustus associated with ecological change within a short time frame and restricted geography. This represents the most highly resolved evidence yet of microevolutionary change within an early hominin species.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Geographical and stratigraphic context of DNH 155.
Fig. 2: Specimen DNH 155.
Fig. 3: Phylogenetic relationships of early hominins while treating the DMQ robust australopiths as a distinct taxon.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data are available in the Methods, Supplementary Information and at MorphoBank (http://morphobank.org/permalink/?P3477). Specimen DNH 155 is curated by the Evolutionary Studies Institute of the University of the Witwatersrand. Requests for permission to examine DNH 155 should be directed to their hominin access committee and are subject to regulations of the South African Heritage Resources Agency.

References

  1. Keyser, A. W. The Drimolen skull: the most complete australopithecine cranium and mandible to date. S. Afr. J. Sci. 96, 189–193 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Keyser, A. W., Menter, C. G., Moggi-Cecchi, J., Pickering, T. R. & Berger, L. R. Drimolen: a new hominid-bearing site in Gauteng, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Sci. 96, 193–197 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Herries, A. I. R. et al. Contemporaneity of Australopithecus, Paranthropus and early Homo erectus in South Africa. Science 368, eaaw7293 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pickering, R. et al. U-Pb-dated flowstones restrict South African hominin record to dry climate phases. Nature 565, 226–229 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Broom, R. Another new type of fossil ape-man (Paranthropus crassidens). Nature 163, 57 (1949).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Broom, R. & Robinson, J. T. Swartkrans Ape-Man Paranthropus crassidens (Transvaal Museum, 1952).

  7. Grine, F. E. in Ancestors: The Hard Evidence (ed. Delson, E.) 153–167 (Alan R. Liss, 1985).

  8. Robinson, J. T. The genera and species of the Australopithecinae. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 12, 181–200 (1954).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Robinson, J. T The Dentition of the Australopithecinae (Transvaal Museum, 1956).

  10. Arnold, S. J. Morphology, performance and fitness. Am. Zool. 23, 347–361 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lockwood, C. A., Menter, C. G., Moggi-Cecchi, J. & Keyser, A. W. Extended male growth in a fossil hominin species. Science 318, 1443–1446 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rak, Y. The Australopithecine Face (Academic Press, 1983).

  13. Smith, A. L. et al. The feeding biomechanics and dietary ecology of Paranthropus boisei. Anat. Rec. (Hoboken) 298, 145–167 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ledogar, J. A. The biomechanics of bony facial “buttresses” in South African australopiths: an experimental study using finite element analysis. Anat. Rec. (Hoboken) 300, 171–195 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kimbel, W. H., Rak, Y. & Johanson, D. C. The Skull of Australopithecus afarensis (Oxford Univ. Press, 2004).

  16. Neubauer, S., Gunz, P., Weber, G. W. & Hublin, J.-J. Endocranial volume of Australopithecus africanus: new CT-based estimates and the effects of missing data and small sample size. J. Hum. Evol. 62, 498–510 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Spoor, F. et al. Reconstructed Homo habilis type OH 7 suggests deep-rooted species diversity in early Homo. Nature 519, 83–86 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Neubauer, S., Hublin, J.-J. & Gunz, P. The evolution of modern human brain shape. Sci. Adv. 4, eaao5961 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Holloway, R. L., Broadfield, D. C. & Yuan, M. S. The Human Fossil Record. Volume Three, Brain Endocasts, the Paleoneurological Evidence (Wiley, 2004).

  20. Johanson, D. C. & White, T. D. A systematic assessment of early African hominids. Science 203, 321–330 (1979).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walker, A., Leakey, R. E., Harris, J. M. & Brown, F. H. 2.5-Myr Australopithecus boisei from west of Lake Turkana, Kenya. Nature 322, 517–522 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kimbel, W. H., White, T. D. & Johanson, D. C. in Evolutionary History of the “Robust” Australopithecines (ed. Grine, F. E.) 259–258 (Aldine de Gruyter, 1988).

  23. Wood, B. & Constantino, P. Paranthropus boisei: fifty years of fossil evidence and analysis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 134, 106–132 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wood, B. A. & Schroer, K. in Human Paleontology and Prehistory: Contributions in Honor of Yoel Rak (eds Marom, A. & Hovers, E.) 95–107 (Springer, 2017).

  25. Lehmann, J. & Boesch, C. Social influences on ranging patterns among chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in the Taï National Park, Côte d’Ivoire. Behav. Ecol. 14, 642–649 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pickering, R., Kramers, J. D., Hancox, P. J., de Ruiter, D. J. & Woodhead, J. D. Contemporary flowstone development links early hominin bearing cave deposits in South Africa. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 306, 23–32 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Herries, A. I. R. & Adams, J. W. Clarifying the context, dating and age range of the Gondolin hominins and Paranthropus in South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 65, 676–681 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stammers, R., Caruana, M. & Herries, A. I. R. The first bone tools from Kromdraai and stone tools from Drimolen, and the place of bone tools in the South African Earlier Stone Age. Quat. Int. 495, 87–101 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bruxelles, L., Marie, R., Couzens, R., Thackeray, J. F. & Braga, J. in Kromdraai: a birthplace of Paranthropus in the Cradle of Humankind (eds Braga, J. & Thackeray, J. F.) 31–48 (Sun Press, 2016).

  30. Leakey, M. G., Feibel, C. S., McDougall, I. & Walker, A. New four-million-year-old hominid species from Kanapoi and Allia Bay, Kenya. Nature 376, 565–571 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brunet, M. et al. Australopithecus bahrelghazali, une nouvelle espèce d’hominidé ancient de la région de Koro Toro (Tchad). C. R. Acad. Sci. 322, 907–913 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Brunet, M. et al. A new hominid from the Upper Miocene of Chad, Central Africa. Nature 418, 145–151 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Asfaw, B. et al. Australopithecus garhi: a new species of early hominid from Ethiopia. Science 284, 629–635 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Senut, B. et al. First hominid from the Miocene (Lukeino Formation, Kenya). C. R. Acad. Sci 332, 137–144 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Haile-Selassie, Y. H., Suwa, G. & White, T. D. Late Miocene teeth from Middle Awash, Ethiopia, and early hominid dental evolution. Science 303, 1503–1505 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Berger, L. et al. Australopithecus sediba: a new species of Homo-like australopith from South Africa. Science 328, 195–204 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Simpson, G. G. The species concept. Evolution 5, 285–298 (1951).

    Google Scholar 

  38. de Queiroz, K. in Endless Forms: Species and Speciation (eds Howard, D. J. & Berlocher, S. H.) 57–75 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1998).

  39. De Queiroz, K. Species concepts and species delimitation. Syst. Biol. 56, 879–886 (2007).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Suwa, G., White, T. D. & Howell, F. C. Mandibular postcanine dentition from the Shungura Formation, Ethiopia: crown morphology, taxonomic allocations, and Plio-Pleistocene hominid evolution. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 101, 247–282 (1996).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kimbel, W. H. et al. Was Australopithecus anamensis ancestral to A. afarensis? A case of anagenesis in the hominin fossil record. J. Hum. Evol. 51, 134–152 (2006).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Moggi-Cecchi, J., Menter, C., Boccone, S. & Keyser, A. Early hominin dental remains from the Plio-Pleistocene site of Drimolen, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 58, 374–405 (2010).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Brain, C. K. The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1981).

  44. Pickering, R. & Herries, A. I. R. in Hominin Postcranial Remains from Sterkfontein, South Africa, 1936–1995. (eds Zipfel, B., Richmond, B. & Ward, C. V.) 21–30 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).

  45. Vrba, E. S. in Ancestors: The Hard Evidence (ed. Delson, E.) 63–71 (Alan R. Liss, 1985).

  46. Dupont, L. M., Donner, B., Vidal, L., Perez, E. M. & Wefer, G. Linking desert evolution and coastal upwelling: Pliocene climate change in Namibia. Geology 33, 461–464 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Caley, T. et al. A two-million-year-long hydroclimatic context for hominin evolution in southeastern Africa. Nature 560, 76–79 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Johannes-Boyau, R. et al. Elemental signatures of Australopithecus africanus teeth reveal seasonal dietary stress. Nature 572, 122–115 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Pickering, R. et al. Australopithecus sediba at 1.977 Ma and implications for the origins of the genus Homo. Science 333, 1421–1423 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Potts, R. Environmental hypotheses of hominin evolution. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 107, 93–136 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wood, B. & Strait, D. Patterns of resource use in early Homo and Paranthropus. J. Hum. Evol. 46, 119–162 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Scott, R. S. et al. Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins. Nature 436, 693–695 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sponheimer, M. et al. Isotopic evidence for dietary variability in the early hominin Paranthropus robustus. Science 314, 980–982 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schroeder, L., Roseman, C. R., Cheverud, J. M. & Ackermann, R. R. Characterizing the evolutionary path(s) to early Homo. PLoS ONE 9, e114307 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Mayr, E. Systematics and the Origin of Species from the Viewpoint of a Zoologist (Columbia Univ. Press, 1942).

