Does an Arched Foot Bone Prove That Lucy Loved to Walk?

By Andrew Moseman | February 10, 2011 6:03 pm


Lucy loved the land, new research suggests. A study in this week’s edition of the journal Science puts forth a foot bone from the early hominid Australopithecus afarensis (Lucy’s kind) as evidence that this species was built for walking—meaning human ancestors could have been striding around on ground level for most of their lives by 3.2 million years ago.

Scientists already knew that A. afarensis could walk on two feet but were unsure whether the creatures climbed and grasped tree branches as well, much like their own ancestor species and modern nonhuman apes. The fourth metatarsal … shows that A. afarensis moved around more like modern humans. “Now that we know Lucy and her relatives had arches in their feet, this affects much of what we know about them, from where they lived to what they ate and how they avoided predators,” said Carol Ward. [The Guardian]

The bone in question comes from Ethiopia, home to many significant hominid finds. And though it is just a small sample, that arched shape in the foot bone suggests Australopithecus had rigid feet, and may not have been much better at climbing trees than you or I.

Arches were an important part of our evolution into humans, because they make climbing trees much harder. The arches on the inside of the foot, nearer to the big toe, serve as a shock absorber when we plant our feet back on the ground. All other living primates have feet made for grasping and bending to hang onto tree branches and their young, more like our hands than our feet. [LiveScience]

For some anthropologists, the metatarsal finally seals the deal on Australopithecus‘ status as a land-lover. Last year researchers announced the finding of an Australopithecus individual much larger than Lucy, and dating back 3.6 million years. They dubbed him Big Man. The shape of his legs, chest, and back suggested upright walking to his discoverers.

“There were far too many highly detailed adaptations in every part of the A. afarensis skeleton for upright walking and exclusive ground travel not to have emerged,” remarks anthropologist Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University in Ohio, who studied Big Man’s remains. [Science News]

Plenty of anthropologists didn’t believe that Big Man clinched the case on Australopithecus’s love of walking, however, and the new find hasn’t convinced everyone either. Chris Stringer of the London Natural History Museum, for example, points out that some of the species’s upper-body parts seem adapted to climbing, such as their curved arm bones.

“If you are on the ground all the time, you need to find shelter at night and you are in a position to move out into open countryside, which has implications for new resources — scavenging and meat-eating, for example. “If the Australopithecines [the broader family of Australopithecus] were on that road, they were only at the very, very beginning of it.” [BBC News]

Related Content:
Not Exactly Rocket Science: Human ancestors carved meat with stone tools almost a million years earlier than expected
80beats: Scientist Smackdown: Are Bone Scratches Evidence of Tool Use by Human Ancestors?
80beats: Lucy’s Species May Have Used Stone Tools 3.4 Million Years Ago
80beats: Lucy’s New Relative, “Big Man,” May Push Back the Origin of Walking
DISCOVER: How Loyal Was Lucy?

Image: Kimberly A. Congdon / Carol Ward / Elizabeth Harman / Science

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Human Origins, Top Posts
  • http://tispaquin.blogspot.com Douglas Watts

    Plenty of contemporary humans are more physically adept in trees than on the ground. Especially in Mindinao. Since when has “ground walking” been accepted as a proxy for evolution? It’s not.

  • scott

    Also…I see a trend towards a lazy, obese evolution of the human race – that loves sitting and lounging, flipping channels and crunching sugary salty things (made from subsidized corn and soy). If readily available, people do not want to walk, or bike, or swing through trees to get around…they want to sit in their memory foam bucket seats with giant cup holders and glide into AppleBee’s for the chicken fried steak….they dont want bike or foot paths to it….if they did, they would be there. Texans dont even want high speed rail…requires too much walking! More people walk in LA…

    Maybe “nature/evolution” thinks thats the ultimate…a species that can sit and peacefully graze on colorfully packaged foods (like fruit, the biological bribe) and zoom around in safety and comfort with abundant yummy hydrocrabons to add to their hoard? But..does that make the species happy…are sedentary and obese people happy…do they want to be this way, why does this trend continue with all the diet books and shows…and humans gravitate towards that lifestyle yet try to fight it.

  • Christina Viering

    She liked to walk.

  • Murel

    What makes them think that this is not human? The bones are too old for DNA testing. The full skeleton was not found.

    As far as big man is concerned there is a video of a large ape in a zoo walking on rear legs on Utube. So what is the big deal and who’s to say apes or monkeys did not have a species or two which did walk on the rear legs?

    Gee, there are plenty of small dwarf humans walking around. When these bones are dug up a thousand years from now will they also make them out to be monkeys or apes?

    To much speckulation going on.

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

80beats

80beats is DISCOVER's news aggregator, weaving together the choicest tidbits from the best articles covering the day's most compelling topics.
ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »