Modern anthropoids. Family of great apes

INTRODUCTION

Apes are our blood relatives in the literal sense of the word. Until recently, the blood of these monkeys could not be distinguished from human blood. There are the same blood groups, almost the same plasma proteins. Recently it has been established that chimpanzees are closest to us.

Undoubtedly, apes are the most intelligent of animals. They are easy to train, and you can teach them a lot. Unlock and lock doors with a key, stack boxes in a pyramid to get tasty fruits from the ceiling, work with a plane and saw, draw with a pencil and paints, bring objects named by a person, distinguish coins of different denominations and put them into the machine. Scientists have noticed that depending on their place of residence, the habits and ability to wield tools among apes are not the same.

Thus, the goal of our work is to study the behavior of great apes in their natural habitat.

Representatives of great apes

Apes are called chimpanzees, pygmy chimpanzees (bonobos), gorilla and orangutans. Like humans, they belong to the large zoological family of primates, or higher animals. Of all the representatives of the animal world, they are most similar to humans in their physique and behavior.

Apes live in the tropics of Africa and Asia. Their species differ in their lifestyle and habitat. Chimpanzees, including pygmy chimpanzees, live in trees and on the ground.

Chimpanzees live in African forests of almost all types, as well as open savannas.

Bonobos can only be found in the tropical rainforests of the Congo Basin.

Two subspecies of the gorilla - the western coast or lowland and the eastern lowland - prefer the tropical rainforests of Africa, while the mountain gorilla prefers temperate forests. Gorillas are very massive and do not often climb trees, spending almost all their time on the ground. They live family groups, the number of members is constantly changing.

Orangutans, on the contrary, are most often loners. They live in the damp and swampy forests of the islands of Sumatra and Kalimantan, are excellent climbers, slowly but deftly move from branch to branch, hanging on disproportionately long arms reaching to the ankles.

All great apes can at least sometimes stand on their feet, then their dexterous hands are free. Apes of all kinds are very intelligent creatures and more or less often use various objects as tools, which no other animal can do. They have very developed facial expressions, much like human ones.

Ape Intelligence

When researchers placed a mirror in the gibbon's cage, the unexpected happened. The monkey approached him with interest, saw his reflection and, squealing loudly, ran away to the corner. Then she grabbed the mirror and began throwing it from side to side. There is no doubt: she did not recognize herself and, most likely, thought that some other gibbon intended to do something bad to her. Other animals behave in a similar way in this situation.

Only apes, when faced with a mirror, act like intelligent beings. This was confirmed by the experience with the orangutan Suma. At first she, too, was afraid of her reflection in the mirror. Then she began to make faces, cover her eyes with her hands, peeking into the cracks between her fingers. Standing on her head, she carefully studied the upside-down world in the mirror. While eating, Suma stuck a tomato skin to her cheek. When she saw herself in the mirror, she touched the skin with her finger and shook it off. This clearly proved that Suma recognized herself in the mirror, and this is a high intellectual achievement for an animal.

Lemurs and lower apes are not able to identify themselves with their reflection in the mirror. Only great apes can do this (or rather, in intelligence), but they also differ in mental abilities: chimpanzees need on average one day to begin to recognize themselves, orangutans - 3 days, and gorillas - 5 days. The high degree of intelligence of apes is also proven by other experiments.

One day they were shown a treat that was suspended so high between the trees that the monkeys could not simply climb up there and get it. Several cubes of different sizes were also placed in front of them. The monkeys quickly realized that by placing cubes on top of each other, they could build a tower out of them, climb to the top and thus get to the desired food. It should be added that when erecting a tower, the monkeys placed the largest cubes at the base, and the smallest ones at the top.

They also solve more complex problems: for example, they open a box with a screwdriver, take out a key from it, open another box with it, where they eventually find a reward. However, animals often baffle researchers by offering specific “monkey” ways of solving problems that a person could not think of. For example, instead of building a tower of cubes, some monkey will knock down a treat by throwing a stick at it, or, swinging on a rope, will fly several meters in its reward.

In any case, apes always think about a problem and find a solution, and sometimes more than one. Scientists regard this course of action as evidence of sufficiently developed intelligence.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Apes, a group of great apes, the most highly developed among the Old World monkeys; includes gibbons, orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas. Together with humans, apes make up the superfamily Hominoidea, which is combined with the superfamily Apes into the section Old World monkeys. ape anatomical

Apes are also called anthropoids, although in modern classifications this term usually refers to the suborder of higher primates, which includes both the higher (anthropoid) and lower (monkey and capuchin) monkeys of the Old and New Worlds.

Purpose of the work: to characterize the family of great apes.

Job objectives:

Give a general description of the family of great apes;

Consider individual representatives of the family: morphology, Lifestyle;

Consider the similarities and differences between the family of anthropoids with humans and apes.

1. General characteristics of the Ape family

Apes first appeared in the Old World towards the end of the Oligocene - about 30 million years ago. Among their ancestors, the most famous are propliopithecus - primitive gibbon-like monkeys from the tropical forests of Fayoum (Egypt), which gave rise to pliopithecus, gibbons and dryopithecines. The Miocene saw a dramatic increase in the number and diversity of ape species. This was the era of the heyday of Dryopithecus and other hominoids, which began to widely spread from Africa to Europe and Asia about 20-16 million years ago. Among the Asian hominoids were Sivapithecus - the ancestors of orangutans, whose line separated about 16-13 million years ago. According to molecular biology, the separation of chimpanzees and gorillas from a common trunk with humans most likely occurred 8-6 million years ago.

Anthropomorphic or great apes constitute the highest group of primates and are closest to humans. These include the largest species - the gorilla and chimpanzee living in African forests, the orangutan - a large monkey from the island of Kalimantan, and several forms of gibbons from Indochina and from the islands of Kalimantan and Sumatra. They have the same number of teeth as humans, and just like humans, they lack a tail. Mentally, they are more gifted than other monkeys, and the chimpanzee especially stands out in this regard.

In 1957, the great ape bonobo was singled out into a special genus - a form that until then was considered only a dwarf variety of chimpanzees.

All great apes live in forests, climb trees easily, and are very imperfectly adapted for moving on land. Unlike true quadrupeds and bipedal humans, they have an inverse relationship between the length of the limbs of the first and second pair: their legs are relatively short and weak, while the tenacious upper limbs are significantly elongated in length, especially in the most skilled tree climbers - gibbons and orangutans .

When walking, great apes rest on the ground not with the entire sole of their feet, but only with the outer edge of the foot; with such an unsteady gait, the animal needs the necessary help from its long arms, with which it either grabs tree branches or rests on the ground with the back of its bent fingers, thereby partially unloading the lower limbs. Smaller gibbons, when descending from trees and walking across open ground, move on their hind legs, and with their unusually long arms they balance like a person walking on a narrow pole.

