Australopithecus had the following distinctive features. Australopithecus: characteristics, anatomical features, evolution. Relationships within the herd: close dependence on each other

Humanity has always wondered about its origins, because that’s how it works Homo sapiens. He needs to understand everything, comprehend it and, passing it through the prism of his own worldview, give a reasonable explanation for any phenomenon or fact. Modern science points to Australopithecus as one of our distant ancestors. This topic is relevant and causes many different debates, giving rise to new hypotheses. It is necessary to take a short excursion into history and trace the evolution of australopithecines in order to understand what is common and different between this group of hominids and modern man.

Adaptation to upright walking

Science gives enough interesting characteristic Australopithecus. On the one hand, she considers them an upright bipedal monkey, but a very highly organized one. On the other hand, he calls them primitive but with a monkey’s head. Australopithecus skulls found during excavations differ little from modern gorillas or chimpanzees. Based scientific research It was established that the brain of Australopithecus was primitive and its volume did not exceed 550 cm 3. The jaws were quite large in size and had well-developed chewing muscles. The teeth looked more massive, but their structure already resembled teeth modern people.

The most heated debate in the scientific community is the upright posture of Australopithecus. The structure of his body, determined on the basis of those found in volcanic ash remains and traces have been determined quite fully. It is possible to say with a high degree of probability that when walking, the Australopithecus hip joint did not fully extend, and the feet crossed. But his heel was well formed, there was a pronounced arch of the foot and thumb. These anatomical features of Australopithecus in the structure of the heel and foot make us similar.

It is not entirely known what prompted Australopithecines to switch to an upright gait. Various versions are called, but, basically, they boil down to the fact that they were prompted to switch to an upright gait by the need to increasingly use their front paws, for example, to pick up cubs, food, etc. Another interesting hypothesis was put forward that upright posture southern monkeys" - their adaptation in conditions of constant presence in shallow water. The shallow waters provided them with abundant food. For some reason, the ability of people to spontaneously hold their breath is cited as an argument in favor of this version.

To explain the issue of upright posture, a version is also proposed that upright posture is one of the necessary elements for better adaptability to life in the trees. But a more reliable version is climate change, which, according to scientists, occurred approximately 11 million years ago. During this period, the number of forests decreased sharply and a lot of open space appeared. This condition served trigger, which spurred monkeys, the ancestors of Australopithecus, to explore the earth.

Height and dimensions

It cannot be said that this group of hominids was distinguished by its large size. Their height did not exceed 150 cm, with a weight from 25 kg to 50 kg. But there's one here interesting feature: in size, male Australopithecines were very different from females. They were almost half as heavy. This also played a role in the characteristics of behavior and reproduction. If we talk about hair, scientists believe that they began to lose their fur when they left the forests. Australopithecines began to be more active and fur only got in the way in such conditions. Sweating in modern man is defense mechanism the body from overheating and, a kind of compensation for the loss of the natural “fur coat” by our ancestors.

It is necessary to touch upon the topic of childbirth - important characteristic Australopithecus, allowing this species not only to survive, but also to evolve. By switching to a less energy-consuming method of movement - a straight gait - the Australopithecus pelvis became similar to a human one. But there was a gradual evolution. Increasingly, children with big heads. This is primarily due to the fact that living conditions have changed and required greater organization and mastery of primitive tools.

Main groups of Australopithecus

Where and when did Australopithecus live? Various dates have been given for the appearance of Australopithecus on our Earth. The numbers are called from 7 million years BC to 4 million years BC. But anthropologists date the earliest remains of humanoid creatures to 6 million years BC. e. They stumbled upon the remains of the earliest australopithecines. Their settlement area covers not only the entire center African continent, but reaches the northern part. Their skeletons are also found in the east. That is, they felt great in the jungle and in the shroud. The main condition for their habitat was the presence of water nearby.

Modern anthropology distinguishes three of their species, distinguishing not only by the anatomical features of Australopithecus, but also by different dating.

1. Australopithecus anamensis. This is the earliest form of humanoid hominids. Supposedly lived 6 million years ago BC.
2. Australopithecus africanus. Represented by the sensational skeleton of a female Australopithecus. He is known to a wide audience as Lucy. Her death was clearly violent. Her remains date back to approximately 2 million years BC.
3. Australopithecus sediba. This is the most major representative these primates. The approximate time of its existence is stated to range from 2.5 to 1 million years BC.

