Morotopithecus

• Moroto, Uganda

Morotopithecus bishopi is an extinct species of primates that occurred during the early Miocene in East Africa. In Uganda, near the town of Moroto, near the border with Kenya discovered fossils that have been made to this genus, derived in 1997 published first description of genus and species, according to layers of sediment that are at least 20.6 million years old. The validity of the designation of the finds and their reconstruction are controversial because they are very similar with Afropithecus turkanensis was attributed.

Naming

The name is derived from the locality Morotopithecus bishopi in the Ugandan town of Moroto and from the Greek word πίθηκος ( ancient Greek pronounced píthēkos: "Monkey "). The epithet bishopi refers to the deceased at the age of 45 years, British geologist Walter William (Bill) Bishop ( 1921-1966 ). WW Bishop worked in the late 1950s for the Uganda Geological Survey from 1962 to 1965 as curator of the Uganda Museum in Kampala and published in 1962 the first scientific description of the reference of Miocene fossils from Moroto.

The type specimen

As holotype was in the original description by Daniel L. Gebo et al. reported a broken, but almost completely preserved and almost completely dentate maxilla probably a male individual ( archive number UMP 62-11 ), which is kept in the Uganda Museum of Paleontology. Including several jaw fragments, a maxillary canine tooth, several vertebrae fragments, some fragments of the thigh bone and a shoulder blade fragment were named in the original description as paratypes.

Morotopithecus bishopi is also the type species and is currently the only species of the genus Morotopithecus.

Fund Description

Finds of anthropoids ( Hominoidea ) leading from the fossil layer Moroto II were first described in 1963 and 1964 by Walter William Bishop and then called the Proconsul major. Other authors had assigned the fossils of the genus Afropithecus. Further excavations in 1994 and 1995 brought to light new findings that allowed additional meaningful information concerning taxonomy, phylogeny and morphology of human -like fossils from Moroto loud first description of Morotopithecus bishopi.

In addition, the dating of the two layers Fund Moroto Moroto I and II had been improved. 1969 was calculated for the age using the potassium -argon dating of 12.5 ± 0.4 and 14.3 ± 0.3 million years. 1981 age 14.5 to 16.5 in 1986 and was finally published by 17.5 million years based on biostratigraphic analyzes. The first description of Morotopithecus published in 1997 called on the other hand - having regard to the 39Ar - 40Ar method - an age of 20.61 ± 0.05 million years for Moroto I and at least 20 million years for Moroto II

The distinguishing features of the genera Proconsul and Afropithecus both features of the teeth and the facial bones were reported. Nevertheless, both the face and the dentition on similarities with other original apes, while the lower spine containing echoes of today living apes. The description of the type also was based on the first 1994/95 discovered fossil MUZM 80 ( MUZM = Makerere University Zoology Museum ), from which have been preserved, among other parts of two femurs, whose original length was estimated to be 270 millimeters. From this and from the upper jaw bone of the holotype was deduced that the males in life weighed around 40 to 50 kg, which is approximately equal to the body weight of today's chimpanzees, and could reach a height of 120 to 150 cm.

From the construction of the shoulder bone and the femur was concluded that these animals shimmy on trees as well as could stand upright in them. From the construction of the teeth was deduced that the animals lived on vegetable food.

For all of these features has been closed in the first description that Morotopithecus the sister group of the apes fancy, that is, stand closer to them than other related human -like of the Miocene as Graecopithecus, Otavipithecus, Afropithecus and Kenyapithecus. This assessment but was already criticized in 1997 as going too far, since it is based on only two skeletons, one of which was also very incomplete. In this small number of artefacts in 2002 reiterated in an aggregated view. 2002 was also argued that the custom built in the 1960s reconstruction of the holotype declared maxilla was flawed. Among other things, the snout in the original condition was significantly longer than in the reconstruction of the fossil, and the orientation of the canines had to be corrected. Considering these objections Morotopithecus could also be interpreted as merely local variant of Afropithecus turkanensis.