Thus, apes do not have the upright gait of humans, but they also do not walk on all fours in the manner that most other mammals do. Therefore, in their skeleton we find a combination of some features of a bipedal person with animal characteristics of four-legged mammals. Due to the elevated position of the body, the pelvis in apes is closer in shape to that of a human, where it truly lives up to its name and supports the abdominal innards from below. In four-legged animals, the pelvis does not have to perform such a task, and its shape is different there - this is easy to see on the skeleton of a cat, dog and other four-legged mammals, including monkeys. The tail of apes is underdeveloped, and its skeleton is represented in them, as in humans, only by a small rudiment - the coccygeal bone, which is closely fused to the pelvis.

On the contrary, the inclined position of cabbage soup and the stronger development of the facial bones, pulling the skull forward, bring apes closer to four-legged animals. To support the head, strong muscles are required, and this is associated with the development of long spinous processes on the cervical vertebrae and bony ridges on the skull; both serve to attach muscles.

Large jaws also correspond to strong chewing muscles. They say that a gorilla is able to gnaw through a gun taken from a hunter with its teeth. For attachment of the chewing muscles in the gorilla and orangutan, there is also a longitudinal ridge on the crown. Due to the strong development of the facial bones and ridges on the skull, the cranium itself turns out to be more compressed laterally and less capacious than that of a person, and this, of course, is reflected in both the size and development of the cerebral hemispheres: a gorilla is almost the same in height as a person, and the mass of its brain is three times less than the mass of the human brain (430 g for a gorilla and 1350 g for a human).

All modern anthropoids are inhabitants of tropical forests, but their adaptability to life among arboreal vegetation is not expressed to the same degree. Gibbons are natural tree climbers. Orangutans also constantly stay in the trees; there they make their nests, and their adaptability to climbing is clearly expressed in the structure of their long arms, the hands of which, with four long fingers and a shortened thumb, have a characteristic monkey shape, allowing them to cling tightly to branches and branches of trees.

In contrast to orangutans, gorillas mainly lead a terrestrial lifestyle in forests and climb trees only for food or for safety, and as for chimpanzees - monkeys that are smaller and heavier, they occupy an intermediate place in this regard.

Despite differences in size and morphology, all great apes have much in common. These monkeys do not have a tail, the structure of the hands is similar to that of a human, the volume of the brain is very large, and its surface is dotted with grooves and convolutions, which indicates the high intelligence of these animals. Apes, like humans, have 4 blood types, and bonobo blood can even be transfused to a person with the corresponding blood type - this indicates their “blood” relationship with humans.

2. Gibbons

According to a number of characteristics (thick hair, small calluses, size and structure of the brain), gibbons occupy an intermediate position between apes and large apes. They are usually considered a separate family of small apes, or gibbons (Hylobatidae), while orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas are grouped into the family of great apes, or pongidae. Gibbons include two genera: gibbons proper (Hylobates, 6 species) and siamangs (Symphalangus), represented by only one species, which is often included in the genus of gibbons. These monkeys live in dense tropical forests South-East Asia and the Sunda Islands (Kalimantan, Sumatra, Java). Gibbons are small monkeys (body length up to 1 m, weight rarely exceeds 10 kg), leading almost exclusively wood image life. With the help of their long, strong arms, they are able to fly from branch to branch over a distance of 10 m or more. This method of movement, called brachiation (from the Greek brachion - shoulder, arm), is to one degree or another characteristic of other apes. Some gibbons have the ability to sing melodiously at a full octave (“singing monkeys”). They live in small family groups led by a male leader. Puberty is reached at 5-7 years.

3. Orangutans

Another Asian great ape is the orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) - an inhabitant of the swampy forests of Kalimantan and Sumatra. It is also arboreal and rarely comes down to the ground. This is a genus with extremely high variability; perhaps it consists of two subspecies. Unlike the slender, gracile gibbons, the orangutan has a massive, dense build and highly developed muscles. The height of the male reaches 1.5 and even 1.8 m, weight up to 200 kg, the female is much smaller. Possessing long arms and short legs, this monkey differs more than others from humans in body proportions, but its skull and face are the most human-like. The face of an adult male is especially distinctive, with a high forehead, small close eyes, mustache and beard.

Unlike gorillas and chimpanzees, orangutans rarely form groups, preferring to live alone or in pairs (female - male, mother - cubs), but sometimes a pair of adult animals and several cubs of different ages form a family group.

A female orangutan gives birth to one baby, which the mother takes care of for almost 7 years until it becomes an adult. Until the age of 3, a small orangutan feeds almost exclusively on its mother’s milk, and only then does its mother begin to introduce it to solid food. Chewing the leaves, she makes vegetable puree for her child. Preparing the baby for adulthood, the mother teaches him to climb trees and build nests. Baby orangutans are very affectionate and playful, and they perceive the entire learning process as an entertaining game. Orangutans are very smart; in captivity they learn to use tools and even make them themselves. But in nature, these monkeys rarely use their abilities: the constant search for food does not leave them time to develop natural intelligence.

4. Gorillas

The closest to humans are chimpanzees and gorilla, living in some areas of the Western and Central parts Equatorial Africa. Unlike the reddish-brown orangutan, they have black hair. The gorilla is the largest living primate, including humans. The height of a male is up to 2 m, weight is up to 200-250 kg, females are almost half that size. The brain volume is on average about 500 cubic meters. cm, sometimes up to 752 cc. cm. Compared to orangutans, gorillas lead a more terrestrial lifestyle and are less long-armed.

Females are much lighter and smaller than males. The body of gorillas is massive, with a large belly; broad shoulders; the head is large, conical in adult males (due to the presence of a sagittal crest on the skull); the eyes are widely spaced and set deep under the eyebrows; the nose is wide, the nostrils are surrounded by ridges; the upper lip, unlike chimpanzees, is short; the ears are small and pressed to the head; the face is bare, black. The gorilla's arms are long, with wide hands, the first finger is short, but can be opposed to the rest. The brush is used in collecting food, in various kinds of manipulation and for building nests (similar to humans). Legs are short, foot with long heel, thumb well set aside; the remaining fingers are connected by membranes almost to the nail phalanges. The coat is short, thick, black; adult males have a silver stripe on the back and a small beard.

The gorilla genus is represented by a single species - the common gorilla (Gorilla gorilla) - with three subspecies, of which the coast and lowland gorillas live in the damp rain forests of the Congo Basin, and the mountain gorilla lives in the volcanic Virunga Mountains north of Lake Kivu (Congo (Zaire). Gorillas are vegetarians, rather calm and peaceful animals, but when threatened they take on a terrifying appearance, stand on their hind limbs and, hitting their chest with their fists, emit a loud roar. They live in small herds led by a male leader. Puberty occurs at 6-7 years in females and at 8-10 years and even later in males.

Public life. The eldest of the silverback males becomes the head of the family group, and the care of all its members falls on his powerful shoulders. The leader gives signals for waking up in the morning and going to bed in the evening, chooses a path in the forest that the whole group will follow in search of food, and maintains order and peace in the family. He protects his charges from all the dangers that the tropical forest conceals.

The cubs in the group are raised by females - their mothers. But, if suddenly the kids become orphaned, it is the silver-backed patriarch who will take them under his protection, carry them on himself, sleep next to them and watch their games. While protecting the cubs, the leader can enter into a duel with a leopard and even with armed poachers.

