The exterior model of DH2 (blue), comprising the original see matched for the mirror visualize, was then submitted and you can lined up on the mirror-imaged DHstep 1 model (pink). Mention the brand new similarity in proportions and you can contour ranging from DH1 and DH2 observed in the latest rear (A) prior (B) horizontal (C) and you can superior (D) viewpoints.
Differential diagnosis
The brand new cranium from H. naledi is different from Australopithecus sediba (Berger ainsi que al., 2010) during the indicating sagittal keeling, a very obvious supraorbital torus and supratoral sulcus, an effective weakly curved supraorbital contour with circular horizontal edges, an enthusiastic angular torus, a properly-outlined supramastoid crest, a rounded advanced a beneficial, a-root of the zygomatic procedure for new temporal that is tilted downwards as much as 29° relative to FH, a hit bottom nasoalveolar clivus, weakened the dog juga, a keen anteriorly organized foot of the zygomatic process of the new maxilla, and you can a relatively broad palate which is anteriorly low. The brand new H. naledi mandible (DH1) has a mental foramen organized superiorly into the corpus one to opens posteriorly, unlike the newest mid-corpus top, a whole lot more laterally beginning rational foramen off Au. sediba. New maxillary and mandibular white teeth out of H. naledi is actually smaller compared to those of Au. sediba, which have mandibular molars that will be buccolingually slim. New lingual mesial and distal limited ridges don’t blend to the brand new cervical stature regarding the maxillary I 2 , the newest paracone of your own maxillary P step 3 was equal in dimensions towards protocone, new protoconid and metaconid of your own mandibular molars is actually just as mesially arranged, and lingual cusps of one’s molars are positioned on occlusobuccal margin while the buccal cusps are put a little lingual so you can this new occlusobuccal margin. Also, Bien au. sediba shares along with other australopiths good protostylid that’s situated and you will and that intersects the newest buccal groove of down molars, in place of the tiny and you can mesiobuccally restricted protostylid that doesn’t intersect brand new buccal groove into the H. naledi.
H. naledi lacks the reduced cranial height of Homo floresiensis, and displays a marked angular torus and parasagittal keeling between bregma and lambda that is absent in the latter species. H. naledi further has a flat and squared nasoalveolar clivus, unlike the pronounced maxillary canine juga and prominent pillars of H. floresiensis. The mandible of H. floresiensis shows a posteriorly inclined post incisive planum with superior and inferior transverse tori, differing from the steeply inclined posterior face of the H. naledi mandibular symphysis, which lacks both a post incisive planum or a superior transverse torus. Dentally, H. naledi is distinguishable from H. floresiensis by the mesiodistal elongation and extensive talonid of the mandibular P4, and the lack of Tomes’ root on the mandibular premolars. The molar size gradient of H. naledi follows the M1 < M2>
H1 try dissimilar to hand stays attributed to Paranthropus robustus/early Homo off Swartkrans (Susman, 1988; Susman et al., 2001) inside the that have a relatively brief Mc1 legs and you may proximal articular element, a seat-molded Mc5-hamate combined, and curved proximal and you will advanced phalanges off ray dos–5.
Description
In the posteroinferior extent of the temporary outlines, they curve anteroinferiorly to provide a properly-arranged angular torus. New crania features a great pentagonal description when you look at the posterior see, for the most readily useful container depth located in the supramastoid region. The nuchal area showcases intimately dimorphic growth of nuchal muscle tissue scars as well as the exterior occipital protuberance, and there is a definite sign of an effective tuberculum linearum in addition BrazilCupid search toward outside occipital protuberance. In the superior look at the container tapers out of rear to prior, in the event post-orbital constriction try limited. The newest squamosal suture was reduced and you may softly curved, and you will parietal striae are outlined. Brand new lateral margins of the orbits face sideways. A small zygomaticofacial foramen is typically introduce close to the cardio from the fresh new zygomatic limbs. The underlying of the zygomatic procedure for the maxilla are anteriorly organized, at the level of the newest P step 3 or perhaps the P 4 .
In comparison to H. habilis, H. rudolfensis, and H. erectus, the teeth of H. naledi are not only small, but also markedly simple in crown morphology. Maxillary and mandibular molars lack extensive crenulation, secondary fissures and supernumerary cusps. The M 1 has an equal-sized metacone and paracone, and has a slight expression of Carabelli’s trait represented by a small cusp or shallow pit. I 1 exhibits slight occlusal curvature with trace marginal ridges and variably small tuberculum dentale. I 2 exhibits greater occlusal curvature and tuberculum dentale expression but neither upper incisor has double shovelling or interruption groove. The mandibular canines of H. naledi have a small occlusal area, and have a distal marginal cuspule as a topographically distinct expression of the cingular margin. The P3 is double-rooted, fully bicuspid with metaconid and protoconid of approximately equal height and occlusal area separated by a distinct longitudinal groove, has a distally extensive talonid, and an occlusal outline approximately symmetrical with respect to the mesiodistal axis. P4 likewise has a distally extensive talonid and approximately symmetrical occlusal outline (Figure 5). M1 and M2 lack cusp 6 and cusp 7, except for very slight expression in a small fraction of specimens, and have a very faint subvertical depression rather than a distinct or extensive protostylid. Like australopiths and some early Homo specimens, H. naledi has an increasing molar size gradient in the mandibular dentition (M1 < M2>