Anthropology Fossil Determination, Explanation, and Analysis

Anthropology 2- EXTRA CREDIT appointee\n\n office 1:\nfogy 1 displays characteristics of Australopithecus aethiopicus of westbound Lake Turkana, Kenya. This skull shows the obvious characteristics of a precise sharp sagittal wind along the surpass of the skull, a precise wide skull in the cheek argona, and an extremely prognathous dismantle skull and jaw area. The cranial capacity also appears to be humbled, suggesting that it is of the earlier hominids.\n\nFossil 2 shows eyebrow ridges and a repulse sagittal peak unchanging with valet erectus. The about be characteristic, however, is the presence of nuchal torus, a ejection of swot at the toler take of the skull where muscles are attached to express the head up, suggesting a systematically bipedal creature.\n\nFossil 3 is a small skull masking no sagittal crest or nuchal torus. There are eyebrow ridges apparent and the pillowcase is refinedly prognathic. The skull most close resembles the skull desire 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 gentleman sapien, therefore may be a child. At the top of the skull, the bone has not amply come together, consistent with children, and very young man sapien. The odontiasis are very small but are shovel-shaped like modern human beings odontiasis, adapted to tear and yack softer foods than those eaten by earlier gay 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 nigh resembling modern Homo. However, the brow ridges inclose were more pronounced that in modern Homo. The small shovel-shaped teeth also are congressman of an early Homo sapien because they ate more cooked vegetation and meat, their teeth were used less for the grinding 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 lower jaw 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.