<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schroeder, Lauren</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Scott, Jill E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Garvin, Heather M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Laird, Myra F.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dembo, Mana</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Radovcic, Davorka</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Berger, Lee R.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">de Ruiter, Darryl J.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ackermann, Rebecca R.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Skull diversity in the Homo lineage and the relative position of Homo naledi</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Human Evolution</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Human Evolution</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cranial and mandibular variation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dinaledi hominins</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Genus Homo</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geometric morphometrics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Homo erectus</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rising Star</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8/2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248416301361</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">97</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17 - 26 </style></pages><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">0047-2484</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The discovery of &lt;em&gt;Homo naledi&lt;/em&gt; has expanded the range of phenotypic variation in &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt;, leading to new questions surrounding the mosaic nature of morphological evolution. Though currently undated, its unique morphological pattern and possible phylogenetic relationships to other hominin taxa suggest a complex evolutionary scenario. Here, we perform geometric morphometric analyses on &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; cranial and mandibular remains to investigate its morphological relationship with species of &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Australopithecus&lt;/em&gt;. We use Generalized Procrustes analysis to place &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; within the pattern of known hominin skull diversity, distributions of Procrustes distances among individuals to compare &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Homo erectus&lt;/em&gt;, and neighbor joining trees to investigate the potential phenetic relationships between groups. Our goal is to address a set of hypotheses relating to the uniqueness of &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt;, its affinity with &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;erectus&lt;/em&gt;, and the age of the fossils based on skull morphology. Our results indicate that, cranially, &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; aligns with members of the genus &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt;, with closest affiliations to &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;erectus&lt;/em&gt;. The mandibular results are less clear; &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; closely associates with a number of taxa, including some australopiths. However, results also show that although &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; shares similarities with &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;erectus&lt;/em&gt;, some distances from this taxon – especially small-brained members of this taxon – are extreme. The neighbor joining trees place &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; firmly within &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt;. The trees based on cranial morphology again indicate a close relationship between &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;erectus&lt;/em&gt;, whereas the mandibular tree places &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt; closer to basal &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt;, suggesting a deeper antiquity. Altogether, these results emphasize the unique combination of features (&lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;erectus&lt;/em&gt;-like cranium, less derived mandible) defining &lt;em&gt;H.&amp;nbsp;naledi&lt;/em&gt;. Our results also highlight the variability within &lt;em&gt;Homo&lt;/em&gt;, calling for a greater focus on the cause of this variability, and emphasizing the importance of using the total morphological package for species diagnoses.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record></records></xml>