Human ancestors walked comfortably upright 3.6 million years ago, new footprint study says

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


A comparison of ancient and contemporary footprints reveals that our ancestors were strolling much like we do some 3.6 million years ago, a time when they were still quite comfortable spending time in trees, according to a study which will be published in the March 22 issue of the journal PLoS ONE.

Anatomical fossils have given scant confirmation about when our ancestors developed a fully modern gait. Although some researchers have argued that the 4.4 million-year-old ancient human Ardipithecus ramidus ("Ardi") described in October 2009 was adept at walking on her hind legs, many disagree.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


So rather than quibbling over badly crushed—and often missing—fossil bones, the researchers behind the new study turned much of their focus back to the famous Laetoli footprints, which were discovered more than 30 years ago in what is now Tanzania. Likely left by Australopithecus afarensis, the same species as "Lucy," these prints show an upright gait, but it has remained controversial just how fluid and modern this creature's walk would have been.

"Based on previous analyses of the skeletons of Australopithecus afarensis, we expected that the Laetoli footprints would resemble those of someone walking with a bent knee, bent hip gait typical of chimpanzees, and not the striding gait normally used by modern humans," David Raichlen, an assistant professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Arizona in Tuscon and lead author on the study, said in a prepared statement.

To test this assertion, Raichlen and his colleagues created a sandy test bed for contemporary subjects to walk across—both normally and then in a bent, chimpanzee-like manner. The researchers used a laser scaner to construct 3-D models of all of the footprints to compare with the Laetoli tracks.

"To our surprise, the Laetoli footprints fall completely within the range of normal human footprints," Raichen said. The upright, modern walkers' prints had heal and toe-print depths that were relatively equal, as the Laetoli prints do, but those locomoting more like chimpanzees—as ancient humans have been proposed to have done—produced toe prints that were much deeper and did not match the Laetoli patterns.

"This more human-like form of walking is incredibly energetically efficient, suggesting that reduced energy costs were very important in the evolution of bipedalism," Raichlen said.

Image courtesy of iStockphoto/meltonmedia

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe