Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Hemispheric difference in human skin color

Chaplin, George, Jablonski, Nina G.·1998·American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Abstract

Did the first hominids have a short developmental period similar to that of the great apes or a longer period closer to that of modern humans? Evidence from studies on dental and facial growth favors the first point of view. Additional evidence presented in this report is provided by a morphogenetic analysis of the lower limb. Some morphological modifications undergone by the human femur during infantile and adolescent growth are shown to be excellent markers of different developmental stages. The angular remodelling of the femoral diaphysis, which results in femoral bicondylar angle, is a marker of infancy, while the reshaping of the distal femoral epiphysis is a marker of adolescence. This reshaping of the bony epiphysis consists of the strong projection of the external lip of the femoral trochlea, the increase of the radius of curvature of the external condyle, and the anteroposterior lengthening of the whole epiphysis. The growth spurt in linear dimensions of the femur, characteristic of human adolescence, is shown to be associated with qualitative changes of the distal femoral epiphysis engendered by the late closure of the distal epiphysis. The femur of the first hominids (Australopithecus afarensis) shows only features of infantile growth, whereas characters of both precocious and later growth are typical of later hominids (Homo). The absence of the derived epiphyseal features in Australopithecus would be linked to their early epiphyseal closure and short adolescent growth period; their presence in Homo would have been promoted by their delayed epiphyseal closure and prolonged adolescent growth period. The transition from Australopithecus to Homo appears to have involved a heterochronic process of time hypermorphosis (Gould, [1977], Ontogeny and Phylogeny [Cambridge: Harvard University Press]) in which the size of the femur increases, the epiphysis is modified, and the period of peripubertal growth is prolonged. The shape of the distal epiphyses of KNM-WT 15000, an immature Homo erectus (Brown et al. [1985] Nature 316:788-792), lies clearly within the range of modern human adolescents. In contradiction to Smith's ([1993] in A. Walker and R. Leakey [eds.]: The Nariokotome Homo erectus Skeleton [Cambridge: Harvard University Press], pp. 195-220) hypothetical reconstruction of life span of Homo erectus, we infer that a growth spurt had begun with Homo erectus but was probably less pronounced and of shorter duration than in modern humans. Our findings on the femur are consistent with studies of the growth on the hominid pelvis (Berge [1996] in LF Marcus, M Corti, A Loy, G Naylor, and DE Slice [eds.]: Advances in Morphometrics [Chicago: Plenum Publishing Corp.], pp. 441-448). It is suggested that the lengthening of the adolescent growth period, from Australopithecus to Homo, would have been also associated with the shape changes of the pelvis and with the lengthening of the lower limbs.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/(sici)1096-8644(199810)107:2<221::aid-ajpa8>3.3.co;2-#

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Metadata

Authors
Chaplin, G., & Jablonski, N. G.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Published
1998

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hemispheric difference in human skin color. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/(sici)1096-8644(199810)107:2
The paper
Chaplin, G., & Jablonski, N. G. (1998). Hemispheric difference in human skin color. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-8644(199810)107%3A2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.