We are descended from bark chewers, 2 million-year-old fossil reveals

By analyzing teeth and carbon remains from isotopes from fossil specimen Australopithecus sediba, German scientists discovered early humanity chewed bark.

Lee Berger
The teeth of what may be humanity's immediate ancestor, Australopithecus sediba (skull from a male juvenile shown here), revealed the species likely lived off a woodland diet rather than the grasses of an open savanna.

The immediate ancestor of the human lineage may have lived off a woodland diet of leaves, fruits and bark instead of a menu based on the open savanna as other extinct relatives of humanity did, researchers say.

Food was a major environmental force that shaped the human lineage – perhaps influencing key moments such as when humans' ancestors started walking upright – and these new findings help reveal the complex evolutionary paths these ancestors took in response to the world around them, the scientists add.

The findings are based on fossils of the extinct hominin Australopithecus sediba that were accidentally discovered in 2008 by the 9-year-old son of a scientist in the remains of a cave in South Africa. The fossils were 2 million years old.

A hominin is the lineage that includes humans and their relatives after they split from those of chimpanzees.  Australopithecus means "southern ape" and is a group that includes the iconic fossil Lucy, while sediba means "wellspring" in the South African language Sotho. This hominin's mix of human and primitive traits has made a strong case for it being the immediate ancestor of the human lineage. [Image Gallery: Our Closest Human Ancestor]

Chimpanzees, humans' closest living relatives, prefer fruits and leaves even when grasses are abundant. By contrast, extinct species of humans and australopiths apparently preferred diets richer in grasses or grass-eating animals.

Scientists can gauge what our ancient relatives might have eaten by looking at their teeth, particularly the marks and remnants left on them by food. They also can look at the carbon isotopes making up fossils; the grasses that dominate savannas engage a kind of photosynthesis that involves both normal carbon-12 and heavier carbon-13, while trees and shrubs rely on a kind of photosynthesis that prefers carbon-12.

By analyzing two fossil specimens, researchers found that the diet of Au. sediba apparently differed substantially from those of most other extinct species of hominins studied to date.

Carbon isotopes from the remains suggest Au. sediba ate nearly completely woodland diets, comparable to forest specialists such as giraffes. In addition, tiny fragments of a diverse range of plant tissues, including bark and wood, were found in the teeth of one of the individuals.

"There is more variety in our past than we expected," said researcher Amanda Henry, a paleoanthropologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. "We're seeing more variation among the diets and behaviors of early hominins than we'd previously seen."

The findings suggest "there wasn't a single, straight line from an early, primitive hominin to us," Henry told LiveScience. "Many of our ancestors and relatives branched out, tried new things and generally worked at doing what was best in their environment at that particular time."

Henry and her colleagues are now looking for remnants of food stuck in the teeth of other extinct hominins. They detailed their findings online June 27 in the journal Nature.

Follow LiveScience on Twitter @livescience. We're also on Facebook & Google+.

Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.