Often the capture of a baby gorilla costs not only the life of its mother, but also the life of the leader of the group. Having lost their leader and deprived of protection and care, helpless females and young animals may well die if some single male does not take care of the orphaned family.

The life routine of gorillas is very similar to that of humans. At sunrise, at a signal from the leader, the entire group wakes up and begins to search for food. After lunch, the family rests, digesting what they have eaten. Young males sleep at a distance, females with cubs are closer to the leader, juveniles frolic next to them - each has its own place. At night, gorillas build nest-beds from branches and leaves. Nests are usually located on the ground. Only light young animals can afford to climb low into a tree and make a bed there.

Cubs enjoy special love in the family. The kids spend most of their time with their mother, but the whole group participates in their upbringing, and adults are patient with the pranks of young people. Gorillas grow up slowly, only twice as fast as human children. Newborns are completely helpless and need maternal care; only by 4-5 months they can move on four legs, and by eight months they can walk upright. Then they grow up faster; surrounded by relatives, young gorillas quickly learn everything. At the age of 7, females become fully grown, males mature by 10-12 years, and at 14 years their back becomes silver. The silverback male often leaves the group and lives alone for a long time until he manages to create a new family.

5. Chimpanzee

The chimpanzee genus (Pan) includes two species - the common chimpanzee (P. troglodytes) with three subspecies and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo (P. panicus). The chimpanzee can to a certain extent be considered a smaller version of the gorilla, with which it shares many characteristics. Height is about 1.5 m, weight is 50-60 kg, brain volume is 350-400 cm3. They live in forests and more open landscapes from about 14° N. w. up to 10° south sh., east of lakes Victoria and Tanganyika. They lead a semi-terrestrial lifestyle. The pygmy chimpanzee is found only in the jungle. Some scientists consider it the prototype of the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. Chimpanzees live in herds, usually of several dozen individuals, led by a male leader who is often replaced. They are herbivorous, but cases of hunting small animals have been described. Sexual maturity occurs at 8-10 years in females and 10-12 in males. Maximum life expectancy is about 50-60 years.

The closeness of chimpanzees to humans is evidenced by data from comparative anatomy, embryology, physiology, genetics (the chromosome set in humans consists of 46 chromosomes, in chimpanzees - of 48), ethology (behavior) and especially biochemistry and molecular biology. The similarity of humans and chimpanzees in blood groups, the structure of molecules of a number of proteins, including hemoglobin, and genes (over 90%) has been established.

The arms are much longer than the legs. Hands with long fingers, but the first finger is small. On the feet, the first toe is large, and there are skin membranes between the remaining toes. The ears are large, similar to human ones, the upper lip is high, the nose is small. The skin of the face, as well as the back surfaces of the hands and feet, is wrinkled. The coat is black, and both sexes have white hair on the chin. The skin of the body is light, but on the face different types its color varies. The average body temperature is 37.2 °C.

Chimpanzees, like gorillas, exhibit exceptional learning abilities. For example, the gorilla Koko mastered about 500 signs and used designations such as “I” and “mine”; The pygmy chimpanzee Kindi identified 150 lexigrams and even understood monotonous synthetic speech.

Social life of chimpanzees. Chimpanzees live in groups of an average of 20 individuals. The group, led by one male leader, includes males and females of all ages. A group of chimpanzees lives in a territory, which the males protect from incursions by neighbors.

In places where there is plenty of food, chimpanzees lead sedentary image life, but if there is not enough food, they wander widely in search of food. It happens that the living space of several groups intersects, then they temporarily unite, and in all disputes the group that has more males and is therefore stronger has an advantage. Chimpanzees do not form permanent married couples, and all adult males can freely choose a girlfriend from among the adult females of both their own and the neighboring group that has joined.

After an 8-month pregnancy, a female chimpanzee gives birth to one completely helpless baby. The mother carries the baby on her stomach for up to a year, then the baby independently moves onto her back. For 9 years, mother and child are almost inseparable. Mothers teach their cubs everything they know, introducing them to the world around them and to other members of the group. Sometimes grown-up babies are sent to a “kindergarten”, where they frolic with their peers under the supervision of several adult females. By the age of 13, chimpanzees become adults, independent members of the group, and young males gradually become involved in the struggle for leadership.

Chimpanzees are quite aggressive animals. Quarrels often occur within the group, escalating into bloody fights, sometimes with fatal. A wide range of gestures, facial expressions and sounds help monkeys establish relationships with each other, with the help of which they show dissatisfaction or approval. Monkeys express friendly feelings by picking each other's fur.

Chimpanzees obtain food both on the ground and in the trees, feeling quite confident everywhere. In addition to plant foods, their diet includes insects and small animals. Moreover, hungry monkeys as a whole community can go hunting and get, for example, a gazelle.

Chimpanzees are very smart and know how to use tools, and they specifically select the most convenient tool and can even improve it. So, in order to climb into an anthill, a chimpanzee takes a twig and tears off all the leaves on it. They use a stick to knock down a tall fruit or hit an opponent during a fight. Getting to the core of the nut, the monkey can place it on a specially selected flat stone, and use another sharp one to break the shell. To get a drink, the chimpanzee uses a large leaf as a scoop or makes a sponge from a chewed leaf, dips it in a stream and squeezes the water into his mouth.

During a hunt, monkeys are able to throw stones at their prey; a hail of stones awaits a predator, such as a leopard, who dares to hunt monkeys. To avoid getting wet when crossing a stream, chimpanzees can make a bridge out of sticks; they use leaves as umbrellas, fly swatters, fans, and even as toilet paper.

The Ape family occupies an intermediate position between humans and the apes. It consists of 4 genera: gibbons, orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas.

Among the characteristic features of apes that distinguish them from apes are the absence of an external tail, cheek pouches, ischial calluses (except for gibbons), a shortened body and very long arms, sparse body hair, high level brain development, expressive facial expressions, complex behavior.

In terms of the combination of features of the anatomical structure and a number of physiological indicators, pongidae are most similar to humans, especially gorilla and chimpanzee. This is confirmed by data from molecular biology and biochemical genetics. The immunological similarity of protein molecules was noted; homology of most of the chromosomes of pongidae and humans has been revealed, which is manifested in the same pattern of chromosome striations (the same arrangement of genes). The percentage of gene similarity in humans and chimpanzees reaches 91, and in humans and apes - 66. Chimpanzees are the most complete model of the human body in biological and medical research. Pongidae are close to humans in terms of pregnancy duration, puberty, and life expectancy. The common ancestor of gorillas, chimpanzees and humans is considered to be the poorly specialized semi-terrestrial, semi-arboreal apes Dryopithecus, who lived in the Miocene. The divergence of branches to these African anthropoids and to humans probably took place in the Middle Miocene.

Thus, apes have a number of common characteristics that make it possible to classify humans as members of this superfamily. These are the following signs:

· large body size;

· lack of a long tail;

· similar shape of the auricle;

· large brain with developed grooves and convolutions;

· similar structure of the teeth, especially the chewing surface (“Dryopithecus pattern”);

· structure internal organs;

presence of an appendix;

· similar blood types;

· similarities in the course of diseases, especially infectious ones.