  56. Lordkipanidze, D. et al. A complete skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the evolutionary biology of early Homo. Science 342, 326–331 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Neubauer, S., Gunz, P. & Hublin, J.-J. The pattern of endocranial ontogenetic shape changes in humans. J. Anat. 215, 240–255 (2009).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Neubauer, S. & Gunz, P. in Digital Endocasts: From Skulls to Brains (eds Bruner, E. et al.) 173–190 (Tokyo Springer, 2018).

  59. Wood, B. Koobi Fora Research Project. Volume 4, Hominid Cranial Remains (Clarendon Press, 1991).

  60. Darroch, J. N. & Mossiman, J. E. Canonical and principal components of shape. Biometrika 72, 241–252 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T. & Ryan, P. D. PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electronica 4, 4 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Gordon, A. D., Nevell, L. & Wood, B. The Homo floresiensis cranium (LB1): size, scaling and early Homo affinities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 4650–4655 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wood, B. A. & Engleman, C. A. Analysis of the dental morphology of Plio-Pleistocene hominids. V. Maxillary postcanine tooth morphology. J. Anat. 161, 1–35 (1988).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Grine, F. E. New hominid fossils from the Swartkrans Formation (1979–1986 excavations): craniodental specimens. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 79, 409–449 (1989).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Grine, F. E. & Daegling, D. New mandible of Paranthropus robustus from Member 1, Swartkrans Formation, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 24, 319–333 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Grine, F. E. & Strait, D. S. New hominid fossils from Member 1 “Hanging Remnant”, Swartkrans Formation, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 26, 57–76 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Sutton, M. B. et al. Newly discovered fossil- and artefact-bearing deposits, uranium-series ages, and Plio-Pleistocene hominids at Swartkrans Cave, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 57, 688–696 (2009).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Pickering, T. R. et al. New hominid fossils from Member 1 of the Swartkrans formation, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 62, 618–638 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Pickering, T. R. et al. New early Pleistocene hominin teeth from the Swartkrans Formation, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 100, 1–15 (2016).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Mongle, C. S., Strait, D. S. & Grine, F. E. Expanded character sampling underscores phylogenetic stability of Ardipithecus ramidus as a basal hominin. J. Hum. Evol. 131, 28–39 (2019).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Haile-Selassie, Y., Melillo, S. M., Vazzana, A., Benazzi, S. & Ryan, T. M. A 3.8-million-year-old hominin cranium from Woranso-Mille, Ethiopia. Nature 573, 214–219 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Huelsenbeck, J. P. & Ronquist, F. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17, 754–755 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Lewis, P. O. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst. Biol. 50, 913–925 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Pyron, R. A. Divergence time estimation using fossils as terminal taxa and the origins of Lissamphibia. Syst. Biol. 60, 466–481 (2011).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Ronquist, F. et al. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539–542 (2012).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Gavryushkina, A., Welch, D., Stadler, T. & Drummond, A. J. Bayesian inference of sampled ancestor trees for epidemiology and fossil calibration. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003919 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Heath, T. A., Huelsenbeck, J. P. & Stadler, T. The fossilized birth–death process for coherent calibration of divergence-time estimates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E2957–E2966 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Wright, D. F. Bayesian estimation of fossil phylogenies and the evolution of early to middle Paleozoic crinoids (Echinodermata). J. Paleontol. 91, 791–814 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Wright, D. F. & Toom, U. New crinoids from the Baltic region (Estonia): fossil tip-dating phylogenetics constrains the origin and Ordovician-Silurian diversification of the Flexibilia (Echinodermata). Palaeontology 60, 893–910 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  80. Zhang, C., Stadler, T., Klopfstein, S., Heath, T. A. & Ronquist, F. Total-evidence dating under the fossilized birth–death process. Syst. Biol. 65, 228–249 (2016).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Swofford, D. L. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4.0a (Sinauer Associates, 2002).

