| Literature DB >> 32103129 |
Thomas A Püschel1, Jordi Marcé-Nogué2,3, Andrew T Chamberlain4, Alaster Yoxall5, William I Sellers4.
Abstract
Inferring the locomotor behaviour of the last common ancestor (LCA) of humans and African apes is still a divisive issue. An African great-ape-like ancestor using knuckle-walking is still the most parsimonious hypothesis for the LCA, despite diverse conflicting lines of evidence. Crucial to this hypothesis is the role of the centrale in the hominoid wrist, since the fusion of this bone with the scaphoid is among the clearest morphological synapomorphies of African apes and hominins. However, the exact functional significance of this fusion remains unclear. We address this question by carrying out finite element simulations of the hominoid wrist during knuckle-walking by virtually generating fused and unfused morphologies in a sample of hominoids. Finite element analysis was applied to test the hypothesis that a fused scaphoid-centrale better withstands the loads derived from knuckle-walking. The results show that fused morphologies display lower stress values, hence supporting a biomechanical explanation for the fusion as a functional adaptation for knuckle-walking. This functional interpretation for the fusion contrasts with the current inferred positional behaviour of the earliest hominins, thus suggesting that this morphology was probably retained from an LCA that exhibited knuckle-walking as part of its locomotor repertoire and that was probably later exapted for other functions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32103129 PMCID: PMC7044280 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-60590-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Biomechanical problem under analysis displayed using the bones from the left limb of a Pan troglodytes specimen (S: scaphoid; C: capitate; Ce: centrale. (A) Depicts the position of the bones under analysis during a standing scenario, (B) shows a fused model and (C) displays a non-fused model (i.e., the scaphoid and centrale are simulated as separated bones). Please note that view of the carpal bones was defined according to the human anatomical standard position.
Body mass and applied loads for the individuals under analysis.
| Model | Body mass [Kg] | Total load [N] |
|---|---|---|
| 72.1 | 141.41 | |
| 170.4 | 334.21 | |
| 59.7 | 117.09 | |
| 77.9 | 152.79 | |
| 9.5 | 18.63 |
Figure 2von Mises stress distribution of the analysed sample for both the fused and non-fused models. For simplicity, views were defined according to the human anatomical standard position.
Figure 3Boxplots of the stress distribution for both the fused and non-fused morphologies for all the species under analysis. The summary statistics used to create the boxplot are the median of the data (line), the lower (25%) and upper quartiles (75%) (box limits) and the minimum and maximum values (whiskers).