References

1. BES Biology. - M.: Russian Encyclopedia. - 2004.

2. Zhedenov V.N. Comparative anatomy of primates. - M.: graduate School. - 1982.

3. Schaller J.B. A year under the sign of the gorilla. - M. - 1968.

4. Yakhontov A.A. Zoology for teachers: Chordates. - M.: Enlightenment. - 1985.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Classification

Female gorilla.

Traditionally, three families of apes have been recognized: gibbons, pongids (orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees) and hominids (man and his ancestors). However, modern biochemical studies show that this division is unfounded, since the relationship between humans and pongids is very close. Therefore, the pongidae family is now included in the hominid family.

The modern classification of great apes has next view(the word “genus” is not specified):

Gibbon family or great apes (Hylobatidae)
- Gibbons, Hylobates: gibbons and siamangs, 12-14 species
Family hominids ( Hominidae)
- Subfamily Ponginae
  - Orangutans, Pongo: 2 types
- Subfamily Homininae
  - Gorillas, Gorilla: 2 types
  - Chimpanzee, Pan: 2 types
  - People , Homo: the only modern species is Homo sapiens

Wikimedia Foundation.

2010.

See what “Humanoids” are in other dictionaries: - (Anthropoidea), suborder of PRIMATES, including monkeys and humans. Apes have flatter, human-like faces, larger brains, and larger body sizes than … lower primates

Scientific and technical encyclopedic dictionary

Representatives of two families of primates Hylobatidae (gibbons, or small apes) and Pongidae (great apes, or actually apes: orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees). Both groups, together with humans, are included in the superfamily... ... Collier's Encyclopedia

Same as pongids... Big encyclopedic Dictionary

Hominoids, anthropoids (Hominoidea, Anthropomorphidae), superfamily of narrow-nosed monkeys. It is believed that the origins of the development of Ch. o. was a parapithecus from the Oligocene of Egypt. Numerous in the Miocene. and various C. o. inhabited Europe, India, Africa. 3rd semester:… … Biological encyclopedic dictionary

Same as pongids. * * * APEES Apes, a group of higher narrow-nosed monkeys (see NARROW-NOSED MONKEYS), the most highly developed among the monkeys of the Old World; includes gibbons, orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Great apes- the same as pongids, large apes, a family of narrow-nosed monkeys of the primate order, includes three genera: gorilla, orangutan, chimpanzee ... The beginnings of modern natural science

great apes- žmoginės beždžionės statusas T sritis zoologija | vardynas taksono rangas šeima apibrėžtis Šeimoje 4 gentys. Kūno masė – 5,300 kg, kūno ilgis – 45,180 cm. atitikmenys: lot. Pongidae English. anthropoid apes vok. Menschenaffen rus. higher narrow-nosed... ... Žinduolių pavadinimų žodynas

Or anthropoids (Anthropomorphidae), a group of higher primates. Together with the family hominids, they form the superfamily of anthropoid primates (Hominoidea). According to the most common system, Ch. o. include 2 families: Gibbons, or... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

- (for characteristics see Narrow-nosed monkeys) embrace three living genera: the orangutan (Simia), the chimpanzee (Troglodytes s. Anthropopithecus) and the gorilla (Gorilla). Some also include gibbons (see Narrow-nosed monkeys). Orang living on... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron

Books

Great apes, . Long-term study of monkeys has made it possible to learn a lot about their lives, developed intellect, about the ability to speak. Scientists learned about the origin of aesthetic feeling by seeing how they draw...

form an inextricable whole with the mineral mass filling the cavity of the cranium.
The skull was delivered to South African biologist Raymond Dart. He studied the skull and published a brief description of it, in which he proposed calling the found monkey an Australopithecus Africanus (i.e., a southern monkey).
The discovery of the “Taung monkey” aroused a lot of controversy. Some scientists, such as Otenio Abel, attributed the skull to a baby fossil gorilla. Others, like Hans Weinert, saw in it much more resemblance to the skull of a chimpanzee and based their opinion, in particular, on the concavity of the facial profile, as well as on the shape of the nasal bones and eye sockets.
A third group of scientists, which included Dart, as well as William Gregory and Milo Hellman, believed that Australopithecus was more similar to Dryopithecus and humans. The arrangement of cusps on the lower molars is a not very strongly modified pattern of Dryopithecus teeth.
The supraorbital ridge on the skull is poorly developed, the fangs almost do not protrude from the dentition, the face as a whole, according to Gregory, is strikingly pre-human.
Still others, like Wolfgang Abel, drew attention to features of specialization that lead Australopithecus away from the human ancestry.
Thus, the first permanent molars of Australopithecus, unlike human ones, are wider in their posterior half. Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420 cm 3 Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420, which is not far from that defined by V. Abel: 390 Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420. Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420.
Raymond Dart determined the capacity of the brain box to be 520 , but this figure is undoubtedly exaggerated. Taking into account the young age of the found specimen, it could be assumed that the capacity of the braincase of adult Australopithecines is 500-600 Ideas about the type of Australopithecus were noticeably enriched when the skull of a fossil anthropoid was discovered in the summer of 1936 in the Transvaal. He was found in a cave near the village. Sterkfontein, near Krugersdorp, at 58 km southwest of Pretoria. This skull belongs to an adult and is very similar to the skull of a chimpanzee, but the teeth are similar to those of humans. km The skull has an elongated shape: the length of the braincase is 145
South African paleontologist Robert Broome, who worked in South Africa for about forty years as an expert on mammals and their evolution, examined the skull of the Sterkfontein fossil monkey and assigned it to the genus Australopithecus, a species of Australopithecus Transvaal.

However, the study of the lower last molar later found in the same place (in Sterkfontein), which turned out to be very large and similar to a human one, forced Broome to conclude
create a new genus - plesianthropes, i.e. monkeys closer to humans. Therefore, the Sterkfontein anthropoid received a new species name - the Transvaal plesianthropus.
Deeply interested in the finds of African fossil anthropoids and the problem of anthropogenesis, Broome put a lot of energy into further searches for their remains. From 1936 to 1947, over 10 incomplete skulls and 150 isolated teeth, as well as some skeletal bones of plesianthropes, were discovered.
In 1938, Broom managed to find a remarkable skull of a fossil anthropoid (Fig. 35). The story of this discovery is as follows.