  82. Felsenstein, J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39, 783–791 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Y. Rak and B. Kimbel, who are completing a detailed description of the DNH 7 skull, for sharing observations and insights on this specimen, a number of which correspond to ours; however, endorsement of our conclusions is not implied and all observations and interpretations are, of course, our own. The research underpinning this publication was undertaken while J.M.M. and A.B.L. were completing a PhD at La Trobe University. We thank the student excavators from the Washington University Drimolen Cave Field School and the Australian Palaeoanthropological Fieldschool at Drimolen. We dedicate the discovery of DNH 155 to I. Good, whose daughter S. Good uncovered the specimen on Father’s Day in 2018. We thank R. Nsibande for invaluable logistical assistance and we remember S. Mokobane for many years of similar support as well as mentorship and friendship but who sadly died mere months before the discovery of DNH 155. We thank J. Massey for providing access to digital data, K. McNulty and A. Gordon for providing statistical advice and support, A. Larson for advice regarding species concepts and to J.-J. Hublin and P. Gunz for access to data and support. We thank D. Wright for methodological assistance with the tip-dated analysis. We thank J. Adams and M. Meredith-Williams for the supervision provided to J.M.M. and A.B.L. throughout their PhD programmes (in addition to that also provided by A.I.R.H. and D.S.S.). We also thank P. Strait for timely advice regarding probability theory. We thank the landowners (K. and N. Nkosi) for their continuing support to excavate at Drimolen, including through South African Heritage Resource Agency permit nos. 2597 and 2883 to S.E.B. and A.I.R.H. This research was funded and supported by Higher Degree Research fee waivers and living scholarships from La Trobe University to J.M.M. and A.B.L. and an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant no. DP170100056 to A.I.R.H. and D.S.S. Biomechanical analysis was supported by a grant to D.S.S. from the Biological Anthropology Directorate of the National Science Foundation (no. NSF-BCS-0725126). S.N. was supported by the Max Planck Society.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Jesse M. Martin, A. B. Leece.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Palaeoscience, Department of Archaeology and History, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia

    Jesse M. Martin, A. B. Leece & Andy I. R. Herries

  2. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Department of Human Evolution, Leipzig, Germany

    Simon Neubauer

  3. Palaeo-Research Institute, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Stephanie E. Baker, Giovanni Boschian, David S. Strait & Andy I. R. Herries

  4. Division of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, USA

    Carrie S. Mongle

  5. Turkana Basin Institute, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Carrie S. Mongle

  6. Department of Biology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Giovanni Boschian

  7. Institute of Human Origins, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Gary T. Schwartz

  8. Department of Organismal Biology & Anatomy, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Amanda L. Smith

  9. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Justin A. Ledogar

  10. Department of Anthropology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

    David S. Strait

Authors
  1. Jesse M. Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. B. Leece
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simon Neubauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie E. Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carrie S. Mongle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Giovanni Boschian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gary T. Schwartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Amanda L. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Justin A. Ledogar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. David S. Strait
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Andy I. R. Herries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.B.L., S.E.B., A.I.R.H., J.M.M., G.B. and D.S.S. participated in the recovery of DNH 155 and J.M.M. and A.B.L. reconstructed the specimen. A.B.L., J.M.M., S.N., C.S.M., G.T.S. and D.S.S. analysed and described the morphology. A.L.S., J.A.L. and D.S.S. conducted the biomechanical analyses of early hominins. A.I.R.H. and G.B. assessed the depositional context and age of the specimen. All authors wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David S. Strait.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Surface scans of DNH 155.

Specimen positioned in a, posterior, b, basal, and c, right lateral views. Scale bar = 10mm.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Position of the zygomatic root.

Right lateral views of P. robustus specimens a, DNH 7, c, SK 48, e, SK 52, f, SKW11, and g, SK 12. Left lateral views of b, DNH 155, and d, TM 1517. Vertical red lines pass through P4/M1 on each specimen. The anterior aspect of the root is positioned at this line in a and b but anterior to the line in c–g. Scale bar = 10mm.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Thickness of the zygomatic root.

