G. freybergi is considered to be possibly the same taxon as
Ouranopithecus macedoniensis, another extinct hominid described in 1977 from northern Greece. Due to paucity of specimens and poor quality of the fossils, it remains the least well-known extinct hominid found within Europe. In 1984, British palaeontologists Peter Andrews and Lawrence B. Martin classified
Graecopithecus and
Ouranopithecus as synonyms (same taxon) and treated them as members of the genus
Sivapithecus. This classification persisted for several years until additional
Ouranopithecus fossils were discovered including part of the skull in the 1990s that indicated better distinction as different hominids. Based on new evidences, in 1997, Australian palaeontologist David W. Cameron proposed renaming and inclusion of
Ouranopithecus into
Graecopithecus based on taxonomic
priority with
Graecopithecus macedoniensis as a new name for
O. macedoniensis. However, better
O. macedoniensis specimens were found including a new species
Ouranopithecus turkae from Turkey that supported separation of the genus. This change was generally adopted.
Re-examination and reinterpretation In 2017, an international team of palaeontologists led by
Madelaine Böhme (
Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Germany) published detailed reanalysis and new interpretation in the journal
PLOS One. One paper deals with an examination of the detailed morphology of molar teeth of
G. freybergi from Greece and Bulgaria, and compared it with that of
Ouranopithecus. If this classification is correct, Graecopithecus
would be the oldest known representative of the human lineage after the human–chimpanzee split, in 19th-century terminology, the "missing link" between human and non-human primates. The species was found to be some two hundred thousand years older than the oldest known hominid found in Africa (not necessarily ancestral to the human lineage), Sahelanthropus tchadensis''.
Criticism The 2017
PLOS One papers made two critical conclusions: that
Graecopithecus is a hominin suggesting it as the oldest ancestor of humans after splitting from chimpanzees, and that as
Graecopithecus is a human ancestor, Europe is the birthplace of hominins. This directly challenges the prevailing knowledge that humans originated in East Africa. This is a feasible explanation as it is possible that the African ape ancestors could move to Africa around 9 million years ago from Europe. However, many researchers have challenged the claim that
Graecopithecus is evidence of the human lineage originating in Europe, since virtually all human ancestral species that have been discovered so far have been found in Africa. The European hypothesis remains in contradiction with the consensus view. As Rick Potts, head of the Smithsonian's
Human Origins Program, remarked: "I think the principal claim of the main paper goes well beyond the evidence in hand... A hominin or even a hominine (modern African ape) ancestor located in a fairly isolated place in southern Europe doesn't make much sense geographically as the ancestor of modern African apes, or particular the oldest ancestor of African hominins." Other scientists have also expressed skepticism of Begun's classification. Bernard Wood of
George Washington University described the hypothesis as "relatively weak" and Sergio Almécija, also at George Washington University, reminded the press that primates have a special tendency towards "evolving similar features independently". "Single characters are not reliable to make big evolutionary [claims]". Tim White at the
University of California, Berkeley, dismissed the study as merely an attempt "to resurrect Begun's tired argument with a long-known crappy fossil, newly scanned." • The partial fusion of the fourth premolar (P4) roots does not define
Graecopithecus as a hominin since the feature is common in hominids, even in the chimpanzees. • Thick enamel and relatively large molar teeth are not exclusive to hominins as they are also present in other Miocene apes and gorillas. • The claim that
Graecopithecus is the ancestral ape of human lineage and that humans originate in Europe is not justified. Even if
Graecopithecus is the basal (root ancestor) ape, all other human ancestral species starting from
Sahelanthropus were in Africa, thus, still making Africa the birthplace of humans. claiming that their original publication had been misrepresented and misconstrued. They explained that the conclusion of the 2017 paper had not been that
Graecopithecus was certainly a hominin, but that its status as a hominin could not be ruled out, and that more research and evidence would be needed to make a conclusion—a conclusion that Benoit and Thackeray make in their own paper. They argued against Benoit and Thackeray write that they did not judge canine root derivation of
Graecopithecus and
Salehanthropus against each other, stating that the differences between them were within the range of sexual variation. Additionally, when Benoit and Thackeray claim that the characteristics mentioned in the 2017 paper are not unique to Hominini, they do not mention that the 2017 paper discusses canine root size and premolar root complexity reduction, which could be indications of Hominini. == See also ==