Anthropology Fossil Determination, Explanation, and Analysis

Anthropology 2- EXTRA CREDIT d have\n\npost 1:\n fogey 1 displays characteristics of Australopithecus aethiopicus of wolfram Lake Turkana, Kenya. This skull shows the obvious characteristics of a rattling sharp sagittal height along the spend of the skull, a genuinely wide skull in the cheek area, and an fundamentally lantern-jawed take down skull and jaw area. The cranial capacity also appears to be littler, suggesting that it is of the earlier hominids.\n\nFossil 2 shows eyebrow ridges and a gauzy sagittal summit meeting concordant with human erectus. The well-nigh specify characteristic, however, is the presence of nuchal torus, a task of jampack at the back off of the skull where muscles are attached to determine the head up, suggesting a consistently bipedal creature.\n\nFossil 3 is a lower-ranking skull exhibit no sagittal crest or nuchal torus. There are eyebrow ridges apparent and the pose is ignorely prognathic. The skull most intimately resembles th e skull alike(p) that of the Taung child (Jurmain 203). The skull of the Taung child, a variety known as the gracile australopithecine, or A. africanus, exhibits smaller brain capacity, accounting for the smaller skull.\n\nThe fourth fossil has a small skull be conveys the characteristics of humanity sapien, therefore may be a child. At the top of the skull, the bone has not full come together, consistent with children, and very young homophile sapien. The odontiasis are very small but are shovel-shaped like modern worlds odontiasis, adapted to tear and lecture softer foods than those eaten by earlier human beings and other hominids. The skull shows little to no prognathism consistent with humans.\n\nSTATION 2:\nFossil 1 at this station showed postorbital constriction, excess bone behind the eyebrows protecting the eyes. The skull showed slight prognathism, which is the protrusion of the jaw and lower skull. I predicted that the skull was Homo erectus; however, I noted that the African form, Homo ergaster, characteristically shows postorbital constriction whereas Homo erectus does not.\n\nFossil 2 showed little prognathism, a skull more well-nigh resembling modern Homo. However, the brow ridges put forward were more pronounced that in modern Homo. The small shovel-shaped teeth also are example of an early Homo sapien because they ate more cooked vegetation and meat, their teeth were used less for the attrition of hard, brittle vegetation. The fossil most closely displays the characteristics of Cro-Magnon, or Homo sapiens sapiens (Jurmain 281).\n\nSTATION 3:\nThe first jowl is very robust and shows extreme molarization,...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:

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