One schoolboy from the village. Kromdraai obtained a monkey skull from rock on the hillside near his village and, breaking it into pieces, took some of the fallen teeth for play. Broome accidentally learned about the found teeth, who hurried to the place of discovery and, with the help of a schoolboy who gave him the monkey’s teeth, found pieces of the skull. The geological antiquity of the find apparently falls to the middle of the Quaternary period.
In 1948-1950 Broome made new discoveries of South African anthropoids - Paranthropus largetooth and Australopithecus Prometheus (Fig. 36). From this we can conclude that Africa must be very rich in the remains of other, still undiscovered monkeys (Yakimov, 1950, 1951; Nesturkh, 1937, 1938), especially since in 1947 the English scientist L. Leakey found how we have already mentioned the skull of an African proconsul (with features similar to chimpanzees) in the Kavirondo region (Yakimov, 1964, 1965).
Based on the above facts, it can be considered very likely that in the first half of the Quaternary period and earlier, in the upper part of the Tertiary period, several different species of large, highly developed apes had already formed in Africa (Zubov, 1964). Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420 The volume of their braincase is 500 - 600 and even slightly more (with a weight of 40-50 kg
), and the jaws and teeth, while possessing typically anthropoid features, at the same time show significant similarity to human teeth. Australopithecines are considered by many to be “models” of human ancestors.
The geological antiquity of some of these Australopithecines goes back to the Lower Pleistocene, which is now chronologically dated to a depth of up to 2 million years, containing the Villafranca layers (Ivanova, 1965).
Some of the fossil African anthropoids walked on two legs, as evidenced by the shape and structure of various bones found, for example from the pelvis of Australopithecus Prometheus (1948) or Plesianthropus (1947). It is possible that they also used sticks and stones found in nature as tools. Living in fairly dry, steppe or semi-desert areas (Fig. 37), Australopithecus also consumed animal food. They hunted hares and baboons.

there is no assumption (Koenigswald, 1959). Attempts to represent the anthropoids of South Africa as real hominids are unfounded. There is also insufficient evidence that these monkeys were the ancestors of all humanity or any part of it. The same applies to the Oreopithecus found in Italy, the remains of which were discovered in Tuscany near Mount Bamboli.
Its teeth, jaws, and fragments of forearm bones are known, found in layers of the Middle Miocene and Early Pliocene ages. Judging by the bone remains, Oreopithecus bambolii is significantly closer to anthropoids (Hurzeler, 1954).
In 1958, in Tuscany, near the village of Baccinello, in layers of lignite dating from the Upper Miocene, at a depth of about 200
m

An almost complete skeleton of Oreopithecus was discovered. Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420 This is certainly one of the largest discoveries in the field of human paleontology.
Rather, Oreopithecus should be interpreted as nature’s “failed attempts”: these monkeys became extinct. Man probably gave rise to one of the South Asian forms of anthropoids, which developed from the Early Pliocene apes of the Ramapithecus type and, probably, similar to Australopithecus. were marked by new discoveries of fossil anthropoids. For example, K. Arambourg and I. Coppens (Arambourg, Coppens), found in the Omo Valley, western Ethiopia, attributed the lower jaw to a form more primitive than the australopithecines, and called it “Paraustralopithecus aethiopicus”.
Researchers consider this anthropoid from the lower Villafranchian to be more primitive than australopithecines, which, however, are also found in the lower Pleistocene layers.

The Pleistocene deepened according to the international agreement of geologists by adding to it the Villafranca epoch of the Upper Pliocene and is approximately 2 million years old. The number of finds of australopithecines is increasing (in Garusi and Pelinji on Lake Neutron in Tanzania; near Lake Chad; in Kanapoi, Kenya and other places). The rich find of remains of twelve Australopithecus specimens made by C. Brain (1968) in the Swartkrans breccias from old excavations of 1930-1935 is very successful; In particular, it turned out to be possible to obtain a complete cast of the endocrane of one of them. Let's move on to the question of the capacity of the braincase of the Australopithecus described by Dart. In 1937, the Soviet anthropologist V. M. Shapkin, using the exact method he proposed, received the figure 420 Thus, Homo habilis, or prezinjanthropus (Fig. 39), is now not as isolated as it seemed to many before, and one can join those paleoanthropologists who consider it one of the geographical variants of populations of the Australopithecus species.
Besides, his brain was not that big, not 680
, and 657, according to F. Tobayas himself, or even less - 560 (Kochetkova, 1969).
J. Robinson (Robinson, 1961) depicts the radiation of australopithecines this way. Leading a bipedal lifestyle, Paranthropus were predominantly herbivorous, and Australopithecus, which also used tools, switched to semi-carnivorous food as the climate dried out and forests thinned out. In this regard, Australopithecines progressed with tool activity and increased the level of intelligence.

In theory, Australopithecus descended independently from early Miocene pongids like Proconsuls, and perhaps even, given the example of Amphipithecus, from a lineage independent from the prosimian stage and slowly developing for most of its history.
A similar idea about the antiquity of the branch of the human branch has appeared more than once in the history of science. For example, the famous Austrian paleontologist Othenio Abel considered Parapithecus the original representative of the human branch of development from the beginning of the Oligocene. Charles Darwin (1953, p. 265) wrote: “We are far from knowing how long ago man first separated from the trunk of the narrow-nosed; but this could have taken place in such a distant era as the Eocene period, because the higher apes were already separated from the lower ones as early as in the upper Miocene period, as evidenced by the existence of Dryopithecus.” However, modern paleontology great apes believes that the separation of the pre-human branch most likely occurred in the Miocene, and
ancient people
appeared during the Lower Pleistocene (see also: Bunak, 1966).
African finds of anthropoids were thoroughly revised by V. Le Gros Clark (Le Gros Clark, 1967).

He believes that Plesianthropus, Zinjanthropus, Prezinjanthropus and Telanthropus belong to the same genus of Australopithecus of the subfamily Australopithecines of the family of hominids, in other words, that these are all the most primitive hominids, but not related to the more highly developed people who form the genus Homo. In the genus Australopithecus, Le Gros Clark identifies only two species - African and massive.
In his opinion, their feet were unlikely to be grasping, although they still did not move very well on two legs due to their underdeveloped pelvis. But the first finger in the hand was well developed and it is possible that Australopithecus When hunting animals, they used weapons made of bone, horn or tooth, since they did not have natural tools of their body.
The chain of discoveries of ancient apes continues in Western Asia. Thus, in Israel, near the Ubaidiya hill in the Jordan Valley, in 1959, two fragments of a massive frontal bone of an unknown large hominoid were discovered.
Israeli archaeologist M. Stekelis considers the broken pebbles and other stones with chips found there as his tools, but, rather, these are natural fragments. The antiquity of the large anthropoid from Ubeidiya is the Lower Quaternary era. Another, larger, one might say gigantic, monkey became known from its lower jaw, discovered in 1955 near Ankara, during excavations on Mount Sinap. She was distinguished by certain features that brought her closer to ancient people, in particular, a rudimentary protrusion on the front jaw. This find suggests that the number of large anthropoids in Asia was probably no less than in Africa. The geological age of Ancaropithecus is Upper Miocene. Findings of representatives of the Australopithecus group of South African anthropoids (Fig. 40) forced many scientists to think again about the geographical habitat of the ancestral species for humans, about the ancestral home of humanity. Darth proclaimed south africa
the cradle of humanity, Broome, as well as Arthur Keys, joined Dart’s opinion.

