A revised systematic scheme for the Eurasian Miocene fossil Hominidae.
The current systematics of the European hominids has recently been reexamined in light of new and important fossil discoveries. It has been argued by Begun (1992a) that the European dryopithecines (including Graecopithecus from Greece) represent one of the earliest members of the Hominidae. Andrews (1992) and Dean & Delson (1992) agree that Graecopithecus should probably be placed within the Homininae, but that Dryopithecus should be excluded from this subfamily and retained within the Dryopithecinae. De Bonis & Koufos (1993, 1994) suggest that Graecopithecus shares a sister-group relationship with hominins. Moyà-Solà & Köhler (1993, 1995), however, argue that Dryopithecus and Graecopithecus both represent primitive members of the Ponginae. A phylogenetic and taxonomic revision of these taxa presented here supports the allocation of Graecopithecus to Homininae. It is also shown that the apparent disagreement concerning Dryopithecus is a result of the presence of two distinct genera within the fossil samples examined. It is concluded that the Hungarian hominid should be retained within the genus Dryopithecus, and the subfamily Dryopithecinae; the Spanish hominids are allocated to the resurrected genus Hispanopithecus Villalta & Crusafont-Pairó, 1944 which is likely to be a primitive member of the Ponginae.
Cameron
D W
DW
Department of Archaeology & Anthropology (Faculty), Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
D000818:Animals; D005060:Europe; D005147:Facial Bones / Q000033:anatomy & histology; D005580:Fossils; D015186:Hominidae / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000145:classification*; D006801:Humans; D010161:Paleodontology; D010163:Paleontology; D010802:Phylogeny