What is the translation of " AUSTRALOPITHECUSA " in English?

• australopithecus

Examples of using Australopithecusa in Croatian and their translations into English

Imati ćeš priliku vidjeti lubanju australopithecusa.
You're gonna have the opportunity of seeing an australopithecus skull.

Fosili Australopithecusa afarensisa otkriveni su samo u Istočnoj Africi.
Australopithecus afarensis fossils have only been discovered within Eastern Africa.

Tri kutnjaka iz pokrajine Jianshi u Kini(špilja Longgudong) je kasnije identificirano kao zubi vrste Australopithecusa Gao, 1975.
Three fossilized molars from Jianshi, China(Longgudong Cave) were later identified as belonging to an Australopithecus species Gao, 1975.

Robusni tip Australopithecusa preimenovan je u rod Paranthropus P. robustus iz Južne Afrike, te P. boisei i P. aethiopicus iz Istočne Afrike.
The robust variety of Australopithecus has since been renamed Paranthropus P. robustus from South Africa, and P. boisei and P. aethiopicus from East Africa.

Sve vrste roda Paranthropus bile su dvonožne i mnoge su postojale u isto vrijeme kao i vrste roda Homo koje su možda potekle od Australopithecusa.
All species of Paranthropus were bipedal, and many lived during a time when species of the genus Homo(which were possibly descended from Australopithecus).

Australopithecus sediba je vrsta Australopithecusa iz ranog pleistocena, definiran kao nova vrsta na temelju fosilnih ostataka datiranih na oko 2 milijuna godina starosti.
Australopithecus sediba is a species of Australopithecus of the early Pleistocene, identified based on fossil remains dated to about 2 million years ago.

Različita su mišljenja po pitanju toga da li bi se vrste P. aethiopicus, P. boisei i P. robustus trebale uključiti u rod Australopithecusa ili ga smatrati zasebnim rodom.
Opinions differ whether the species P. aethiopicus, P. boisei and P. robustus should be included within the genus Australopithecus.

Postojale su također znatne morfološke razlike između Australopithecusa i Paranthropusa, iako su one pronađene gotovo isključivo u morfologiji lubanje, dok su im postkranijalni ostaci bili vrlo slični.
There were significant morphological differences between Australopithecus and Paranthropus, although the differences were found on the cranial remains.

Oblik tih kostiju navodno se znatno razlikovao od kostiju ručnog zgloba današnjih ljudi i više je sličio na zglob velikih afričkih čovjekolikih majmuna ili Australopithecusa.
The shapes of these bones were claimed to differ significantly from the bones of the modern human wrist and to resemble the wrist of great African apes or Australopithecus.

Tim White i Ronald Clarke navode da su ovi fosili vjerojatno ostaci kasne južnoafričke grane Australopithecusa, koji je koegzistirao s već razvijenim pripadnicima roda Homo.
Tim White and Ron Clarke suggest that the fossils could be a late southern African branch of Australopithecus, coexisting with already existing members of the genus Homo.

Australopithecusa robustusa i Australopithecusa boisei posebno su zastupljeni u Južnoafričkoj Repubilici na lokalitetima Kromdraai i Swartkrans, te oko jezera Turkana u Keniji.
Fossils of robust australopithecines such as Au. robustus(or alternatively Paranthropus robustus) and Au./P. boisei are particularly abundant in South Africa at sites such as Kromdraai and Swartkrans, and around Lake Turkana in Kenya.

Hadar, naselje u Afaru, bilo je mjesto gdje je pronađena"Lucy", odnosno kostur Australopithecusa afarensisa, od strane Donalda Johansona iz Clevelandskog prirodoslovnog muzeja.
Hadar, a community in Afar, was the site of the discovery in 1973-74 of"Lucy", the Australopithecus afarensis skeletal remains, by Donald Johanson of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History.

Paranthropusov" bipedalizam(dvonožno hodanje) zaključuje se na temelju anatomske strukture njegovih kukova, nogu i stopala, koji nalikuju na one kod njegovog pretka, Australopithecusa afarensisa, ali i na one današnjih ljudi.
Citation needed Paranthropus is thought to be bipedal based on its anatomical structure in its hips, legs, and feet that resemble both its ancestor, Australopithecus afarensis, and modern humans.

Ovi su fosili isprva opisani kao ostaci neke vrste Australopithecusa, ali White i njegovi kolege kasnije su objavili bilješku u istom časopisu kojom su pripisali taj fosil novom rodu, Ardipithecus.
This fossil was originally described as a species of Australopithecus, but White and his colleagues later published a note in the same journal renaming the fossil under a new genus, Ardipithecus.

Povrh toga, definiranje juvenilnih jedinki kao tipskih primjeraka česta je praksa u paleoantropologiji: tipski primjerci Homo habilisa i Australopithecusa africanusa i sami su juvenilne jedinke.
Moreover, the use of juvenile specimens as type specimens has been a common practice in palaeoanthropology: the type specimens of Homo habilis and Australopithecus africanus are themselves juvenile specimens.

