Hominin homoiology: an assessment of the impact of phenotypic plasticity on phylogenetic analyses of humans and their fossil relatives.

Homoiologies are phylogenetically misleading morphological similarities that are due to nongenetic factors. It has been claimed that homoiologies are common in the hominin skull, especially in regions affected by masticatory strain, and that their prevalence is one reason why reconstructing hominin phylogenetic relationships is difficult. To evaluate this "homoiology hypothesis," we performed analyses on a group of extant primates for which a robust molecular phylogeny is available--the hominoids. We compiled a data set from measurements that developmental considerations and experimental evidence suggest differ in their likelihood of exhibiting masticatory-strain-induced phenotypic plasticity. We then used the coefficient of variation and t-tests to evaluate the phenotypic plasticity of the measurements. We predicted that, if the hypothesis is correct, the measurements of skeletal features that do not remodel and therefore are unaffected by phenotypic plasticity should be less variable than the measurements of skeletal features that remodel and are subject to low-to-moderate strains, and that the latter should be less variable than the measurements of skeletal features that remodel and are subject to moderate-to-high strains. Subsequently, we performed phylogenetic analyses on character state data derived from the measurements and compared the resulting phylogenetic hypotheses to the consensus molecular phylogeny for the hominoids. We predicted that, if the hypothesis is correct, agreement between the phylogenies should be best for the non-phenotypically-plastic characters, intermediate for the low-to-moderate-strain characters, and worst for the moderate-to-high-strain characters. The results of the coefficient of variation/t-test analyses were consistent with the predictions of the hypothesis to the extent that the moderate-to-high-strain measurements exhibited significantly more variability than the non-phenotypically-plastic and low-to-moderate-strain measurements. In contrast, the results of the phylogenetic analyses were not those predicted. The phylogeny derived from the moderate-to-high-strain characters matched the molecular phylogeny better than those obtained using the non-phenotypically-plastic and low-to-moderate-strain characters. Thus, our study supports the suggestion that mechanical loading results in phenotypic plasticity in the hominin skull, but it does not support the notion that homoiologies have a significant negative impact on hominin phylogenetics.

Collard M ，Wood B 《journal of human evolution》

Do homoiologies impede phylogenetic analyses of the fossil hominids? An assessment based on extant papionin craniodental morphology.

Homoiologies are phylogenetically misleading resemblances among taxa that can be attributed to phenotypic plasticity. Recently, it has been claimed that homoiologies are widespread in the hominid skull, especially in those regions affected by mastication-related strain, and that their prevalence is a major reason why researchers have so far been unable to obtain a reliable estimate of hominid phylogeny. To evaluate this "homoiology hypothesis", we carried out analyses of a group of extant primates for which a robust molecular phylogeny is available-the papionins. We compiled a craniometric dataset from measurements that differ in their susceptibility to mastication-related strain according to developmental considerations and experimental evidence. We used the coefficient of variation and analysis of variance with post hoc least significant difference comparisons in order to evaluate the variability of the measurements. The prediction from the homoiology hypothesis was that dental measurements, which do not remodel in response to strain, should be less variable than low-to-moderate-strain measurements, and that the latter should be less variable than high-strain measurements. We then performed phylogenetic analyses using characters derived from the measurements and compared the resulting phylogenetic hypotheses to the group's consensus molecular phylogeny. The prediction was that, if the homoiology hypothesis is correct, the agreement between the craniometric and molecular phylogenies would be best in the analyses of dental characters, intermediate in the analyses of low-to-moderate-strain characters, and least in the analyses of high-strain characters. The results of this study support the suggestion that mastication-related mechanical loading can result in variation in hominid cranial characters. However, they do not support the hypothesis that homoiology is a major reason why phylogenetic analyses of hominid crania have so far yielded conflicting and weakly supported hypotheses of relationship. These findings are consistent with a recent test of the homoiology hypothesis using craniodental data from extant hominoids, and cast doubt on the validity of the homoiology hypothesis, as originally formulated.

Lycett SJ ，Collard M 《journal of human evolution》

Inferring hominoid and early hominid phylogeny using craniodental characters: the role of fossil taxa.

