Omo remains
As Omo 1 and Omo 2 obtained in two fragments of fossils of the genus are called Homo. They were recovered in 1967 as part of a led by Richard Leakey in the valley of the Omo River in southern Ethiopia excavation and 1969 first described scientifically. From Omo 1 remained parts of the skull and the bones get below the skull of a young adult, at Omo 2 is the largely preserved skullcap of an older adult. Another, less preserved partial skull roof - Omo 3 - is largely similar to the fossil Omo 1.Your of custody is the National Museum of Ethiopia in Addis Ababa.
The fossils come from two adjacent excavation sites. They were initially dated using the uranium -thorium dating to an age of about 130,000 years. At the same time they are disclosed (Homo sapiens) by Richard Leakey as the remains of anatomically modern humans, with Omo 2 was interpreted as " archaic " compared with Omo 1 (compare archaic Homo sapiens). The temporal position of the fossil record, however, long remained controversial. However, new datings of Fund film ( "Member I" ) by the 39Ar - 40Ar method indicate a higher age 190000-200000 years. If this dating endure these fossils were the hitherto oldest known evidence of Homo sapiens.
However, it was argued that the skull - more precisely, derived in particular from the elaborate reconstruction of the skull anatomical features - not enough have much in common with Homo sapiens, but rather with the Homo sapiens temporally preceding Chrono species Homo erectus. In 1991, for example, refer to a more pronounced anatomical correspondence of Omo 2 with the Fossil Arago XXI ( "Man of Tautavel "); ambiguity in assigning putative "transitional forms ", however, is not unusual. Donald Johanson wrote in 2006: " The pieces are anatomically undoubtedly modern, and with their presumed old age, they were very quick to crucial pieces of evidence for those who claim that Homo sapiens developed first in Africa and later the rest of the world populated " (Out - of-Africa theory ).
The numerous fragments of the skull of Omo 1 are mainly from the rear and the side right side of the skull roof. Fragments of the forehead, the facial skull and the lower jaw of Omo 1 have been handed down, but they are usually separated from each other due to lack of spacers. From the skeleton below the head, among other parts of the shoulder girdle, several well-preserved vertebrae, fragments of ribs and pelvis, and some bones of the arms and legs remained.
The reconstruction of the cranial contents of Omo 1 is indicative of a brain volume of 1435 cm3. As clearly state the long, curved parietal bones of the skull and the short broad face are referred to with a high forehead. The upper jaw has a modern U-shaped palate, the mandible chin, and two preserved teeth are in shape and size also those of Homo sapiens similar.
Omo 2 is a highly fragmented, but largely preserved skullcap ( calvaria ), the posterior and lateral parts are missing. The reconstruction of the cranial contents can also connect to a brain volume of 1400 cm3. " The Calvary Omo 2, which in some cases strikingly similar in some details Kabwe 1 is classified as a late - sapiens archaic H.; but they should on the other hand have also been typical characteristic attributes of anatomically modern humans, such as for H. sapiens typical separation of the superciliary arches ( arcus superciliary ) and the supraorbital triangle ( trigonum supraorbital ). " Donald Johanson pointed 2008 out Omo 2 was much stronger built than Omo 1 and have different muscle attachments and a pronounced occipital bar, also the forehead is receding. However, Omo have 2 long curved parietal bones and the skull roof is wider at the top than at the base and pondered, "Maybe they do not both come from the same population. "