Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Archaeolemuridae, another family of extinct lemurs, which are also most likely related to the family Indriidae, have many similarities to baboons and other monkeys due to their body plans, which are both adopted to arboreal and terrestrial lifestyle, giving them the nickname "monkey-lemurs" or "baboon-lemurs".
In earlier classification, New World monkeys, Old World monkeys, apes, and humans – collectively known as simians or anthropoids – were grouped under Anthropoidea (/ ˌ æ n θ r ə ˈ p ɔɪ d i. ə /; from Ancient Greek ἄνθρωπος (ánthrōpos) 'human' and -οειδής (-oeidḗs) 'resembling, connected to, etc.'), while the strepsirrhines and tarsiers were grouped under the ...
For example, neutral human DNA sequences are approximately 1.2% divergent (based on substitutions) from those of their nearest genetic relative, the chimpanzee, 1.6% from gorillas, and 6.6% from baboons. [10] [11] Genetic sequence evidence thus allows inference and quantification of genetic relatedness between humans and other apes.
The ID between humans and gorillas was determined to be 1.09, that between humans and chimpanzees was determined as 1.14. However the distance to six different Old World monkeys was on average 2.46, indicating that the African apes are more closely related to humans than to monkeys.
The earliest fossils clearly in the human but not the chimpanzee lineage appear between about 4.5 to 4 million years ago, with Australopithecus anamensis. Few fossil specimens on the "chimpanzee-side" of the split have been found; the first fossil chimpanzee, dating between 545 and 284 kyr (thousand years, radiometric ), was discovered in Kenya ...
The Old World species are divided into apes and monkeys depending on the number of cusps on their molars: monkeys have four, apes have five [73] - although humans may have four or five. [79] The main hominid molar cusp ( hypocone ) evolved in early primate history, while the cusp of the corresponding primitive lower molar (paraconid) was lost.
Her findings revolutionised contemporary knowledge of chimpanzee behaviour and were further evidence of the social similarities between humans and chimpanzees. [ 30 ] Goodall set herself apart from convention by naming the animals in her studies of primates instead of assigning each a number.
The nature of interaction between early humans and these sister species has been a long-standing source of controversy, the question being whether humans replaced these earlier species or whether they were in fact similar enough to interbreed, in which case these earlier populations may have contributed genetic material to modern humans.