It full differential diagnosis depends upon cranial, dental care and you may postcranial characters. I checked-out unique specimens for most variety, except where indicated about ‘Product and you will methods’; as soon as we used most other offer to own anatomical findings we suggest which. A summary of faculties of H. naledi in comparison to most other varieties is displayed inside Secondary document 2parative cranial and you can mandibular strategies is actually showed inside Table 1, and comparative dental care methods are supplied into the Table dos.
The mandible out of H
Unless of course otherwise conveyed specifications try defined as in the Wood (1991). Chord distances are located in mm. Data to own H. naledi accumulated away from new fossils otherwise laser beam scans because of the DJdeR and you can HMG; comparative investigation accumulated by the DJdeR towards the brand-new fossils and you can casts and you may supplemented by investigation out-of Wood (1991).
The new hypodigms useful almost every other types are intricate throughout the ‘Information and you will methods’
The cranium of H. naledi doesn’t always have the fresh really-create crest habits that define Australopithecus garhi (Asfaw et al., 1999) and types of new genus Paranthropus, neither the newest derived face morphology found in the latter genus. naledi was rather more gracile as opposed to those of Paranthropus. No matter if maxillary and you can mandibular incisors and you can pets away from H. naledi overlap in proportions which have the ones from Paranthropus, the post-your dog teeth is actually notably smaller than that from Paranthropus and Bien au. garhi, that have mandibular molars which might be buccolingually narrow.
H. naledi differs from Australopithecus afarensis and you will Australopithecus africanus when you look at the with a beneficial pentagonal-formed cranial vault when you look at the rear look at, sagittal keeling, widely spread temporary outlines, an enthusiastic angular torus, a-deep and you will thin digastric fossa, an external occipital protuberance, an enthusiastic anteriorly arranged root of the zygomatic means of the latest maxilla, an over-all palate, and you can a little canine jugum not having prior pillars. New prior and you will horizontal vault regarding H. naledi differs from Bien au. afarensis and you will Bien au. africanus in the demonstrating just limited article-orbital constraint, front bossing, a highly-arranged supraorbital torus having a highly-laid out supratoral sulcus, temporal traces which can be added to new posterior instead of the superior aspect of the supraorbital torus, a-root of zygomatic process of the fresh temporal that is tilted downward everything 30° according to the newest Frankfort Lateral (FH) and you may and therefore initiate the lateral expansion over the mandibular fossa instead than the EAM, a great mandibular fossa that’s positioned medial with the wall surface from the newest temporal squame, a tiny postglenoid procedure that associations this new tympanic, a coronally oriented petrous, and a smaller than average obliquely based EAM. The newest H. naledi mandible exhibits a more gracile symphysis and you can corpus, a vertically inclined symphysis, hook mandibular incurvation delineating a faint intellectual trigon, and you can an excellent steeply inclined posterior face of mandibular symphysis instead of an article incisive planum. New incisors out of H. naledi overlap in proportions which includes specimens off Bien au. africanus, although dogs and article-your dog dentition is significantly faster, that have seemingly thin buccolingual proportions of brand new mandibular molars. Brand new maxillary I step 1 lacks an average lingual ridge and you may displays a standard and you can uninflated lingual cervical stature, the newest lingual mesial and you may distal limited ridges do not merge to the brand new cervical stature from the maxillary I dos , the newest mandibular your dog showcases just a deep failing lingual average ridge and you can a broad and uninflated lingual cervical prominence, and also the buccal grooves to the maxillary premolars are only weakly created. H. naledi displays a smaller than average isolated Carabelli’s feature in the maxillary molars, unlike the greater number of preferred and you can thorough Carabelli’s ability regarding Australopithecus. Furthermore, the H. naledi mandibular molars has actually small, mesiobuccally minimal protostylids which do not intersect the buccal groove, different on generally speaking expanded, centrally arranged protostylids that intersect new buccal groove in the Australopithecus.