Evolution and change in behavior of Australopithecus

Australopithecus felt equally at home both on the ground and on a tree. When night fell, he climbed a tree for safety, even while living on the ground. In addition, the trees gave him food. Therefore, he tried not to go far from them. The Australopithecus lifestyle changed. The changes affected not only his manner of movement, but also his methods of obtaining food. The need to lead a predominantly daytime lifestyle also changed their vision. The need for orientation at night disappeared, but as compensation there appeared color vision. The ability to distinguish colors made it possible to accurately find riper fruits, but they were not the main food of Australopithecus. Many scientists associate brain development with the appearance of a sufficient amount of protein in the diet. Where could he get it? Perhaps by hunting smaller representatives of the animal world. Although there is an opinion that the remains of the feast of other larger predators were the main food of Australopithecus.

Dietary diversity is the basis for behavior change

In those days they ruled large predators from the cat family: saber-tooths and lions. They were not allowed to be seen, so the need to adapt concerned not only the individual, but also the entire group. And this, in turn, inevitably forced us to improve interaction between all members. Only through organized actions was it possible to compete with other scavengers, as well as to be warned in case of danger. Even then, hyenas lived - the main competitor of Australopithecus for leftover food. It is difficult to fight them in open battle, so it was necessary to get to the feast site earlier.

Diversity in methods of movement (on the ground and trees) also provided diversity in obtaining the necessary food. This important point. Scientists, studying the structure of the teeth, jaws, and skull at the places of muscle attachment, conducting isotopic analysis of bones and the ratio of trace elements in them, came to the conclusion that these hominids were omnivorous. An individual was found among Australopithecines - sediba, who even ate tree bark, and this is not characteristic of any primates. The range of “dishes” also makes Australopithecines similar to modern humans, because humans are also omnivores. It is believed that this ability was laid down in us at an early stage of evolution. Australopithecines did not know how to store food for future use, so they needed to lead a nomadic lifestyle in constant search for food.

Tools

There is evidence that Australopithecus already knew how to use tools. These were bones, stones, sticks. Modern primates, and not only that, they also use available means to achieve various goals: get food, climb up, etc. This, of course, does not make them highly organized creatures. They simply use what is available to them in a given situation. Australopithecus also did not make tools. In behavior and habits, he differed little from his relatives - monkeys. If he used stones, it was for throwing or for splitting bones.

New skills are the basis for survival in the wild

The variety of food obtained through an upright gait, the use of primitive tools and the organization of the group are not all the skills. To answer the questions: what australopithecus could do that allowed them to adapt and continue the path of evolution, it is necessary to pay close attention to the upper limbs of these hominids. The main characteristic of Australopithecus gracile was that this distant ancestor of man, having lost most of the basic ape features, was already a purebred erect walker. And this gave him some advantages. For example, he could carry some kind of cargo over a short distance. By moving during daylight hours, they could be more likely to avoid encounters with hyenas, which lead predominantly night look life. It is argued that due to upright walking, Australopithecines had an advantage in finding food over hyenas, as they covered greater distances in a shorter period of time, but this is a rather controversial point of view.

Did Australopithecines have a sign language?

Scientists cannot answer the question about interaction within the herd, in particular whether group members had at least a primitive sign language. Although, observing primates, you can notice at first glance how clearly expressed their facial expressions are. And they can learn sign language. Therefore, we cannot exclude the possibility that distant human ancestors had the ability to transmit information not only by shouts, but also by gestures and facial expressions. The lifestyle of australopithecus differed little from that of apes, but a developed thumb, which not only helped to successfully grasp objects, a straight gait that freed up the hands - all these factors together could serve as the impetus for the development of sign language in their environment. There is a high probability that a Neanderthal spoke such a language. Australopithecus presumably too.

There was one more feature that set them apart from all other hominids - their method of copulation. They did this face to face, peering at their partner's facial expressions. And we must not forget about non-sound methods of communication within the team (gestures, postures, facial expressions). These are all also ways of transmitting information, an opportunity to express emotions and attitudes (fear, threat, submission, satisfaction, etc.).

Relationships within the herd: close dependence on each other

Perhaps the most striking characteristic of Australopithecus is the relationship with each other. If we take a troop of baboons as an example, we can see a strict hierarchy where everyone obeys the alpha male. This apparently was not observed in the case of Australopithecines. But this does not mean that everyone was left to their own devices. There was a kind of redistribution of roles. The main burden of food production was shifted to the males. Females with cubs were too vulnerable. The baby, when born, was practically helpless, and this required additional attention and time from the mother. It took not months, but years for the cub to learn to walk independently and somehow interact in a pack.

