Blogs

  • News
  • |
  • Art
  • |
  • History
  • |
  • Food and Travel
  • |
  • Science
Dinosaur Tracking

Where paleontology meets pop culture

Hominid Hunting

Meet the members of the tangled human family tree

Innovations

How human ingenuity is changing the way we live

Surprising Science

Ideas, news and discoveries from the world of science


August 6, 2012

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright

A trio of upright walkers: Lucy (middle) and Australopithecus sediba (left and right). Image: Compiled by Peter Schmid courtesy of Lee R. Berger, University of the Witwatersrand/Wikicommons

Welcome to Hominid Hunting’s new series “Becoming Human,” which will periodically examine the evolution of the major traits and behaviors that define humans, such as big brains, language, technology and art. Today, we look at the most fundamental human characteristic: walking upright. 

Walking upright on two legs is the trait that defines the hominid lineage: Bipedalism separated the first hominids from the rest of the four-legged apes. It took a while for anthropologists to realize this. At the turn of the 20th century, scientists thought that big brains made hominids unique. This was a reasonable conclusion since the only known hominid fossils were of brainy species–Neanderthals and Homo erectus.

That thinking began to change in the 1920s when anatomist Raymond Dart discovered the skull known as the Taung Child in South Africa. Taung Child had a small brain, and many researchers thought the approximately three-million-year-old Taung was merely an ape. But one feature stood out as being human-like. The foramen magnum, the hole through which the spinal cord leaves the head, was positioned further forward under the skull than an ape’s, indicating that Taung held its head erect and therefore likely walked upright. In the 1930s and 1940s, further fossil discoveries of bipedal apes that predated Neanderthals and H. erectus (collectively called australopithecines) helped convince anthropologists that walking upright came before big brains in the evolution of humans. This was demonstrated most impressively in 1974 with the finding of Lucy, a nearly complete australopithecine skeleton. Although Lucy was small, she had the anatomy of a biped, including a broad pelvis and thigh bones that angled in toward the knees, which brings the feet in line with the body’s center of gravity and creates stability while walking.

In more recent decades, anthropologists have determined that bipedalism has very ancient roots. In 2001, a group of French paleoanthropologists unearthed the seven-million-year-old Sahelanthropus tchadensis in Chad. Known only from a skull and teeth, Sahelanthropus‘ status as an upright walker is based solely on the placement of its foramen magnum, and many anthropologists remain skeptical about the species’ form of locomotion. In 2000, paleoanthropologists working in Kenya found the teeth and two thigh bones of the six-million-year-old Orrorin tugenensis. The shape of the thigh bones confirms Orrorin was bipedal. The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.

While the timeline of the evolution of upright walking is well understood, why hominids took their first bipedal steps is not. In 1871, Charles Darwin offered an explanation in his book The Descent of Man: Hominids needed to walk on two legs to free up their hands. He wrote that “…the hands and arms could hardly have become perfect enough to have manufactured weapons, or to have hurled stones and spears with a true aim, as long as they were habitually used for locomotion.” One problem with this idea is that the earliest stone tools don’t show up in the archaeological record until roughly 2.5 million years ago, about 4.5 million years after bipedalism’s origin.

But after the unveiling of Ardi in 2009, anthropologist C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University revived Darwin’s explanation by tying bipedalism to the origin of monogamy. I wrote about Lovejoy’s hypothesis for EARTH magazine in 2010. Lovejoy begins by noting that Ardi’s discoverers say the species lived in a forest. As climatic changes made African forests more seasonal and variable environments, it would have become harder and more time-consuming for individuals to find food. This would have been especially difficult for females raising offspring. At this point, Lovejoy suggests, a mutually beneficial arrangement evolved: Males gathered food for females and their young and in return females mated exclusively with their providers. To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods.

Another theory considers the efficiency of upright walking. In the 1980s, Peter Rodman and Henry McHenry, both at the University of California, Davis, suggested that hominids evolved to walk upright in response to climate change. As forests shrank, hominid ancestors found themselves descending from the trees to walk across stretches of grassland that separated forest patches. The most energetically efficient way to walk on the ground was bipedally, Rodman and McHenry argued. (Full disclosure: Rodman was my graduate school advisor.) In 2007, researchers studying chimpanzees on treadmills determined that the chimps required 75 percent more energy while walking than two-legged humans, providing some evidence that bipedalism has advantages.

Numerous other explanations for bipedalism have been outright rejected, such as the idea that our ancestors needed to stand up to see over tall grass or to minimize the amount of the body exposed to the sun in a treeless savannah. Both ideas were debunked by the fact that the first hominids lived in at least partially wooded habitats.

Although difficult to study, the question of why bipedalism evolved might come closer to an answer if paleoanthropologists dig up more fossils of the earliest hominids that lived seven million to six million years ago. Who knows how many species of bipedal apes they’ll find. But each new discovery has the potential to fundamentally change how we understand the origins of one of our most distinctive traits.



***

Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.

6 Comments »

  1. Thank you for this very helpful update and overview–will be an important addition to many 2012-2013 anthropology courses. I’ve used it as a reference to update some thoughts on Bipedalism is Also Called Walking. My take is that the new discoveries will probably only further increase the complexity and realization there is probably not a single-factor model to explain bipedalism.

  2. Kathy says:

    @Jason Antrosio
    “…and realization there is probably not a single-factor model to explain bipedalism.”

    I agree wholeheartedly with this.

    @Erin Wayman
    Interesting article.

  3. Erin Wayman says:

    Thanks Jason & Kathy for the comments. It does seem likely that more than one factor explains bipedalism.

  4. Richard says:

    Watching video of bonobos makes two reasons to walk upright almost obvious: 1) to see better and further, and 2) to carry things. To say that to “see over tall grass” was debunked because they lived in wooded habits is to miss the advantage of standing up and running upright: to see. Bonobos do it and we do it (standing up to see better, and staying up to approach or avoid is a very common human behavior). It is good, of course, to study the many possibilities, and to challenge all seemingly “obvious” explanations. But I don’t see anything here to debunk at least these two obvious advantages.

  5. kevin pickering says:

    It seems to me that another factor in our struggle for supremacy of the planet is our incredable endurance and adapability, our ability to shed heat; yet I see few (only one stands out in my mind, David Suziki’s ” The Running Man”)referances to our ability to sweat. Did that come before or after we became bipedal? is there theorys on this?, am I asking something that is already known?
    Well read but no expert….kevin.

  6. kevin pickering says:

    Further on my last comment, is there any other mammal that can eat/drink while on the run?, I dont mean grazing while casually strolling, I mean on the hunt, or chase, or escape for that matter. The only mammals I can think of with these abilaties are aquatic, ( dolphin whale seal…etc). Hmmm….thinking,,,,I can only come up with Bats for land based critters. Did our ability to eat on the fly come before or after we came out of the trees?
    Also…..lol…it seems obvious ( logical) to me that we were forced out of the trees ( either trees went away, or big scary thing also lived in them) an we weren’t built for running on all fours without a lot of changes, so upright running was the easiest eveloutionary answer. If this was the case, is there any evidence that pre-humans nearly went extinct around the time anthrpolagists guess we transitioned to upright mobility? My guess is, is that the ones that could run around and find someting to eat survived, an the ones living in fewer an fewer trees died.
    If anyone has suggestions of good material to read on these questions ,please post…..thankyou,,,,kevin

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until Smithsonian.com has approved them. Smithsonian reserves the right not to post any comments that are unlawful, threatening, offensive, defamatory, invasive of a person's privacy, inappropriate, confidential or proprietary, political messages, product endorsements, or other content that might otherwise violate any laws or policies.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free

Advertisement



Follow Us

Travel with Smithsonian






Advertisement