4.7 Article

Footprints reveal direct evidence of group behavior and locomotion in Homo erectus

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep28766

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Leakey Foundation
  2. National Science Foundation [BCS-1515054, BCS-1232522, BCS-1128170, BCS-0935321, DGE-080163, SMA-1409612]
  3. Wenner-Gren Foundation
  4. George Washington University's Research Enhancement Fund
  5. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  6. SBE Off Of Multidisciplinary Activities [1409612] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  8. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [1515054] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bipedalism is a defining feature of the human lineage. Despite evidence that walking on two feet dates back 6-7 Ma, reconstructing hominin gait evolution is complicated by a sparse fossil record and challenges in inferring biomechanical patterns from isolated and fragmentary bones. Similarly, patterns of social behavior that distinguish modern humans from other living primates likely played significant roles in our evolution, but it is exceedingly difficult to understand the social behaviors of fossil hominins directly from fossil data. Footprints preserve direct records of gait biomechanics and behavior but they have been rare in the early human fossil record. Here we present analyses of an unprecedented discovery of 1.5-million-year-old footprint assemblages, produced by 20+ Homo erectus individuals. These footprints provide the oldest direct evidence for modern human-like weight transfer and confirm the presence of an energy-saving longitudinally arched foot in H. erectus. Further, print size analyses suggest that these H. erectus individuals lived and moved in cooperative multi-male groups, offering direct evidence consistent with human-like social behaviors in H. erectus.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available