The famous and relatively well-preserved remains of Lucy indirectly indicate close ties within the pack. It is assumed that this “family” consisted of 13 individuals. There were adults and cubs there. They died together in a flood and, apparently, felt affection for each other.

Collective hunting, places to spend the night, carrying food to a safe place - everything that australopithecus could do required coherence, communication and the inevitable development of a sense of comradeship. In such conditions, one could only trust members of one's own pack. The rest of the world was hostile.

Cro-Magnons

These are already early representatives of modern people, who in terms of the structure of the bones of the skeleton and skull are practically no different from us. According to archaeological finds, they lived in Upper Paleolithic, that is, only about 10 thousand years ago. Between them and the Australopithecines, Pithecanthropus existed for some time, then Neanderthals. Each of these “pro-human” species had some progressive anatomical features, which moved them higher and higher on the evolutionary ladder. As we see, several million years must have passed for the hominoid Australopithecus to become Cro-Magnon man.

Alternative perspectives on evolutionary theory

IN Lately distrust of Darwin's theory of evolution about the origin of man from ape is increasingly being expressed. The point here is not even that supporters of creationism, believing that God created man in his own image and likeness from clay, do not consider monkeys as their ancestors. Proponents of the theory of evolution have too often discredited themselves and their theory by engaging in banal forgery, trying to pass off wishful thinking as reality. And the emergence of new data forces us to once again reconsider the theory of human origins. However, first things first.

In 1912, Charles Dawson made a “stunning” discovery (several bones and a skull) that “proved” the victory of the theory of evolution. True, there was one doubting dentist who claimed that the teeth primitive man slightly filed modern tools, but who will listen to such dirty lies? And “Piltdown Man” took pride of place in biology textbooks. That, it would seem, is all: an intermediate link between man and ape has finally been found. But in 1953, Kenneth Oakley, Joseph Weiner and Le Grosse Clark upset the public, and at the same time the UK. Collaboration representatives of the British University, which included a geologist, an anthropologist and a professor of anatomy, established a blatant fact of forgery. A test for fluoride was developed. He revealed that the human skull, monkey jaw and other bones were treated with chromium. This method gave the desired " ancient look" But even after such a sensation, you can still find the image of the “Piltdown Man” in textbooks.

This is not the only hoax. There were others too. American Museum of Natural History and its best representatives Henry Fairfield Osborn and Harold Cook in Nebraska discovered a molar tooth of a half-man, half-ape. Advertising is the engine of progress. This discovery, which was trumpeted by “the best and most independent American press,” was enough not only to paint a supposed portrait of a distant human ancestor, but even to win a lawsuit against creationists and others who disagree with “a real breakthrough in the field of evolution and the history of human origins.” . Then it was announced that this was a mistake. The tooth belongs to an extinct breed of pig. And then the “extinct” breed was found in Paraguay. The local pigs didn't even realize that for a long time were in the center of attention of the progressive world scientific community. And such funny embarrassments can be listed further.

In the evolutionary struggle of species, the baboons won among the Australopithecines

Often, not far from the remains of our supposed ancestors, the skulls of defeated baboons are found. It turns out that Australopithecines used tools not only for cracking nuts, but also for hunting their relatives. Here again inexplicable questions arise. Did our ancestors really come down from the tree, master a straight gait and better organization of their herd, based on a more improved communication ability, but in the end they lost to the baboons, who had already reached almost their peak evolutionary development. After all, these primates are alive to this day, and Australopithecines exist only in the form of fossil remains. This fact also raises many questions like: “why and how is this possible?” As the years passed, Cro-Magnons appeared. Australopithecines were later found much later to tell their amazing story.

Australopithecines are bipedal apes.

First finds. For the first time, the name Australopithecus appeared in the scientific literature in connection with the fossil finds of Raymond Dart; in 1924, he discovered in the dolomite deposits of the South-Eastern Transvaal, near the town of Taung, the skull of a 3-5 year old hominoid calf (“baby from Taung”). The skull bones had more “monkey” features with very minor manifestations of “human” features in the structure of the jaws. The internal capacity of the skull was also more in line with the average of most fossils and moderns. great apes– 380-450 cm 3.

