The Evolution and Growth of the Hominid Pelvis

A Preliminary Thin-Plate Spline Study of Ilium Shape
  • Christine Berge
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSA, volume 284)


Previous studies have shown that the pelvis of an adult Australopithecus resembles that of a human neonate both in morphometric features and qualitative anatomical characters (Berge, 1993). In this study, the thin-plate spline was used to compare the shape of the ilium of Australopithecus (adult) and Homo (adult and neonate). The spline highlights three aspects of the ilium (anterior, medial and posterior), that feature significantly in the comparisons. The adult australopithecine and the human neonate are similar in all three of these aspects in the broad upper portion of the ilium. However, differences in shape are more apparent when the australopithecine is compared with the human adult. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that hominid evolution has been strongly influenced by heterochrony.


Iliac Crest Human Ilium Anterior Superior Iliac Spine Posterior Superior Iliac Spine Anterior Inferior Iliac Spine 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berge, C. 1984. Multivariate analysis of the pelvis for hominids and other extant primates: Implications for the locomotion and systematics of the different species of Australopithecines. Journal of Human Evolution 13: 555–562.Google Scholar
  2. Berge. C. 1991. Size and locomotion-related aspects of hominid and anthropoid pelves: An osteometrical multivariate approach. Human Evolution 6: 365–376.Google Scholar
  3. Berge. C. 1993. L’Evolution de la hanche et du pelvis des Hominidés. Bipédie, Parturition, CroissanceGoogle Scholar
  4. Allométrie. Cahiers de Paléoanthropologie. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique Paris. Berge, C. 1994. How did the australopithecine walk? A biomechanical study of the hip and thigh of Australopithecus afarensis. Journal of Human Evolution 26: 259–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berge, C., and J. K. Kazmierczak. 1986. Effects of size and locomotor adaptations on the hominid pelvis: Evaluation of australopithecine bipedality with a new multivariate method. Folia Primatologica 46: 185–204.Google Scholar
  6. Berge, C., R. Orban-Segebarth, and P. Schmid. 1984. Obstetrical interpretation of the australopithecine pelvic cavity. Journal of Human Evolution 13: 573–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bookstein, F. L. 1991. Morphometric tool for landmarks data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge University Press: CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Bookstein, F. L. 1993. A brief history of the morphometric synthesis. Pages 15–40 in L. F. Marcus, E. Bello, and A. Garcia-Valdecasas, (eds.), Contributions to morphometrics. Monografias del Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales 8, Madrid.Google Scholar
  9. Jungers, W. L., and J. T. Stern, Jr. 1983. Body proportions, skeletal allometry and locomotion in the Hadar hominids. A reply to Wolpoff. Journal of Human Evolution 12: 673–684.Google Scholar
  10. McHenry, H. M. 1975. Biomechanical interpretations of the early hominid hip. Journal of Human Evolution 4: 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mosimann, J. E., and F. C. James. 1979. New statistical methods for allometry with application to Florida red-winged blackbirds. Evolution 33: 444–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rohlf, F. J. 1990. TPSPLINE: a program to compare two shapes using a thin-plate spline. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York 11794.Google Scholar
  13. Schmid, P. 1983 Eine reconstruktion der skelettes von A.L. 288–1 ( Hadar) und deren Konsequensen. Folia Primatologica 40: 283–306.Google Scholar
  14. Stern, Jr., J. T., and R. L. Susman. 1983. The locomotor anatomy of Australopithecus afarensis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60: 279–317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sigmon, B. A. 1986. Evolution in the hominid pelvis. Paleont. Afr. pages 25–32.Google Scholar
  16. Tague, R. G., and C. O. Lovejoy. 1986. The obstetric pelvis of AL 288–1 ( Lucy ). Journal of Human Evolution 15: 237–255.Google Scholar
  17. Zihlman, A. L. 1971. The question of locomotor differences in Australopithecus. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress on Primatology, Zürich, 1970: 1: 54–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christine Berge
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d’Anatomie Comparée Muséum National d’Histoire NaturelleURA 1137, Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueParisFrance

Personalised recommendations