204 AFRICA
behind protocone (thus distal moiety of tooth is short,
somewhat rounded, as in M3s). Teeth in positions of
M3s may not have been erupted very long; roots
appear not to have been fully developed; there are no
interproximal facets on either side and they are fairly
unworn. They are much less worn than would be
expected for an individual with so much wear on its
M2s. Deep enamel wrinkling (cuspulation) obscures
crown morphology; distal sides of tooth are rounded,
being most distended toward lingual side.
Lower Dentition. Tooth in position of RI1 is
probably LI1; although heavily worn, it is high
crowned and narrow, with slightly divergent sides. As
in the other Is, lingual surface shallowly curved. L and
FU2s correctly identified; although quite worn, are
high crowned. They are similar in outline to 11,
although broader m/d. Tooth identified as RC1 is
probably LC’; stout root is not very long, bears a
longitudinal groove (that would be on mesial side),
and curves gently backward. Crown broken, bears
toward base a mesial margocrista and a thinner distal
one.
LP1 is fragmentary; RP1 is identified correctly.
RP1 bulky, with stout paracristid that runs m/l a
short distance from protoconid apex, then turns back
and runs down to base of low, peripherally placed
metaconid; paracristid separated from metaconid by
vertical crease. Metaconid and protoconid bases
melded (thus close off moderately large, deep trigo-
nid basin). Apparently, a thick cristid ran distally
from protoconid around to metaconid, enclosing a
modest talonid basin and rounding off back of crown.
W1 has stout bifid root. R and LP2s are probably
identified properly though extremely worn; presumed
protoconid is, unusually, worn lower than presumed
metaconid. Both teeth are narrow d/l and probably
had small, deep talonid basins. Thick root is grooved.
Heavily worn RM1 and distal fragment of LM1
are correctly identified. An apparent small trigonid
basin is wedged between protoconid and metaconid.
Hypoconulid large, centrally placed. Hypoconid base
extends lingually across midline of crown. Entoconid
apex lies slightly distal to apex of hypoconid. Buccal
cusps somewhat centrally placed; lingual cusps com-
pressed, rather peripheral. Tooth longer m/d than
wide b/l, somewhat rounded distally, with notch
separating hypoconulid and hypoconid. Tooth identi-
fied as RM2 is probably M3 of another individual.
Fragment in position of LM2 may be this tooth (itswear is consistent with this). RM2, however, is lightly
worn and has no distal interproximal facet; it is long,
triangular with rounded corners and distally tapering.
Enamel was slightly grooved. It has a thick cingulid
around protoconid; protoconid and metaconid are
connected by a crest enclosing the basin distal to it
between the bases of these two cusps; and there is a
deflecting wrinkle off the metaconid. Metastylid
small. Cristid connects entoconid with centrally
placed hypoconulid. Hypoconulid separated from
hypoconid by deep groove. Buccal cusps are somewhat
centrally placed and are more bulbous than the
slightly compressed, somewhat peripherally placed
lingual cusps. Teeth identified as R and LM3s are cor-
rectly identified (lack distal interproximal facets), but
are probably from a different individual. M3 occlusal
surfaces mildly cuspulated. Paracristid runs between
protoconid and metaconid, enclosing small but dis-
tinct basin. On both M3s, a distinct cingulid sur-
rounds base of protoconid, which is separated from
hypoconid by deep notch. Thinner notch separates
hypoconid and hypoconulid; hypoconulid apex lies
buccal to midline. Buccal cusps slightly more centrally
placed than lingual cusps. Crown slightly wider b/l
mesially than distally, where it is rounded.
In summary, OH 16 consists of one small individ-
ual represented by the partial cranium, and of at least
three other individuals, probably of larger size, repre-
sented by teeth.OH 24. Crushed and reconstructed cranium with
base and partial dentition, numerous cranial and
dental fragments. Lots of plaster in reconstruction,
sometimes hard to tell from bone.
As reconstructed, skull not very long; it is low
with a sharp retreat of frontal profile behind orbits. As
reconstructed, curve of occipital plane is smoothly
rounded to the nuchal plane. In rear view, cranium is
broad and smoothly rounded, almost “en bombe.”
Coronal suture poorly interdigitated; lies far back on
reconstruction, producing a very short although
deeply interdigitated sagittal suture.
Supraorbital margins not very thick s/i. As seen
on R, border between rather concave orbital roof and
supraorbital region is sharply rounded. Glabella
appears to be broad; may not have protruded beyond
levels of brows lateral to it. As reconstructed, frontal
rises behind small posttoral plane. As reconstructed,
orbits are asymmetrical, the R being much larger and
more square, and slightly oblique as seen from front;