Recent discoveries of new fossil hominid species have been accompanied by several phylogenetic hypotheses. All of these hypotheses are based on a consideration of hominid craniodental morphology. However, Collard and Wood (2000) suggested that cladograms derived from craniodental data are inconsistent with the prevailing hypothesis of ape phylogeny based on molecular data. The implication of their study is that craniodental characters are unreliable indicators of phylogeny in hominoids and fossil hominids but, notably, their analysis did not include extinct species. We report here on a cladistic analysis designed to test whether the inclusion of fossil taxa affects the ability of morphological characters to recover the molecular ape phylogeny. In the process of doing so, the study tests both Collard and Wood's (2000) hypothesis of character reliability, and the several recently proposed hypotheses of early hominid phylogeny. One hundred and ninety-eight craniodental characters were examined, including 109 traits that traditionally have been of interest in prior studies of hominoid and early hominid phylogeny, and 89 craniometric traits that represent size-corrected linear dimensions measured between standard cranial landmarks. The characters were partitioned into two data sets. One set contained all of the characters, and the other omitted the craniometric characters. Six parsimony analyses were performed; each data set was analyzed three times, once using an ingroup that consisted only of extant hominoids, a second time using an ingroup of extant hominoids and extinct early hominids, and a third time excluding Kenyanthropus platyops. Results suggest that the inclusion of fossil taxa can play a significant role in phylogenetic analysis. Analyses that examined only extant taxa produced most parsimonious cladograms that were inconsistent with the ape molecular tree. In contrast, analyses that included fossil hominids were consistent with that tree. This consistency refutes the basis for the hypothesis that craniodental characters are unreliable for reconstructing phylogenetic relationships. Regarding early hominids, the relationships of Sahelanthropus tchadensis and Ardipithecus ramidus were relatively unstable. However, there is tentative support for the hypotheses that S. tchadensis is the sister taxon of all other hominids. There is support for the hypothesis that A. anamensis is the sister taxon of all hominids except S. tchadensis and Ar. ramidus. There is no compelling support for the hypothesis that Kenyanthropus platyops shares especially close affinities with Homo rudolfensis. Rather, K. platyops is nested within the Homo + Paranthropus + Australopithecus africanus clade. If K. platyops is a valid species, these relationships suggest that Homo and Paranthropus are likely to have diverged from other hominids much earlier than previously supposed. There is no support for the hypothesis that A. garhi is either the sister taxon or direct ancestor of the genus Homo. Phylogenetic relationships indicate that Australopithecus is paraphyletic. Thus, A. anamensis and A. garhi should be allocated to new genera.

Strait DS ，Grine FE 《journal of human evolution》

Revisiting the homoiology hypothesis: the impact of phenotypic plasticity on the reconstruction of human population history from craniometric data.

Homoiologies are homoplasies that are caused by nongenetic environmental factors. The homoiology hypothesis predicts that osseous regions subject to repeated biomechanical stress during growth should be more variable and, therefore, less reliable for the reconstruction of phylogeny compared with osseous regions relatively unaffected by stress. Previous studies based on the analysis of multiple primate species found that regions of the cranium subject to masticatory-induced stress were significantly more variable than non-masticatory regions, as predicted by the homoiology hypothesis. However, these studies also found that the masticatory regions were no less reliable for reconstructing primate phylogenetic relationships when subjected to parsimony analysis. It was suggested, therefore, that homoiology may be a more potent problem for the reconstruction of phylogeny at the intraspecific level rather than interspecific phylogenetics. This suggestion was tested here using matched molecular and craniometric data for 12 modern human populations. The results show that, as predicted by the homoiology hypothesis, regions of the human cranium related to mastication were more variable than non-masticatory regions. However, masticatory regions were no less reliable for inferring human population history. Therefore, the results match those found from the interspecific analysis of primate species and do not support the suggestion that homoiology is a greater problem for the analysis of intraspecific taxa. The results also suggest that within-taxon variability cannot be relied upon to predict the phylogenetic efficacy of morphometric characters.

von Cramon-Taubadel N 《-》

Does phenotypic plasticity confound attempts to identify hominin fossil species? An assessment using extant Old World monkey craniodental data.

It has been hypothesised recently that masticatory strain-induced phenotypic plasticity complicates efforts to delineate species in the hominin fossil record. Here, we report a study that evaluated this hypothesis by subjecting craniodental data from 8 Old World monkey species to ANOVA and discriminant analysis. The study does not support the hypothesis. Characters associated with high masticatory strains were found to exhibit significantly higher levels of variability than low-to-moderately strained characters and dental characters, but the three sets of characters did not differ markedly in taxonomic utility. Moreover, the best discrimination was achieved when all variables were employed. These results suggest that phenotypic plasticity likely plays only a minor confounding role in hominin taxonomy, and that, rather than attempting to exclude phenotypically plastic characters, researchers should simply maximise the number of characters examined.

Collard M ，Lycett SJ 《-》