In terms of the degree of attention that journalists paid to the finds of these huge monkeys, Gigantopithecus can be compared, perhaps, only with the most ancient predecessors of man, the remains of which were discovered in East Africa. Gigantopithecus has been associated with numerous “sensational” reports of the so-called “Bigfoot” (with which this giant ape has nothing in common) from the Himalayas or other remote areas of Asia. In the 70-80s of this century, interest in Gigantopithecus gradually began to fade, and even fragmentary reports about them disappeared from the mass press. The search for new facts confirming the existence of these primates eventually shifted to the area of professional interests of paleontologists and paleoanthropologists. However, the idea of giant apes unexpectedly inspired filmmakers who created a series of films about monstrous ape monsters that have survived to this day in the jungles of the islands of Southeast Asia.

Recent discoveries in paleoprimatology have significantly changed ideas about the origin and historical development of the group of apes from which Gigantopithecus descended, defining them more accurately family ties with other ancient and modern primates. The study of animals and plants of the era in which Gigantopithecus lived, as well as modern methods of studying their remains, have yielded a lot of new information about appearance and the lifestyle of these giant monkeys. Many hypotheses and assumptions have arisen, sometimes mutually exclusive, but nevertheless existing today.

A unique find from a Chinese pharmacy

All over the world, Chinese pharmacies sell powders containing crushed fossil bones and teeth of mammals from the Paleogene and Neogene periods. This drug, which is erroneously called dragon bones, is highly valued and used in the treatment of rickets and other skeletal, gastrointestinal and other diseases. Until now, however, the pharmacological and physiological meaning of this treatment is not known. It is assumed that it is due to the fact that during fossilization (petrification), the bones of ancient mammals, having lost organic substances, accumulate various elements, in particular trace elements, from surrounding rocks, acquiring a complex chemical composition, often with different isotopes of rare and radioactive elements.

In 1935, the Dutch paleontologist G. Koenigswald discovered a tooth of some very large extinct primate in one of the pharmacies in Hong Kong, calling it Gigantopithecus ( Gigantopithecus blacki). Later, Koenigswald acquired several more Gigantopithecus teeth from Chinese pharmacies in Hong Kong, Guangzhou, and also in Indonesia. Based on the teeth found, it was not difficult to estimate the average size of the animal. This three-meter giant weighed more than 350 kg.

In 1937, the anthropologist F. Weidenreich, clearly exaggerating the similarity of the teeth of man and Gigantopithecus, attributed human features to him and considered these giant monkeys as the direct ancestors of man, considering them not anthropoids (humanoid primates), but giant hominids (a family that includes humans and his immediate ancestors). He expressed an original hypothesis about the origin of man from giant apes, believing that Gigantopithecus, having arisen in India, evolved into meganthropes ( Megantropus), who lived in South Asia during the early Pleistocene. Subsequently, according to Weidenreich, meganthropes spread to Southern China, where they split into two branches. Some of them, having arrived in Indonesia (Java), turned into Pithecanthropus and later into humans, while others moved to the north of China and evolved into Sinanthropus (the Asian branch of Homo erectus) and then into humans modern type. This peculiar hypothesis has been subjected to much criticism. Later research showed that Meganthropes, a group of ancient Asian populations, actually belong to the genus Homo, however, with Gigantopithecus it turned out that not everything was so simple - they clearly did not fit into the proposed scheme. Judging by the structure of the teeth and their size, Gigantopithecus were still “specialized” monkeys and could not possibly have been the ancestors of people, even ancient ones, but more on that later. Let us only add that in 1952, when new materials were obtained on Gigantopithecus and other fossil apes from Asia, the discoverer of Gigantopithecus Koenigswald changed his mind and classified it as a special evolutionary branch of giant apes.

Carnivore or vegetarian?

New stage The study of Gigantopithecus began in 1956 after the discovery in South China, in Guangxi Province (Daxin County), in small caves, of three almost complete jaws and more than a thousand isolated teeth of Gigantopithecus. Although not a single skeletal bone was found (the bones of apes are very poorly preserved in fossil form), this find significantly expanded our knowledge. There is a real opportunity to accurately determine the size of Gigantopithecus and compare them with modern large apes.

It is known that Australopithecines have enormous molars, but tall they were no different - no more than 1.5 m in height. Therefore, it was believed that Gigantopithecus was no larger than modern gorillas. However, when reconstructing, it is necessary to take into account that the height of both a modern person and his ancestors has little correlation with the size of the teeth. After the discovery of jaws in China, the situation became clearer. Based on the size of the largest lower jaw of Gigantopithecus (the height of the horizontal branch is 184 mm and its width is 104 mm), its height should have been more than 2.5 m. Chinese paleontologists came to the conclusion that for Gigantopithecus, as for modern apes, characterized by sexual dimorphism. One large jaw most likely belonged to a young male 14-15 years old, and the other two jaws (very large and smaller) belonged to an adult male and female.

The jaws and teeth of Gigantopithecus lay in layers of yellow sandy-clayey calcareous breccia (a type of cave deposit in which loose rocks and stones are cemented with calcite). Chinese paleontologists and geologists who studied the “Gigantopithecus Cave” (Hedong Cave) came to the conclusion that the topography of its surroundings has remained virtually unchanged over the last million years. The origin of cave deposits is apparently associated with the alternation of wet and dry seasons, with an increase or decrease in the amount of precipitation that penetrated into the cave. The age of Gigantopithecus was determined by the remains of mammals of 25 species found with them: bears, giant panda, red wolf, hyena, tiger, porcupine, tapir, rhinoceros, horse, chalicotherium, wild pig, deer, buffalo, stegodont elephants, mastodons, orangutan, gibbon and apes. The remains of most of these animals belonging to the pando-stegodont complex are well known from other locations in Southern China and Burma, which are of Middle Pleistocene age - approximately 700-200 thousand years. (A similar fauna of mammals, which during the Pliocene climatic optimum was distributed even beyond 52°N, was found in Southern Transbaikalia.) However, the presence here of the remains of primitive elephants (stegodonts and mastodons), as well as peculiar equids with claw-like phalanges ( Chalicotherium), it can be assumed that Gigantopithecus lived in the Early Pleistocene. Estimating the antiquity of the Gigantopithecus remains based on the degree of mineralization with fluorapatite gives an approximate date of 600-400 thousand years.

The territory of Southern China in the early-middle Pleistocene era was a plain crossed by low mountains - a grassy and shrub savanna. The mountains and mountain valleys were covered deciduous forests. The large size of Gigantopithecus, even compared to gorillas, led researchers to believe that these huge monkeys could not feed themselves only on plant foods. Findings of bones of large mammals together with Gigantopithecus and the visible similarity of the latter with the ancestors of humans suggested that Gigantopithecus even hunted such large animals as rhinoceroses and elephants. The researchers were not embarrassed by the absence of tools or traces of fire in the “Gigantopithecus cave”; Gigantopithecus, endowed with enormous physical strength, could kill large animals without the use of tools.

Already at this stage of research, paleontologists suggested that in such large animals, which experienced a large daily need for food, the formation of large groups was impossible. Most likely, Gigantopithecus, like modern mountain gorillas, lived in small family groups of five to nine individuals.

