Skull Analysis Virtual Lab Report

Title: Decoding the Past: Identifying an Unidentified Fossil Skull, Jan Pokorný

Objective(s):
Analyze and compare the morphology of various species of skulls, including an unidentified
fossil skull, using qualitative and quantitative observations.

Hypothesis:
An extinct hominid that this unidentified fossil skull closely resembles, in my belief, is
Australopithecus Afarensis.

Variables:
Independent variable: species of skulls
Dependent variable: skull morphology
Controlled variable: measuring tools, the method used to calculate supraorbital height index

Materials:

 The Skull Analysis Virtual Lab Activity

 Skull Analysis Lab Report

Procedures:
Qualitative Observations
1. Line up each of the skulls on the lab table, facing to the left, with the Frankfurt planes
parallel to the ground.
2. Observe each skull from the side, recording your observations about the following
features (use the table below to record your observations):
3. Observe each skull from the bottom view and locate the foramen magnum. This is the
hole that connects the brain stem to the spinal cord. Record your observation of the
location of each skull’s foramen magnum. Is it located toward the front or the rear of the
skull?
A. Forehead: Is the angle of the forehead sloping or more vertical? Is the brow ridge
above the eyes small, medium, or large? Does the forehead extend out above the eyes?
B. Face: Is the shape of the face sloped or flattened and vertical?
C. Teeth: Are the teeth long or short? Sharp or dull?
4. Observe each skull from the top and record your observations of the shape of the brain
cavity. Is it more round or oval? Are the edges more squared off or pointed? Make
comparisons between the skulls.

Quantitative Observations: Determine Supraorbital Height

 1. Use the calipers to measure the distance AC (from point A to point C on the skull).
2. Use the calipers to measure the distance BC (from point B to point C on the skull).
3. These measurements will be used to calculate the skull’s supraorbital height according to
the formula: (BC/AC) × 100 = Supraorbital Height Index (note: The unit of
measurement is SHI.)
4. Record the skull’s supraorbital height in the data table.
5. Take the same measurements for each of the skulls, recording the supraorbital heights in
the data table.

Data and Observations:

Complete the data table to record your observations and measurements for each skull:
Skull Forehead Face Teeth Foramen Brain Supraorbital
Magnum Cavity Height (SHI)

Pan Sloping, Sloped Short, Rear Oval, 54,93 cm

troglodytes Large Dull Squared
(modern bridge off,
chimpanzee) ridges, Similar to
Does the
extend Australopi
above the thecus
eyes skull
Homo sapiens Vertical, Vertical Short, Front Round, 67,70 cm
(modern Small Dull Squared
human) brow off,
ridges, Unique
Doesn’t
extend
above the
eyes
Homo erectus Sloping, Sloped Short, Front Oval, 61,88 cm
(extinct Medium Dull Squared
hominid) brow off,
ridges, Similar to
Does the Pan
extend troglodyte
above the s
eyes
Australopithec Sloping, Sloped Long, Rear Oval, 53,21 cm
us afarensis Large Sharp Pointed,
(extinct brow Similar to
hominid) ridges, the
Does undefined
 extend skull
above the
eyes
Unidentified Sloping, Sloped Short, Rear Oval, 51,36 cm
Fossil Skull Medium Dull Pointed,
brow Similar to
ridges, the
Does Australopi
extend thecus
above the skull
eyes

Conclusion:
Be sure to answer the following reflection questions as a summary in the conclusion of your lab
report:
 Was your hypothesis correct? Which of the four species does the unidentified skull most
resemble? Predict how you think it may relate to the other species in terms of evolution.
Justify your answer with specific observations.
The skull shares more similarities with Australopithecus afarensis than the other species, such as
the sloped forehead and similarly shaped brain cavity. The unidentified skull may be an ancestor
of Australopithecus afarensis or a closely related species, with differences reflecting adaptations
to different environments or other inputs.

 How do the shapes of the face, forehead, and teeth differ between the various species?

The forehead of Homo erectus is higher and more vertical than that of the other species, while
the forehead of Australopithecus afarensis is more sloped. Pan troglodytes has larger and more
robust molars, while the canines of Australopithecus afarensis are more pointed. The faces of
Australopithecus afarensis and Pan troglodytes protrude forward, while the face of Homo erectus
is flatter.

Questions:
Using what you have learned from the lesson and the virtual lab activity, answer the following
questions in complete sentences:
1. What do you think accounts for the differences in the skulls and species? How might
some of these differences be possible adaptations?

Differences in skulls and species may be due to a variety of factors, such as environmental
impulses, genetic variations, natural selection, etc. Some of these differences may represent
adaptations to specific environments or lifestyles.

2. In what way do you think the location of the foramen magnum relates to the movement of
each species?
In bipedal species, such as Homo erectus, the foramen magnum is located more centrally
underneath the skull, allowing for upright walking. In quadrupedal species, such as
Australopithecus afarensis, the foramen magnum is located further back on the skull, allowing
for a more horizontal spine and quadrupedal movement.

3. What might the shape of the skull and the supraorbital height tell us about each species?

For instance, the brow ridge is characteristic of some hominid species, such as Homo erectus.
This may have provided structural support for powerful chewing muscles. The shape of the skull
can also give us an insight into brain size and shape, which can in turn tell us about cognitive
abilities and behavior.