Гигант питекант: Қытайдың жоғалған маймылының тарихы

Genus of primate

Gigantopithecus (/d//ʒ//aɪ/,/g//æ//n//t//oʊ//p//ɪ/'/θ//i//k//ə//s//, /'/p//ɪ//θ//ɪ//k//ə//s//, //d//ʒ//ɪ// / jahygantohpitheekuhs, pithikuhs, ji ; ) is an extinct genus of ape that lived in southern China from 2 million to approximately 300 200,000 years ago during the Early to Middle Pleistocene, represented by one species, Gigantopithecus blacki. Potential identifications have also been made in Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia. The first remains of Gigantopithecus, two third molar teeth, were identified in a drugstore by anthropologist Ralph von Koenigswald in 1935, 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, and other skeletal elements were likely consumed by porcupines before they could fossilise. The oldest remains date to 2 million years ago from Baikong Cave, and the youngest 380,000–310,000 years ago from Hei Cave. Indicated by extensive rodent gnawing marks, teeth primarily accumulated in caves likely due to porcupine activity. Porcupines gnaw on bones to obtain nutrients necessary for quill growth, and can haul large bones into their underground dens and consume them entirely, except the hard, enamel capped crowns of teeth. This may explain why teeth are typically found in great quantity, and why remains other than teeth are so rare.

In 1935, von Koenigswald considered Gigantopithecus to be closely allied with the Late Miocene Sivapithecus from India. 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 multiregional 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 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 David W. Cameron. 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. Wearing on the tongue side of the incisors (the lingual face), which can extend as far down as the tooth root, suggests an underbite. The molars are the most hypsodont (where the enamel extends beyond the gums) of any ape. Gigantopithecus does not appear to have consumed the commonplace savanna grasses (C4 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 400,000–320,000 year old Middle Pleistocene 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 a specialised form 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.

A Gigantopithecus permanent third molar, based on an approximate 600–800 days required for the enamel on the cusps to form (which is quite long), was estimated to have taken four years to form, which is within the range (albeit, far upper range) of what is exhibited in humans and chimpanzees. Like many other fossil apes, the rate of enamel formation near the enamel dentine junction (dentine is the nerve filled layer beneath the enamel) was estimated to begin at about four μm per day; this is seen in only baby teeth for modern apes. 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 which facilitated biomineralisation of enamel during prolonged amelogenesis (enamel growth). 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 Russel 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. Intensified winter and summer monsoon strength is also cited to be another major environmental force in the Middle Pleistocene of China. Stratigraphic evidence suggests that it contracted severely in range from the provinces of Guangxi, Guizhou, and Hainan to just the Guangxi region by 420–330 ka. The population of the giant ape dwindled further by 300 ka as a response to its declining forest refugia resulting from grassland expansion. The extinction window of Gigantopithecus is estimated to be between 295,000 to 215,000 years ago in correlation with increased seasonality and major environmental turnovers. 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. Zhang et. al. in 2024 suggested that there is no evidence of any archaic hominin involvement in the early extinctions of the Pleistocene of southern China.

Gigantopithecus has been used in cryptozoology circles as the identity of the Tibetan yeti or American bigfoot, apelike monsters in local folklore. This began in 1960 with zoologist Wladimir Tschernezky, briefly describing in the journal Nature a 1951 photograph of alleged yeti tracks taken by Himalayan mountaineers Michael Ward and Eric Shipton. Tschernezky concluded that the yeti walked like a human and was similar to Gigantopithecus. Subsequently, the yeti attracted short lived scientific attention, with several more authors publishing in Nature and Science, but this also incited a popular monster hunting following for both the yeti and the similar American bigfoot which has persisted into the present day. The only scientist who continued trying to prove such monsters exist was anthropologist Grover Krantz, who continued pushing for a connection between Gigantopithecus and bigfoot from 1970 to his death in 2002. Among the binomial names he came up with for bigfoot included "Gigantopithecus canadensis". Scientists and amateur monster hunters both dismissed Krantz's arguments, saying he readily accepted clearly false evidence.