Scientists aren't exactly in agreement... but in any case, they're getting all warm and cuddly by calling her 'Ida'...

She's unique: a 95% complete fossilised early primate.  And showing a rare level of detail - including the outline of where fur covered her body - and amazingly, even stomach contents indicating a last meal of berries and leaves. 

The name, 'Ida' was bestowed upon her by Jørn Hurum - a paleontologist at Oslo's Natural History Museum and leader of the international team who have studied the fossil for two years in secrecy.  Ida is the name of Hurum's 6 year old daughter who is roughly at the same stage of development as the ancient primate was when she died 47 million years ago.

Ida's proper name, is 'Darwinius Masillae': obviously partly a tribute to the great scientist Charles Darwin.  The second part of her name refers to the Messel Pit, an out-of-use quarry southeast of Frankfurt am Main, Germany where Ida was discovered.

So... what's all this about Ida being 'The Link'? Which link?

Hurum and his team have recently published a Research Article (link provided below) in which they assert that Darwinius Masillae is what is known as a 'transitional fossil' - representing a previously unknown connection between two species; in this case, strepsirrhini and haplorrhini.  Stated in a manner a little less specific and scientific for those of us who aren't paleontologists, the article suggests that Ida is a link between tiny beasts that looked a lot like modern lemurs and the part of the evolutionary tree that gave rise to apes.

Rock and roll science?

Undoubtedly, Ida's age and state of preservation will provide many opportunities for further study and especially debate, which is welcomed by scientists as being essential to the process of moving scientific knowledge forward.  Some, however, have commented negatively on the manner in which the discovery and research conclusions on Darwinius Massilae have been announced.  Public announcement came after two years of secrecy, and then alongside a book, documentary film, website and PR campaign: elements more common to a rock band's CD launch and tour announcement than a scientific discovery.  

Hurum defends the media machinery surrounding Ida as being '... part of getting science out to the public, to get attention,' which on the surface may appear to be a good thing.  However, as few scientists have had any time to study Ida outside of Hurum's team, not even a general consensus exists as to the validity of the research article, book and documentary film.  The reputation of science itself may be damaged if bold claims are shown to be premature or over-zealous.

What are the known and undisputed facts?

Neither Hurum or any other scientist are claiming that Ida is a direct human ancestor.  She's far too old.  Hurum's research paper takes the position that Ida is the ancestor from which apes emerged some 47 million years ago.  And eventually, much later, humans arose - with Australopithecus ('southern ape') giving way to Homo Habilis, the first creature to be given the name 'homo': man. 

But perhaps a bit lost - especially for an average person checking the news on the way to work - is that Homo Habilis first stood on the earth 2.5 million years ago - and Ida is close to 20 times older.  She was only 24 cm long (without her tail) and crawled around in trees - a distant, distant relative - but far from human. 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Your website URL (optional)

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Are you human? Type the test text in the field below!

Add Comment