Sahelanthropus tchadensis represents one of the oldest species known in the human family tree. The species did live sometime between 6 and 7 million years ago in the context of West-Central Africa, specifically Chad. In other instances, the species is Toumaï, which refers to the Hope of Life. In its genus name, there are two words. First is ‘The Sahel,’ which relates to the area of Africa close to the southern Sahara associated with the presence of the fossils. Second, there is ‘anthropus,’ which refers to the Greek concept of man. The combined name is a translation of the ‘Sahel man from Chad.’ The species did exist in the late Miocene period. It is the first possible early hominid ancestor. The scientific name for the species is S. tchadensis. The image below reflects the fossil specimen (Smithsonian Institution, 2020).
Scientists date the remains to be 6-7 million years old, which is an important date because it represents the period that they believe in serving the time for the divergence of human life from the ape-line. Critically, the site did not have volcanic ash layers, thus, not suited to the utilization of the radiometric dating technique leading to the use of the faunal analysis as a viable option. The method was possible because of the presence of many of the fossil animals at the site that was identical to the specimens identified through radiometric dating in other locations. Between July 2001 and March 2002, Michel Brunet led a team that would make this ideal discovery of the six fossils before announcing the new species in 2002 (Brunet et al., 2004). In their findings, the team would document the presence of the numerous jaw pieces, some teach, and relatively complete, but small cranium.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The species tend to have diverse critical traits. As evident in the above image, the fossil of the species has a specific skull with intriguing anatomical characteristics flat face in comparison to the modern-day chimp that has flat faces biped with the intelligence capability (Wayman, 2012). The species also had heavy brow ridges over eyes as the chimp with the heavy thick muscles to anchor, as well as for the chewing activities (Dorey, 2019). Another critical characteristic is the brain. In this species, there is the lack of the cranial remains limiting the effectiveness in estimation (Dorey, 2019). Despite this, the brain size is approximated at about 320-380cc, which is quite like that of the chimpanzee. In terms of body size, the scientists could not estimate the size and shape effectively because of the lack of skeletal remains. Still, there is the common notion that the species is probably like the size of the contemporary chimpanzee.
On the jaws and teeth, the species had relatively small canine, as well as incisor teeth. The organization is highly like the case of Ardipithecus apart from the few minor features (Dorey, 2019). The thickness of the tooth enamel reflects the intermediate existence between the living apes and australopithecines. The species also has a narrow u-shaped dental arch, as well as the two roots for the upper and the lower premolars. The species did not have a lower jaw diastema, which is the gap between the premolars and the canines.
Additionally, the cheek teeth are also similar in size to the Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus afarensis. As evident in the previous image, the rear of the skull tends to resemble the ape’s appearance. Besides, the position of the foramen magnus represents bipedal amid controversial perceptions by some experts on this issue or its interpretation. The scars on the fossilized bones from the neck muscles indicate that the species was a quadruped, while others believe that the neck muscles attached at the back of the neck are a representation of the bipeds (Dorey, 2019). Relatively, the species did have a flat face in comparison to the living apes, but the scientists tend to identify a more protruding look compared to modern human beings.
On the other hand, there is also the critical characteristic in the relatively flat nasal area, as well as the narrow, but law base for the intriguing skull. Other features of the skull did relate to the broader upper facial area in comparison to the short lower face, large canine fossa, ape-like widely-shaped eye sockets, and the marked postorbital constriction (Dorey, 2019). The species also had a small sagittal crest or large nuchal crest on the males. The scientists did not find any evidence associated with the postcranial material determined beyond doubt as an element of this species in terms of limbs.
It is also valuable to consider assessing the lifestyle and environment and diet (Dorey, 2019). The scientists did not document any substantial evidence of the cultural attributes. Despite this, it is possible to believe that this species might have optimized the simple tools as the cases of the modern chimpanzees such as the unmodified stones or sticks, as well as other plant materials, which they could shape easily in their daily activities (Dorey, 2019). Besides, in terms of the environment, the scientists found the fossils to exist in areas that did incorporate forests, lakes, rivers, and wooded savanna. Researchers have also used different approaches to ensure that they locate thousands of vertebrate fossils at the site, including crocodiles, hippopotamus, monkeys, antelopes, giraffes, fish, and wild boar. The researchers presume that the species was likely a plant-eater based on the dental formulation and the environmental context depicting the diet for the species.
References
Brunet, M., et al, D. (2004). Sahelanthropus tchadensis: the facts. South African journal of science , 100 (9-10), 443-446.
Dorey F., (2019). “Sahelanthropus tchadensis,” Australian Museum. https://australian.museum/learn/science/human-evolution/sahelanthropus-tchadensis/
Smithsonian Institution, (2020). What does it mean to be human? Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History . https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/sahelanthropus-tchadensis
Wayman E., (2012). “Sahelanthropus tchadensis: Ten Years after the Discovery,” Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/sahelanthropus-tchadensis-ten-years-after-the-disocvery-2449553/