Paranthropus robustus specimens shown slightly offset from palatal view in order to visualize the lateral wall of the maxilla. a, DNH 7. b, DNH 155. c, SK 12. d, TM 1517. e, SK 48. All specimens are scaled to the same P4 – M2 length. Red and yellow lines represent the anterior- and posterior-most aspects of the zygomatic root on the maxilla. The root is proportionally thinnest in DNH 7 and DNH 155.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Zygomaticomaxillary step.

Oblique views of P. robustus specimens a, DNH 155, b, DNH 7, c, SK 46, d, SK 12, e, SK 52, f, TM 1517, and g, SK 48. Arrows indicate change of contour between the surfaces of the zygomatic bone and maxillary trigon. Shading indicates that the change in contour is abrupt and coincident with the zygomaticomaxillary suture in c–g, In a and b the change in contour is gentle (brackets) and positioned above the suture such that the suture lies within the trigon as opposed to being its superolateral margin. Scale bar = 10mm.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Supraorbital corner.

Frontal views of P. robustus specimens a, DNH 152, b, DNH 7, c, DNH 155, d, SK 46, and e, SK 48. Arrows indicate a squared supraorbital corner associated with a roughly horizontal supraorbital torus in d and e. In a and b the homologous region of the orbital margin is rounded, and in c the corner is not squared and the supraorbital torus is inclined. Note that specimen SK 46 is badly distorted, but the torus and corner are locally undistorted. Images not to the same scale.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Principal component and cluster analysis.

Principal component analysis of 19 scale-adjusted craniofacial dimensions (Supplementary Data) were performed on chimpanzees (green) and fossil hominins (P. robustus = red, P. boisei = orange, Au. africanus = blue, early Homo = black) in order to convert the morphometric data into statistically independent variables to be used as input for cluster analysis. a, Plot of PC1 vs. PC2. b, PC3 vs. PC 4. PC 1 accounts for 34.5% of the total variance, PC2 for 28.5%, PC3 for 8.5%, and PC4 for 7.6%. PC1 and PC4 reflect interactions between facial height and minimum frontal breadth, albeit in inverse ways (PC1 loadings: Scale-adjusted Superior Facial Height = -0.51, Scale-Adjusted Nasal Height = -0.43, Scale-Adjusted Minimum Frontal Breadth = 0.44; PC4 loadings: Scale-adjusted Superior Facial Height = 0.41, Scale-Adjusted Minimum Frontal Breadth = 0.49). PC2 reflects palate shape (PC2 loadings: Scale-adjusted Outer Alveolar Breadth = -0.41, Scale-adjusted Interalveolar Distance at P3 = 0.43). PC3 reflects alveolar shape (PC3 loadings: Scale-adjusted Alveolar Height = 0.39, Scale-adjusted Maxilloalveolar length = 0.41). c, Dendrogram of UPGMA of the 19 sets of component scores (accounting for 100% of the total variance) showing that DNH 155 clusters with DNH 7 within P. robustus and Paranthropus clusters.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Sexual dimorphism in P. robustus from DMQ.

Frontal (top row), lateral (middle row) and superior-oblique (bottom row) views of a, c, e, DNH 7 and b, d, f, DNH 155. Note that the face of DNH 7 is detached from the specimen’s neurocranium and neurocranial distortion makes it difficult to join the two pieces. The placement of the face on the neurocranium in lateral and oblique views is heuristic and no morphological assessments reported here are dependent on these cranial parts being properly aligned. Moreover, the lateral view of DNH 7 is a reflected image of the specimen’s right side. DNH 155 is absolutely larger than DNH 7, it exhibits a sagittal crest (red arrows) and strong anteromedial incursion of the superior temporal lines (yellow arrows), and a zygomatic body that projects anterior to the nasal aperture (green arrow). DNH 7 is smaller, it lacks a sagittal crest, has only moderate anteromedial incursion of the superior temporal lines, and its zygomatic body does not project anterior to the nasal aperture. Scale bar = 10mm. Oblique views not to scale.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Postcanine tooth size.

Buccolingual breadth vs. mesiodistal length of P. robustus postcanine teeth at Drimolen and Swartkrans. a, P3. b, P4. c, M1. d, M2. e, M3. Values for specimen DNH 155 are corrected for interproximal wear.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Text, Tables 1–7 and Figs. 1–8.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Data

Data used in the principal component and cluster analyses.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martin, J.M., Leece, A.B., Neubauer, S. et al. Drimolen cranium DNH 155 documents microevolution in an early hominin species. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 38–45 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01319-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01319-6

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing