Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Bite force production and the origin of Homo

  • Justin A. Ledogar
  • , Stefano Benazzi
  • , Amanda L Smith
  • , Paul C. Dechow
  • , Qian Wang
  • , Rebecca W. Cook
  • , Dimitri Neaux
  • , Callum F. Ross
  • , Ian R. Grosse
  • , Barth W. Wright
  • , Gerhard W. Weber
  • , Craig Byron
  • , Stephen Wroe
  • , David S Strait
  • University of Bologna
  • East Tennessee State University
  • East Tennessee State University
  • Touro University California
  • Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine
  • Baylor College of Dentistry
  • Texas A&M College of Dentistry
  • Mercer University
  • University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
  • Samuel Ginn College of Engineering
  • Duke University
  • University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth
  • Duke University
  • Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle
  • University of Chicago
  • Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, The University of Chicago
  • University of Massachusetts
  • Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences
  • University of Kansas Medical Center
  • The University of Kansas School of Medicine
  • University of Vienna
  • Department of Evolutionary Anthropology
  • University of Vienna
  • Mercer University at Macon
  • University of New England
  • University of New England Australia
  • University at Albany, State University of New York
  • Washington University in St. Louis
  • University of Johannesburg
  • University of Tübingen

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The divergence of Homo from gracile australopiths has been described as a trend of decreasing dentognathic size and robusticity, precipitated by stone tool use and/or a shift to softer foods, including meat. Yet, mechanical evidence supporting this narrative is sparse, and isotopic and archaeological data have led to the suggestion that a shift away from a gracile australopith-like diet would not have occurred in the most basal members of Homo but rather only with the appearance of Homo erectus, implying that the origin of our genus is not rooted in dietary change. Here, we provide mechanical evidence that Homo habilis exhibits an australopith-like pattern of facial strain during biting but, unlike most australopiths, was not suited for a diet that required forceful processing by the molar teeth. Homo habilis was at elevated risk of distractive jaw joint forces during those bites, constraining muscle recruitment so as to avoid generating uncomfortable/dangerous levels of tension in the joint. Modern humans have similar limitations. This suggests that selection on skeletal traits favouring forceful postcanine processing was relaxed by the earliest stages in the evolution of our genus, implying that dietary or food processing changes played an important role in the emergence of Homo.
Original languageAmerican English
Article number241879
JournalRoyal Society Open Science
Volume12
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 23 2025

Cite this