Gigantopithecus ( ) is an extinct genus of ape that lived in central to southern China from two million to approximately 215,000–295,000 years ago during the Early to Middle Pleistocene, represented by one species, Gigantopithecus blacki. The first remains of Gigantopithecus, two third-molar teeth, were identified in a drugstore by anthropologist Ralph von Koenigswald in 1935 in England, who subsequently described the ape. In 1956, the first mandible and more than 1,000 teeth were found in Liucheng, and numerous more remains have since been found in at least 16 sites. Only teeth and four mandibles are known currently. Other skeletal elements were likely consumed by porcupines before they could fossilize. , Yanyan Cave is the most productive Gigantopithecus site. They were collected by a local named Dakri in 2014 who found them at the surface within of the Semono site; they may have been imported from China and left there since Chinese "dragon bones" were commonly sold in Javanese drugstores.
Classification
G. blacki
thumb|right|200px|Gigantopithecus is in the subfamily [[Ponginae along with orangutans (a male Bornean orangutan above). In 1946, Jewish German anthropologist Franz Weidenreich described Gigantopithecus as a human ancestor as "Gigantanthropus", believing that the human lineage went through a gigantic phase. He stated that the teeth are more similar to those of modern humans and Homo erectus (at the time "Pithecanthropus" for early Javan specimens), and envisioned a lineage from Gigantopithecus, to the Javan ape Meganthropus (then considered a human ancestor), to "Pithecanthropus", to "Javanthropus", and finally Aboriginal Australians. This was part of his polycentric hypothesis, that all modern races and ethnicities evolved independently from a local archaic human species rather than sharing a more recent and fully modern common ancestor. In 1952, von Koenigswald agreed that Gigantopithecus was a hominin, but believed it was an offshoot rather than a human ancestor. Much debate followed whether Gigantopithecus was a hominin or not for the next three decades until the Out of Africa hypothesis overturned the Out of Asia-theory and multiregional hypotheses, firmly placing humanity's origins in Africa.
Cladogram according to Zhang and Harrison, 2017: This bore resemblance to a molar discovered in 1915 in the Pakistani Pothohar Plateau then classified as "Dryopithecus giganteus". Von Koenigswald reclassified "D. giganteus" in 1950 into its own genus, Indopithecus, but this was changed again in 1979 to "G. giganteus" by American anthropologists Frederick Szalay and Eric Delson until Indopithecus was resurrected in 2003 by Australian anthropologist . "G. bilaspurensis" is now considered a synonym of Indopithecus giganteus, leaving Gigantopithecus monotypic (with only one species), G. blacki.
Description
thumb|Speculative reconstruction of Gigantopithecus with a large build, gorilla-like posture, and orange hair
Size
Total size estimates are highly speculative because only tooth and jaw elements are known. Molar size and total body weight do not always correlate, such as in the case of postcanine megadontia hominins (small-bodied primates exhibiting massive molars and thick enamel).
- In 1979, American anthropologist Alfred E. Johnson Jr. used the dimensions of gorillas to estimate a femur length of and humerus length of for Gigantopithecus, about 20–25% longer than those of gorillas.
- In 2017, Chinese palaeoanthropologist Yingqi Zhang and American anthropologist Terry Harrison suggested a body mass of , though conceded that it is impossible to obtain a reliable body mass estimate without more complete remains.