Australopithecus afarensis - this is what R. Dart called his find, determining the age of Australopithecus at 1.7-2.0 million years. Later in a number of places South Africa in addition to the skull bones, the remains of the postcranial skeleton of australopithecines were found, from which it was possible to establish the ability for bipedal locomotion. Taxonomy of Australopithecines. Sometimes Australopithecines are separated into a separate family or classified as pongidae. In this case, they will be considered as true hominids. Anthropologists have different ideas about the number of species within the genus Homo. The position of Australopithecus in the family of hominids can be considered quite reasonable: firstly, some species of Australopithecus probably participated in the origin of later human ancestors; secondly, it is quite difficult to draw a line separating Australopithecus from the first “real” Homo.

Diversity of Australopithecines. To determine the physical type of Australopithecus, the main features can be identified: bipedality, small brain, large teeth with thick enamel (megadontia), small fangs, the absence of a pronounced set of features in the structure of the upper limbs associated with the production of artificial stone tools. At the same time, depending on the antiquity and biological specialization, morphological characteristics can vary quite significantly. The most recent discoveries have determined the chronological framework for the existence of all known types Australopithecus from 1 to 7 million years.
In general, Australopithecus can be divided into three main groups, different in morphology and relatively consistent in succession over time:

a) early australopithecus;

b) gracile australopithecus;

c) massive australopithecines.

Morphology of Australopithecus

A detailed study of the morphology of all currently known species of australopithecus makes it possible to understand the most complex problems of the formation of upright walking, enhanced development of the brain and the emergence of culture in subsequent hominids. Upright walking, as the oldest system of hominization, began to take shape, apparently, already in preaustralopithecine forms and can be seen quite well in the earliest australopithecines about 7 million years ago. To the greatest extent, upright walking affects the structure of the pelvic girdle:

The ilium expands anteriorly, its middle part strengthens;
The sacroiliac and hip joints are strengthened and brought closer together;
Elements of the muscular-ligamentous apparatus develop, fixing the extension of the leg in the hip and knee joints;
Australopithecines had a pelvic shape and hip joint that were generally similar to those of humans, and they had a permanent bipedal gait, which fundamentally distinguished them from all known fossil and modern apes.

The brain of Australopithecines in absolute size corresponded to variations in its mass in modern apes. Individual brain volume values ​​ranged from 300 to 570 cm 3 . There is no clear idea of ​​changes in the structure of the brain (for this, endocranes are used - internal casts of the brain). There is an opinion about the pongid type of brain structure of australopithecines.

At the same time, progressive changes are noted while maintaining a small volume of the brain itself: an increase in the parietal and temporal association zones. The structure of the skull and dental system of Australopithecines also has many ape-like features. The face was large with pronounced prognathism, there was no chin, the nose was flat and wide, the base of the skull was slightly curved, which indicated the primitiveness of the vocal apparatus. The stages of development of permanent teeth in Australopithecines were more similar to those of modern apes than to humans.

1. Gorilla; 2. Australopithecus; 3. Pithecanthropus; 4. Neanderthal; 5. Modern man.

Habitat of Autralopithecines. Environmental conditions, against the background of which the evolution of australopithecines took place for more than 6 million years, changed quite significantly. In Africa, the general cooling of that time affected a gradual decrease in humidity and changes in the landscape to more open and drier ones. The driest conditions known in Africa characterize the location of the massive Australopithecus in Peninge (Tanzania), where the landscape was an open grass savanna.

Australopithecus was a genus belonging to the family Hominidae. They can be described both as bipedal monkeys and as humans with the characteristics of monkeys. In other words, their structure included features characteristic of modern apes and humans. These ancient primates lived approximately 6-1 million years ago. The earliest remains found in the Republic of Chad date back to 6 million years ago. And the latest ones, discovered in South Africa, date back to 900 thousand years old. This shows that these ancient hominids lived on Earth for a huge period of time.

The habitat was extremely large. This is practically all of Central and Southern Africa, as well as certain areas of North Africa. The bulk of australopithecines were concentrated in the east and south of the continent. In the north, there are much fewer discovered remains, but this may only indicate a relatively poor study of this region, and not the actual distribution of these fossil primates. Taking into account the huge time interval, we can talk about dramatic changes in natural conditions, which contributed to the emergence of completely new species, unlike the old ones.

Currently, these ancient primates are divided into 3 groups, which successively changed each other. Moreover, each group is divided into several types.

Australopithecus anamensis or early Australopithecus. Lived 6-4 million years ago. His first remains were found in Kenya in 1965.

Australopithecus afarensis lived 4-2.5 million years ago. In 1974, a French expedition found the skeleton of a female specimen in Ethiopia. She was given the name Lucy. She lived 3.2 million years ago and died at the age of 25 or 30 years.

