How to use archaicness in a sentence? Find typical usage patterns (collocations)/phrases/context for "archaicness" and check conjugation/comparative form for "archaicness". Mastering all the usages of "archaicness" from sentence examples published by news publications.
Many of these P. aethiopicus features are shared with the early A. afarensis, further reiterating the species' archaicness.
|
|
Like other Paranthropus, P. aethiopicus had a tall face, thick palate, and especially enlarged cheek teeth. However, likely due to its archaicness, it also diverges from other Paranthropus, with some aspects resembling the much earlier A. afarensis. P. aethiopicus is known primarily by the skull KNM WT 17000 from Koobi Fora, Lake Turkana, Kenya, as well as some jawbones from Koobi Fora; the Shungura Formation, Ethiopia; and Laetoli, Kenya. These locations featured bushland to open woodland landscapes with edaphic (water-logged) grasslands.
|
|
They clearly belonged to a robust australopithecine, so they assigned them to the boisei clade. They noted several anatomical differences, but were unsure if this stemmed from the specimens' archaicness or represented the normal range of variation for the species. If the former, they recommended classifying them and similar specimens into a different species, aethiopicus (and recommended that Paraustralopithecus be invalid). The discovery of these specimens discredited earlier hypotheses that P. robustus was the ancestor of the much more robust P. boisei.
|
|
However, it is debated if P. aethiopicus should be subsumed under P. boisei or if the differences stemming from archaicness justify species distinction. The terms P. boisei sensu lato ("in the broad sense") and P. boisei sensu stricto ("in the strict sense") can be used to respectively include and exclude P. aethiopicus from P. boisei when discussing the lineage as a whole. It is also debated if Paranthropus is a valid natural grouping (monophyletic) or an invalid grouping of similar-looking hominins (paraphyletic). Because skeletal elements are so limited in these species, their affinities with each other and to other australopithecines is difficult to gauge with accuracy.
|
|
For example, if the South African A. sediba (which evolved from A. africanus) is considered the ancestor or closely related to the ancestor of Homo, then this could allow for A. africanus to be placed more closely related to Homo than to Paranthropus. This would leave the Ethiopian A. garhi as the ancestor of P. aethiopicus instead of A. africanus (assuming Paranthropus is monophyletic, and that P. aethiopicus evolved at a time in East Africa when only A. garhi existed there). Because P. boisei and P. aethiopicus are both known from East Africa and P. aethiopicus is only confidently identified from the skull KNM WT 17000 and a few jaws and isolated teeth, it is debated if P. aethiopicus should be subsumed under P. boisei or if the differences stemming from archaicness justifies species distinction. The terms P. boisei sensu lato ("in the broad sense") and P. boisei sensu stricto ("in the strict sense") can be used to respectively include and exclude P. aethiopicus from P. boisei when discussing the lineage as a whole.
|
|
No results under this filter, show 5 sentences.