Yet Gigantopithecus were primarily herbivores. The structure of the teeth and the shape of the lower jaw of these monkeys turned out to have quite a lot in common not only with humans, but also with australopithecines. This is what Koenigswald drew attention to when justifying his theory of the origin of man from giant apes. Gigantopithecus has very large premolar and molar teeth, their crowns are high and massive. The length of the crown of the third lower molars of Gigantopithecus is 22 and 22.3 mm, in the gorilla - 18-19.1 mm, and in modern humans - 10.7 mm. Moreover, the volume of molars in Gigantopithecus is twice that of a gorilla and almost six times that of a human. In ancient hominids, changes of this kind in the structure of molars indicate adaptation to plant foods. As for the co-occurrence of numerous remains of Gigantopithecus and other large “non-cave” mammals, then most likely the remains of elephants, rhinoceroses and other animals present here are the remains of the prey of predators (for example, hyenas), which brought parts of corpses and bones to the “Gigantopithecus cave”.

Another important morphological feature of the Gigantopithecus dental system is the absence of a gap between the canine and premolars, which do not protrude beyond the level of other teeth. According to these characteristics, Gigantopithecus is closer to the most ancient ancestors of humans than other apes. The fangs of females are not as massive as those of males. In most primates, the structure and size of canines are closely related to gender, and their formation and growth are controlled by sex hormones. In humans and their ancestors, males have larger fangs than females, only because males are larger than females, and the influence of sex hormones on their structure is less.

Similarities with the human lower jaw include a more parabolic (U-shaped rather than V-shaped as in apes) dental arch, the presence of a single mental foramen on each side of the jaw, the absence of a simian ledge in the central part of the anterior surface of the jaw, and other features.

However, Gigantopithecus has general signs with great apes, for example, in the structure of the lower jaw: large size, massiveness, strong thickening of the lower edge in the anteroposterior direction in its anterior (symphyseal) part, thickening in the form of ridges on the lateral surfaces of its branches; and the index of length to width of the alveolar arch is close to that of the orangutan.

Without risking further boring the reader with unnecessary details set out in the specialized literature, we note that signs of the structure of the teeth and the entire lower jaw of Gigantopithecus have also been discovered, which distinguish it from other apes, from the ancestors of people and are unique to it. Such duality (intermediateness) in the structure of the teeth indicates a unique specialization of Gigantopithecus, unlike other hominids, partly bringing them closer to humans, or more precisely, to representatives of the family Hominidae.

“Divine” monkeys

Until recently, the end of the Miocene and the entire Pliocene period in the history of Gigantopithecus remained a mystery. Although quite numerous finds of apes living in these eras were well known from Northern India at the time of the discovery of Gigantopithecus, they were at first not connected in any way with Gigantopithecus. The originality and gigantism of these primates, as well as the fragmentary nature of the remains (individual teeth and parts of the jaws) for a long time made it difficult to determine the closest relatives and ancestors who stood at the base of the evolutionary branch that led to Gigantopithecus. Further research and discoveries in India, Burma and China made it possible to reconstruct, step by step, the history of these giant primates.

Now no one doubts that Gigantopithecus belongs to the superfamily of hominoids ( Hominoidea). This superfamily, as established by the American paleontologist J. Simpson in 1945, includes monkeys of the family Pliopithecidae, close to gibbons, apes, humans and their common ancestors of the hominid family ( Hominidae). In turn, this family is divided into three subfamilies: hominin ( Homininae) - australopithecus and people; pongin ( Ponginae) - orangutans and some extinct apes of Asia; dryopithecin ( Driopithecinae) - modern apes of Africa (chimpanzees, gorilla) and some extinct Miocene apes of Eurasia and Africa. According to modern ideas, Gigantopithecus belongs to the subfamily Pongina, although some researchers distinguish them into a separate subfamily or even family.

The time of origin of this group of apes, of which Gigantopithecus was the final branch, dates back to the Miocene period (about 18-17 million years ago). Pongins apparently appeared in Africa and settled first in Europe and then in Asia. In Africa and Europe they became extinct at the end of the Miocene, but in Asia they continued to exist a million years ago, in the early Pleistocene. Most pongina were small or medium-sized monkeys, and only the Gigantopithecus included in it surpassed all known primates in size.

Monkeys of this group are characterized by small incisors and large molars and premolars, a shortened (compared to other apes) facial part of the skull and a V-shaped (rather than U-shaped) dental arch. One of the morphological features of pongina is thick, folded enamel on the chewing surface. It is clear that the evolution of pongina was associated with a gradual adaptation to life in savannas and forest-steppes (this is confirmed by some skeletal features of the upper and lower extremities) and feeding on dry and rough food. At the end of the Miocene period, there was a reduction in the area of tropical forests, and mainly in those areas where two groups of great apes, pongines and dryopithecines, that survived the end of the Miocene, lived in conditions of fierce competition. It is competition that explains the gradual transition of ancient pongines into an ecological niche that is atypical for most other apes.

Drawings of the lower jaws of Gigantopithecus, found in Southern China in the “Gigantopithecus cave” (Gigantopithecus blek - a,b,e) and in Northern India (Gigantopithecus Belaspur - c).
For comparison, drawings of the jaws of a modern mountain gorilla are shown (female - g, male - e). (Simons E.L., Chopra S.R.K., 1968).

The most ancient representatives of the Pongin group were monkeys of the genus Sivapithecus ( Sivapithecus indicus), named after the Indian deity Shiva. These monkeys appeared in Africa (Northern Kenya) at the very end of the Early Miocene. Their descendants were the Sivapithecus of India, where they were common in the Middle and Late Miocene. It was from the Siwalik deposits of Northern India that they were first described at the end of the 19th century. In terms of the structure of the skull, Sivapithecus has much in common with the modern orangutan, from which Sivapithecus differed, perhaps, only in a slightly shorter facial region. Closely set eye sockets, widely diverging zygomatic arches, a significantly concave section of the nasal region of the face, a relatively high facial section - all this makes the skull of Sivapithecus very similar to the skull of an orangutan.

In terms of the structure of the foot and hand, Sivapithecus is close to chimpanzees. Perhaps, like modern savanna chimpanzees, he moved equally freely through trees and ground. Large Sivapithecus was the size of a modern orangutan, but there were also much smaller individuals, which apparently indicates sexual dimorphism in these primates.

Ramapithecus, another representative of the Asian pongines, was distributed in Southern Europe and Western Asia. Among its several species, the best studied is Ramapithecus Punjabis ( Ramapithecus pundjabicus). The name of this monkey is given in honor of the Hindu deity - Rama. Ramapithecus resembled Sivapithecus in many ways, which was the basis for combining them into one genus.

Ramapithecus - medium-sized monkeys (about a meter tall and weighing 18-20 kg) - led a predominantly terrestrial lifestyle. Judging by the structure of the long bones and vertebrae, they could sometimes straighten up and move for some time on two hind limbs. The skull of Ramapithecus is even shorter than that of Sivapithecus, but more concave in the facial region. The front teeth are very small, and the molars, on the contrary, are very large, even larger than those of Sivapithecus. Thanks to large area The chewing surface of Ramapithecus teeth was better adapted to feeding on relatively tough plant food, which was dominated by cereal seeds, roots and shoots. Collecting grass seeds required great precision in the movements of the fingers. It is possible that, like modern chimpanzees, Ramapithecines occasionally used stones and sticks to protect themselves from predators or obtain food. The brain volume of large representatives of this genus apparently reached 350 cm 3 and was almost equal to the brain of modern apes, but let us recall that Ramapithecus is a small monkey. If calculations of the volume of the brain cavity of Ramapithecus are correct, then the ratio of brain volume to body weight in this primate was two to three times greater than that of modern apes.

Thus, paleontologists currently have reliable information that some Miocene apes, in connection with the transition to a terrestrial lifestyle, experienced significant changes in the structure of the dental system and skeleton. These branches apparently evolved in parallel along the path of “humanization.” Most of them developed along the path of further specialization and died out, while others “rose to their feet” during the Pliocene, which only in one of the groups of African hominids acquired fundamental importance (when collecting food with the forelimbs and the further use of natural and artificial tools).

The link between the Miocene pongins (Sivapithecus and Ramapithecus) and Gigantopithecus from the Middle Pleistocene of China was the discovery in the same area of the Siwalik Hills of the lower jaw of Gigantopithecus, whose age is apparently about 5 million years. The similarity of morphology and large size of Gigantopithecus from Belaspur ( Gigantopithecus belaspurensis) directly indicate that Gigantopithecus from China are their descendants.

Dead end branch of evolution

Early-middle Miocene hominoids with thin tooth enamel, united in the polymorphic group Dryopithecus, together with Sivapithecus and other extinct Asian pongines (including Gigantopithecus), as well as modern gibbons, orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas, have, despite significant morphological differences in teeth and different thicknesses, enamel, a single type of its microstructure. At the same time, Australopithecus and humans (genus Homo) another type of microstructure. Therefore, the opinion about Ramapithecus and the entire branch of Asian pongina of the Miocene-Pliocene, as possible ancestors of hominids - the predecessors of humans, which dominated among anthropologists until the 60-70s of this century, has now changed significantly. Further study of the structure of the skull and teeth also greatly shook the view that Ramapithecines were the ancestors of all later hominids, which clearly represent several independent branches. Studies of the DNA and some proteins of modern apes have also shown that humans are closer to modern African apes than to the orangutan. It is most likely that Sivapithecus and Ramapithecus are closely related to modern orangutans, and Gigantopithecus occupy a somewhat separate position in this group, but most likely are direct descendants of the line coming from the Asian Sivapithecus.

After the origins and relationships of the giant apes from Asia became largely clear, paleontologists again drew attention to the unusual size of these primates and some details of the structure and wear of the crowns: the dentition of Gigantopithecus is relatively short, with very large, flattened molars with numerous additional teeth tubercles on the chewing surface; The main cusps of the crowns of the molars are increased in size, and additional cusps are present not only on the molars, but also on the premolars. The shape of the jaws and the small size of the incisors indicate that these monkeys could not pinch and tear off pieces of food with their front teeth, which is typical of modern apes. Huge height of the lower jaw and protruding forward Front edge the ascending branch greatly increases the force of crushing food. The massive symphysis (the area where the two halves of the lower jaw meet) and the lower jaw under the molars indicate the ability of Gigantopithecus to powerfully clench its jaws. In addition, the posterior part of the horizontal ramus of the mandible is slightly deflected outward, which, in all likelihood, further increased the force of clenching of the jaws. It can be assumed that Gigantopithecus ate while sitting, picking up food and putting it into his mouth with his hands or bending plant stems towards himself, as gorillas do.

Additional confirmation that Gigantopithecus, despite potential omnivory, were mainly vegetarians, is the fact that their teeth (11.5%) were severely affected by caries, which could have arisen due to the large amount of starch in their food and the lack of calcium and phosphorus available in animal food. In other fossil primates and early humans, dental caries is rare. It is even believed that the most ancient people (before the Neanderthals) did not suffer from this disease, which became commonplace only as man evolved and the composition of his food changed. Caries found in the massive Australopithecines of Africa is an example of typical hypoplasia (destruction of enamel associated with impaired mineral metabolism in the body), which developed in the cubs of these hominids during the transition from feeding on mother's milk to a plant diet poorer in minerals.

Very characteristic scratches and damage were found on the enamel of Gigantopithecus teeth, resulting from the consumption of plant food saturated with silicon. This substance is contained in bamboo fiber and grass shoots, which also confirms the hypothesis about the main food specialization of giants.

The habitat of Gigantopithecus was hilly landscapes with sparse vegetation and copses, where their distant ancestors, Sivapithecus, moved. The cave in which the remains of these monkeys, as well as other animals, were found was not their home, but rather a place where water currents and predators carried their bones. Moreover, during the time of the existence of giant apes in southern China, what is now a cave may have been simply a karst depression in a limestone outcrop. Animal bones could be washed off the surface of the earth and fall into karst cracks as a result of soil erosion.

In total, the remains of 88 individuals were collected in the caves of southern China - 41 males and 47 females. This ratio of males to females is quite common for large modern primates and has been reliably established, for example, for mountain gorillas. One can also judge the age composition of the deceased Gigantopithecus population, in which adult (but not old) animals accounted for approximately 56%, young immature animals - 24%, cubs - 6%, very old individuals - 15%. This age composition of dead animals is atypical for a normally existing population of mammals; usually the percentage of deaths of adult individuals is always lower.

What led Gigantopithecus to death? According to one hypothesis, the reason for their extinction is competition with ancient people, who settled widely in Asia during this period. Undoubtedly, but not only that. The extinction of such large and apparently highly specialized apes was caused by a complex of factors related to climate change in Asia at the end of the Middle Pleistocene. In the process of evolution, many groups of mammals (ungulates, proboscis, etc.) showed a tendency towards a gradual increase in body size, and sometimes the appearance of gigantism. As a rule, this is associated with unilateral adaptation - passive adaptation to external conditions. Although an increase in body size gives animals biological advantages when competing with other species, in particular in the fight against predators, it often turns out to be one of the main causes of extinction when significant changes in the environment occur. There are many examples of how species, becoming giants, find themselves on the verge of extinction.

The work was carried out with the support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research.
Project 9615-98-0689.

Place of first publication - Journal "Nature", No. 12, 1999, p. 38-48.

Literature:

Weidenreich F. Apes, Giants and man. Chicago, 1946.
Pei W.C. // Vertebrata Palasiatika. 1957. No. 2. P.65-71; Woo Ju-kang // Scientia Sinica. 1962. V.XI. No. 3. P.391-396.
Kalmykov N.P., Mashchenko E.N. The northernmost primate of Asia // Nature. 1994. No. 1. P.64-70.
Pilgrim G.E. //Rec. Geological Serv. (India). 1915. V.45. No. 1. P.1-74.
Lydekker R. // Ibid. 1879. No. 11. P.64-85.
Boaz N.T. // New interpretation of Ape and Human ancestry / Eds. R. L. Ciochon, R. S. Corruccini. N.Y.; L., 1983. P.705-720; Cronin J.E. //Ibid. P.115-150.
Fossey D. Gorillas in the fog. M., 1990.