The average maximum length of the upper canines for presumed males and females are and , respectively, and Mandible III (presumed male) is 40% larger than Mandible I (presumed female). These imply sexual dimorphism, with males being larger than females. Such a high degree of dimorphism is only surpassed by gorillas among modern apes in canine size, and is surpassed by none for mandibular disparity. Wearing on the tongue-side of the incisors (the lingual face), which can extend as far down as the tooth root, suggests an underbite. However, in relation to the tooth's size, enamel thickness for Gigantopithecus overlaps with that of several other living and extinct apes. Like orangutans and potentially all pongines (though unlike African apes) the Gigantopithecus molar has a large and flat (tabular) grinding surface, with an even enamel coating, and short dentine horns (the areas of the dentine layer which project upwards into the top enamel layer). The molars are the most hypsodont (where the enamel extends beyond the gums) of any ape. Thick enamel would suggest a diet of abrasive items, such as dirt particles on food gathered near or on the ground (like bamboo shoots). Gigantopithecus does not appear to have consumed the commonplace savanna grasses (C<sub>4</sub> plants). Nonetheless, in 1990, a few opal phytoliths adhering to four teeth from Gigantopithecus Cave were identified to have originated from grasses; though, the majority of phytoliths resemble the hairs of fig family fruits, which include figs, mulberry, breadfruit, and banyan. This suggests that fruit was a significant dietary component for at least this population of Gigantopithecus.
The 320,000–400,000-year-old Middle Pleistocene Gigantopithecus teeth from Hejiang Cave in southeastern China (near the time of extinction) show some differences from Early Pleistocene material from other sites, which could potentially indicate that the Hejiang Gigantopithecus were locally adapting to a changing environment with different food resources. The Hejiang teeth display a less level (more crenulated) outer enamel surface due to the presence of secondary crests emanating from the paracone and protocone on the side of the molar closer to the midline (medially), as well as sharper major crests. That is, the teeth are not as flat.
In 1957, based on hoofed animal remains in a cave located in a seemingly inaccessible mountain, Pei had believed that Gigantopithecus was a cave-dwelling predator and carried these animals in. This hypothesis is no longer considered viable because its dental anatomy is consistent with herbivory. This garnered support from some subsequent researchers, but thicker enamel and hypsodonty in Gigantopithecus could suggest different functionality for these teeth.
Protein sequencing of Gigantopithecus enamel identified alpha-2-HS-glycoprotein (AHSG), which, in modern apes, is important in bone and dentine mineralisation. Because it was found in enamel, and not dentine, AHSG may have been an additional component in Gigantopithecus teeth which facilitated biomineralisation of enamel during prolonged amelogenesis (enamel growth).
Society
The high levels of sexual dimorphism could indicate relatively intense male–male competition, though considering the upper canines only projected slightly farther than the cheek teeth, canine display was probably not very important in agonistic behaviour, unlike modern non-human apes. Other classic animals typically include orangutans, macaques, rhinos, the extinct pigs Sus xiaozhu and Sus peii, muntjac, Cervus (a deer), gaur (a cow), the bovid Megalovis, and more rarely the large saber-toothed cat Megantereon. In 2009, American palaeoanthropologist Russell Ciochon hypothesised an undescribed, chimp-sized ape he identified from a few teeth coexisted with Gigantopithecus, Longgudong Cave may have represented a transitional zone between the Palaearctic and Oriental realms, featuring, alongside the typical Gigantopithecus fauna, more boreal animals such as hedgehogs, hyenas, horses, the bovid Leptobos, and pikas. but these could actually belong to P. weidenreichi. The extinction of Gigantopithecus correlates with a cooling trend marked by intensifying seasonality and monsoon strength in the region, which led to the encroachment of open grasslands on rainforest habitats. Because Gigantopithecus teeth dating to this time show evidence of dietary shifts and chronic nutritional stress, Gigantopothecus may have been less successful at adapting to these environmental stressors compared to contemporary great apes — namely P. weidenreichi and Homo — which could have led to its extinction. Savannas remained the dominant habitat of Southeast Asia until the Late Pleistocene.
Human activity in southern China is known as early as 800,000 years ago but does not become prevalent until after the extinction of Gigantopithecus, so it is unclear if pressures such as competition over resources or overhunting were factors. In 2024, Zhang and colleagues found no evidence of archaic hominin involvement in the extinctions of any southern Chinese animal.
See also
- Bunopithecus
- Khoratpithecus
- Lufengpithecus
- Meganthropus
- Pongo hooijeri
- Sivapithecus