Evolution: Mapping the ancestry of primates
Structures in the inner ear can help determine the evolutionary relationship between extinct and living primates.
- Cátedra de Otoacústica Evolutiva y Paleoantropología, HM Hospitales - Universidad de Alcalá, Spain
When the term ‘primates’ was originally coined by Carl Linneus back in 1758, it was to classify all species of monkeys, humans and apes into one group based on their anatomical similarities. At that time, the observed similarities were simply a curiosity and did not imply any special relationship between these species. Later, when Charles Darwin published ‘On the Origin of Species’ in 1859, it became clear that species with comparable anatomies are often evolutionarily linked. And when Thomas Huxley published 'Evidence as to Man’s Place in Nature' in 1863, he grouped humans, gibbons, orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees into a superfamily named the Hominoidea. Since then, understanding the evolutionary relationships within this superfamily has been a fundamental part of research on human evolution.
Extant members of this family, also known as hominoids, can be arranged into two families: the Hylobatidae family, which includes gibbons; and the Hominidae family, which includes orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees and humans (Figure 1). About 16 to 7 million years ago, during the middle and upper Miocene period, hominoids expanded throughout Europe, Africa and Asia, and diversified into at least 12 different species which have now become extinct (Begun et al., 2012). Fossils from this time led to the identification of a particularly intriguing species called Oreopithecus bambolii (Moyà-Solà et al., 2004; Moyà-Solà et al., 2009).
Figure 1
The evolutionary relationship between O. bambolii and the Hominidae family.
Non-extinct members of the Hominoidea superfamily are split into two families: the Hominidae family, which includes orangutans (Pongo), gorillas (Gorilla), chimpanzees (Pan) and humans (Homo); and the Hylobatidae family, which includes various gibbons (Hylotbates, Nomascus, Symphalangus and Hoolok). However, it is not clear if the extinct species Oreopithecus bambolii split from this branch of the tree of life after the Hylobatidae family split, in which case O. bambolii could be part of Hominidae family (A), or if it split before the Hylobatidae family split (B). Uriciuoli et al. found that O. bambolii is not part of the Hominidae family (that is, scenario B).
O. bambolii fossils date back about 8 million years and come from sites in Sardinia and Tuscany (Rook et al., 2011). The varied features within these fossils have made it difficult to determine the evolutionary history of O. bambolii and its relationship to living hominoid species (Harrison and Rook, 1997; Köhler and Moyà-Solà, 1997). As a result, there is an ongoing debate about whether or not O. bambolii should be included in the Hominidae family (Begun et al., 2012; Nengo et al., 2017). The key to solving this question is to establish how closely related O. bambolii are to the Hominidae family compared to gibbons (Figure 1).
Now, in eLife, David Alba (Institut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) and colleagues – including Alessandro Urciuoli (Barcelona) as first author, and researchers in France and South Africa – report how studying the shape of semicircular canals in the ears of non-extinct primates can provide a better understanding of how the hominoid family evolved over time (Urciuoli et al., 2020). In recent years, these canals (which form part of the bony exterior of the inner ear) have been used to determine the degree of similarity between members of the Hominidae family (Ponce de León et al., 2018; Quam et al., 2016; Beaudet et al., 2019).
The team reconstructed the three-dimensional shape of semicircular canals of 27 species of living primates and two extinct species, including the O. bambolii. This revealed that structures in the inner ear can be used to study the evolutionary relationships between living and extinct hominoid species.
Urciuoli et al. found that although the semicircular canals of O. bambolii had similar characteristics to hominoids, this anatomical region had more features in common with two other primate families known as the cercopithecoids and platyrrhines. This suggests that O. bambolii are evolutionarily further away from orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees and humans than gibbons, and therefore cannot be considered a true member of the Hominidae family (Figure 1B).
The next step will be to study the semicircular canals of other extinct hominoid species, and repeat the experiment using other anatomical regions in the inner ear, such as the cochlea.
References
-
European Miocene hominids and the origin of the African ape and human cladeEvolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 21:10–23.https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20329
-
Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils. Advances in PrimatologyEnigmatic anthropoid or misunderstood ape? The phylogenetic status of Oreopithecus bambolii reconsidered, Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils. Advances in Primatology, Boston, MA, Springer, 10.1007/978-1-4899-0075-3.
-
Magnetostratigraphy of the Late Miocene Baccinello–Cinigiano basin (Tuscany, Italy) and the age of Oreopithecus bambolii faunal assemblagesPalaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 305:286–294.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2011.03.010
Article and author information
Author details
Mercedes Conde-Valverde
Publication history
Copyright
© 2020, Martínez and Conde-Valverde
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 6,558
- views
-
- 188
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Evolution: Mapping the ancestry of primates
eLife 9:e55429.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55429
Further reading
-
- Evolutionary Biology
Lineages of rod-shaped bacteria such as Escherichia coli exhibit a temporal decline in elongation rate in a manner comparable to cellular or biological aging. The effect results from the production of asymmetrical daughters, one with a lower elongation rate, by the division of a mother cell. The slower daughter compared to the faster daughter, denoted respectively as the old and new daughters, has more aggregates of damaged proteins and fewer expressed gene products. We have examined further the degree of asymmetry by measuring the density of ribosomes between old and new daughters and between their poles. We found that ribosomes were denser in the new daughter and also in the new pole of the daughters. These ribosome patterns match the ones we previously found for expressed gene products. This outcome suggests that the asymmetry is not likely to result from properties unique to the gene expressed in our previous study, but rather from a more fundamental upstream process affecting the distribution of ribosomal abundance. Because damage aggregates and ribosomes are both more abundant at the poles of E. coli cells, we suggest that competition for space between the two could explain the reduced ribosomal density in old daughters. Using published values for aggregate sizes and the relationship between ribosomal number and elongation rates, we show that the aggregate volumes could in principle displace quantitatively the amount of ribosomes needed to reduce the elongation rate of the old daughters.
-
- Evolutionary Biology
- Genetics and Genomics
Evolutionary arms races can arise at the contact surfaces between host and viral proteins, producing dynamic spaces in which genetic variants are continually pursued. However, the sampling of genetic variation must be balanced with the need to maintain protein function. A striking case is given by protein kinase R (PKR), a member of the mammalian innate immune system. PKR detects viral replication within the host cell and halts protein synthesis to prevent viral replication by phosphorylating eIF2α, a component of the translation initiation machinery. PKR is targeted by many viral antagonists, including poxvirus pseudosubstrate antagonists that mimic the natural substrate, eIF2α, and inhibit PKR activity. Remarkably, PKR has several rapidly evolving residues at this interface, suggesting it is engaging in an evolutionary arms race, despite the surface’s critical role in phosphorylating eIF2α. To systematically explore the evolutionary opportunities available at this dynamic interface, we generated and characterized a library of 426 SNP-accessible nonsynonymous variants of human PKR for their ability to escape inhibition by the model pseudosubstrate inhibitor K3, encoded by the vaccinia virus gene K3L. We identified key sites in the PKR kinase domain that harbor K3-resistant variants, as well as critical sites where variation leads to loss of function. We find K3-resistant variants are readily available throughout the interface and are enriched at sites under positive selection. Moreover, variants beneficial against K3 were also beneficial against an enhanced variant of K3, indicating resilience to viral adaptation. Overall, we find that the eIF2α-binding surface of PKR is highly malleable, potentiating its evolutionary ability to combat viral inhibition.