Na nekoliko nalazišta u južnoj Africi pronađeni su dokazi da je Dinofelis lovio Australopithecusa africanusa, budući da su tu pronađeni fosilizirani ostaci Dinofelisa, hominida i drugih velikih životinja koje su u to vrijeme živjele na tom području.
Several sites from South Africa seem to show Dinofelis may have hunted and killed Australopithecus africanus, since the finds mingle fossilized remains of Dinofelis, hominids, and other large contemporary animals.

Ovaj koncept može objasniti prisutnost oskudnih ostataka iz Jave i Kine kao tragove azijske grane rane migracije Australopithecusa, kojem je slijedila puno kasnija migracija Homo erectusa iz Afrike, što ju je dovelo do postupnog izumiranja nakon razdoblja suživota.
This concept would explain the scanty remains from Java and China as relic of an Asian offshoot of an early radiation of Australopithecus, which was followed much later by an[African] immigration of Homo erectus, and finally became extinct after a period of coexistence.

Lee Rogers Berger, je međutim, nazvao ovaj argument"slabim", i predložio da se pronađeni ostaci usporede s ostalim mogućim vrstama, kao Australopithecusom africanusom i Australopithecusom sedibaom.
Lee Rogers Berger, however, called the argument"weak", and proposed the finds be compared to other possibilities, such as Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus sediba.

Nazivi koji se prpisuju mnogim od tih stvorenja… su Australopithecus(ili Paranthropus) robustus, Australopithecus(ili Paranthropus ili Zinjanthropus) boisei, te Australopithecus(ili Paranthropus) aethiopicus.
Names that have been attached to various of these creatures… are Australopithecus(or Paranthropus) robustus, Australopithecus(or Paranthropus or Zinjanthropus) boisei, and Australopithecus(or Paranthropus) aethiopicus.

U tom je vremenskom razdoblju postojalo više vrsta australopiteka, od kojih su nama poznati Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus sediba i Australopithecus africanus.
During this time period various forms of australopiths existed, including Australopithecus anamensis, Au. afarensis, Au. sediba, and Au. africanus.

Još jedna stvar koja komplicira slika je da su njihovi mozgovi su bili relativno mali i prilično slične i Homo habilis, ili možda čak primita förmänniskan Australopithecus.
Another thing that complicates the picture is that their brains were relatively small and rather reminds and Homo habilis, or maybe even the primitiga förmänniskan Australopithecus.

Prvi je vjerojatno i sam predak nije majmun, vrste roda Australopithecus, pojavio se u istočnoj Africi oko 5 milijuna.
The first probable ancestor who was not a monkey, a species of the genus Australopithecus, appeared in East Africa about 5 million.

Mi smo ići u školu gotovo cijelom svijetu, mislim, koliko Australopithecus znate li tko je učio svoje potomstvo kako izračunati 589-78?
We go to school almost all over the world, I mean, how many Australopithecus know that taught their offspring how to figured 589-78?

Veći čeoni režanj bi implicirao Homo erectus, ali onda bi imali očnjake… mogli bi biti Australopithecus, ali čeoni režanj bi bio manje izražen.
Uh, the larger brow ridge would imply Homo but the brow ridge would be less prominent… uh, they could be Australopithecus, erectus, but then again, they would have canine teeth… You don't know.

Veći čeoni režanj bi implicirao Homo erectus, ali onda bi imali očnjake… mogli bi biti Australopithecus, ali čeoni režanj bi bio manje izražen.
Uh, the larger brow ridge would imply Homo erectus, but then again, they would have canine teeth… uh, they could be Australopithecus, but the brow ridge would be less prominent… You don't know.

Današnji monogamni primati kao što su giboni imaju tendenciju za ispoljavanje teritorijalnosti, a fosilni dokazi ukazuju na to da su Australopithecus afarensis živjeli u velikim grupama.
Modern monogamous primates such as gibbons tend to be also territorial, but fossil evidence indicates that Australopithecus afarensis lived in large groups.

Dakle, ona pripada našem obiteljskom stablu, ali unutar toga, naravno, napravite detaljnu analizu i sada znamo da pripada Lucy vrsti poznatoj kao Australopithecus afarensis.
So she belongs to our family tree, but within that, of course, you do detailed analysis, and we know now that she belongs to the Lucy species, known as Australopithecus afarensis.

Veći čeoni režanj bi implicirao Homo erectus, ali onda bi imali očnjake… mogli bi biti Australopithecus, ali čeoni režanj bi bio manje izražen.
Uh, the larger brow ridge would imply Homo… uh, they could be Australopithecus, but the brow ridge would be less prominent… erectus, but then again, they would have canine teeth… You don't know.

Ovaj se podatak dovodi u pitanje, jer pronalazak fosila Australopithecusovog stopala podiže sumnju da tragove iz Laetolija nije ostavio Australopithecus.
This can be questioned, as finds of Australopithecus foot bones indicate the Laetoli footprints may not have been made by Australopithecus.

Curnoe umjesto toga predlaže da je Australopithecus garhi, pronađen u Etiopiji i starosti oko 2, 5 miliona godina, bolje objašnjenje za najranijeg izravnog pretka u evolutivnoj liniji ljudi.
Curnoe instead proposes that Australopithecus garhi, found in Ethiopia and dating to about 2.5 million years ago, is a better explanation for the earliest non-Homo direct ancestor in the human evolutionary line.