Australopithecus sediba lived 2.5-1 million years ago. These primates were distinguished by their massive forms and well-developed jaws. Initially, 2 skeletons were discovered in Malapa Cave in South Africa. This is a teenager and a female. A total of 130 fragments of these skeletons were found. The word "sediba" from the language of the Basotho people is translated as "well".

Australopithecus lived in tribal groups

Structural features of Australopithecus

The hominids in question were characterized by a low and wide pelvis, relatively long legs and relatively short arms. The feet did not have grasping functions; only the hands had them. The spine was vertical. That is, we can talk about a similar structure to a person. At the same time, the height was small and varied from 120 to 150 cm with a slender build and weight of 30-55 kg.

The sizes of females and males differed significantly. The stronger sex was almost 50% larger than the weaker sex. In humans, this difference is no more than 15%. The brain volume was 400-550 cubic meters. cm. In humans, the corresponding value is 1200-1500 cubic meters. see Regarding the structure gray matter, then it corresponded to the structure of a chimpanzee.

At a late stage of its development, Australopithecus hunted ungulates

Behavioral Traits

Australopithecines lived in savannas and tropical forests near lakes and rivers. At the same time, it cannot be argued that the most ancient primates ignored territories remote from large bodies of water. It’s just that their remains are best preserved in such places. The diet consisted mainly of plant foods. In later times, hunting of ungulates was practiced.

These ancient ancestors people existed in groups and led a nomadic lifestyle, moving across the hot continent in search of food. It is difficult to say whether they made perfect tools or not. Their hands resembled those of humans, but the fingers were narrower and more curved. It is known that in South Africa 1.5 million years ago bone fragments were used to catch termites that lived in termite mounds. However, modern monkeys also use stones and bones to obtain food.

Australopithecus head in the museum

Were Australopithecines the direct ancestors of humans?

When talking about Australopithecus, we can assume that they were the direct ancestors of modern people, based on the fact that a person is less different from a fossil hominid than a gorilla or chimpanzee. Here you can take as a basis the structure of the jaws, hands, feet, as well as upright walking, which largely contributed to the development of intelligence.

Here you should know that the first signs of upright walking appeared 6 million years ago in extinct species of monkeys. That is, it was the era when the radical formation of the very first ancestors of modern people began. At that time, many appeared in Africa open spaces, which began to be mastered by monkeys. And outside the trees it is much more efficient to move not on 4, but on 2 limbs.

At the same time, it can be assumed that Australopithecines were not the direct ancestors of humans at all, but represented only a dead-end branch of evolutionary development. This assumption can neither be confirmed nor refuted, since science has not yet collected enough data on these and other ancient fossil hominids.

Alexey Starikov

Origin, biology and behavior

Primates close to australopithecines were common in the Anterior, Southern and South-East Asia. Australopithecus lived during the Pliocene from about 4 million years ago until less than a million years ago. The time scale clearly shows 3 long eras of the main species, approximately a million years per species. Most Australopithecus species were omnivores, but there were subspecies that specialized in plant foods. The ancestor of the main species was most likely the anamensis species, and the first main species known to this moment became the species afarensis, which existed for approximately 1 million years. Apparently, these creatures were nothing more than monkeys, walking humanly on two legs, although hunched over. Perhaps in the end they knew how to use available stones to crack, for example, nuts. It is believed that afarensis eventually split into two subspecies: the first branch went towards humanization and homo habilis, the second continued to improve in australopithecus, forming the new kind africanus. Africanus had slightly less developed limbs than afarensis, but they learned to use available stones, sticks, and sharp bone fragments, and, in turn, another million years later they formed two new higher and last known subspecies of australopithecus boisei and robustus, which existed until 900 thousand years BC. e. and could already independently make the simplest bone and wooden tools. Despite this, most australopithecines were part of the food chain of more progressive people who overtook them in development along other branches of evolution, and with whom they overlapped in time, although the duration of coexistence indicates that there were also periods of peaceful coexistence.

It is also possible that Australopithecines were not the direct ancestors of humans, but represented a dead-end branch of evolution. Such conclusions are prompted, in particular, by recent discoveries of Sahelanthropus, an even more ancient ape, which was more similar to Homo erectus than Australopithecus. In 2008, a new species of Australopithecus was discovered, A. sediba, who lived in Africa less than two million years ago. Although for some morphological characteristics it is closer to people than the more ancient species of Australopithecus, which gave grounds to its discoverers to declare it a transitional form from Australopithecus to people; at the same time, apparently, the first representatives of the genus already existed Homo, such as Homo Rudolfis, which excludes the possibility that this species of australopithecus could be the ancestor of modern humans.

Most species of australopithecus used tools no more than modern apes. Chimpanzees and gorillas are known to be able to crack nuts with stones, use sticks to extract termites, and use clubs for hunting. How often Australopithecines hunted is a controversial issue, as their fossil remains are rarely associated with the remains of killed animals.

see also

Notes

Links

• Australopithecines on the Evolution of Man website
• Australopithecus on the portal Anthropogenesis.ru

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what "Australopithecus" is in other dictionaries:

Modern encyclopedia

Australopithecus- (from Latin australis southern and Greek pithekos monkey), a genus of higher bipedal apes that lived mainly in East and Southern Africa from 4 to 1 million years ago. Australopithecus had a small body (length on average 120... Illustrated encyclopedic Dictionary

- (from Latin australis southern and Greek pithekos monkey) the sought-after higher great apes walking on two legs. There are numerous finds of skeletal remains in the south and east of Africa (zinjanthropus, etc.). Lived approx. 3 million years ago... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Australopithecus- (australopithecines), the highest anthropoid primates who stood at the origins of evolution. For the first time the remains, called. A. african (Australopithecus africanus), or South African monkey, were found in the Taunga South region. Africa in 1924. Later similar... ... The World History

- (from Latin australis southern and Greek píthēkos monkey), fossil higher apes that walked on two legs. There are numerous finds of skeletal remains in southern and eastern Africa (zinjanthropus, etc.). Lived 4 1 million years ago. * * * … encyclopedic Dictionary

The oldest hominids are usually considered Australopithecus(Australopithecinae). It was very peculiar group, since they can equally accurately be described as both bipedal monkeys and monkey-headed people. The complexity of the position of australopithecines among primates lies in the fact that their structure mosaically combines features characteristic of both modern apes and humans. How to treat this combination of signs?

Skull of the oldest australopithecus - Sahelanthropus tschadensis. 6-7 million years ago
The skull was nicknamed "Tumai".
Source: http://hominin.net/specimens/tm-266-01-060-1/

The earliest remains of australopithecines, found in Toros Menalla (Republic of Chad), date back to 6-7 million years ago. The latest dating was determined for the finds of massive australopithecines in Swartkrans (South Africa) - 900 thousand years ago; This is the time of existence of much more advanced forms of hominids. Australopithecines are known from almost the entire specified period of time. Thus, the period of existence of the Australopithecus group is extremely long.

The area of ​​settlement of Australopithecines is also very large: all of Africa south of the Sahara and, possibly, some territories to the north. As far as is known, Australopithecines never left Africa. Finds from outside this continent sometimes attributed to Australopithecus (Tel Ubeidia from Israel, Meganthropus 1941 and Mojokerto from Java) are in all cases extremely fragmentary and therefore controversial. Within Africa, Australopithecus sites are concentrated in two main areas: East Africa(Tanzania, Kenya, Ethiopia) and South Africa. Some finds were also made in North Africa; Perhaps their small number is due more to the burial conditions or poor knowledge of the region, rather than to the actual distribution of australopithecines. It is clear that within such a wide time and geographical framework natural conditions changed more than once, which led to the emergence of new species and genera.

AL 822-1 - skull of a female Australopithecus afarensis (australopithecus gracile).
Source: William H. Kimbel and Yoel Rak. The cranial base of Australopithecus afarensis: new insights from the female skull.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 2010 365, 3365-3376

Australopithecus can be divided into three main groups, which have replaced each other relatively consistently over time; each of them contains several species:

Early Australopithecus– existed from 7 to 4 million years ago, had the most primitive structure. There are several genera and species of early australopithecines.

Gracile Australopithecus– existed from 4 to 2.5 million years ago, had relatively small sizes and moderate proportions. Usually there is one genus Australopithecus with several types.

Massive Australopithecus– existed from 2.5 to 1 million years ago, they were very massively built specialized forms with extremely developed jaws, small front and huge back teeth. Massive Australopithecines are recognized as an independent genus Paranthropus with three types.

There are many views regarding their detailed taxonomy; The fact of species differences at least between gracile and massive australopithecines can be considered firmly established. The taxonomic relationships within these groups, even between the synchronous groups of eastern and southern Africa, are unclear.

The simultaneous coexistence of different “good” species of australopithecines in the same territory has not been firmly proven for any location, although many assumptions have been put forward in this regard. However, the coexistence of australopithecus with representatives of the “euhominids” (or “early Homo") is beyond doubt, at least for East Africa.