According this cluster report, there exists a different degree of similarity between different species. The more related the species are, the more similar they are. This is mainly because they share a lot of traits and common features. According to my synthesis, I would like to record that this cluster analysis is sensible (McBrearty, S. & Jablonski, N.G. 2005). It gives accurate presentation of the relationship which exists between these species.
It is sensible to report that there is a higher similarity between the Australopithecus Africanus, Homo erectus and Homo sapiens as compared to any other ape. Essentially, they are more related because of the progressive times they lived in the history f the evolution of human beings. They are closer as compared to other apes which existed at different times. Moreover, they have more or less similar traits and other features not found in the other apes.
On the other hand, Adult male Gorilla displays more similarities with the Male Mandril. They are genetically closer and share a lot of features. This makes the cluster sensible because it places unrelated species far a part. The lesser similar the species are, the smaller the degree of similarity in this dendrogram (Johanson, D. & Wong, K. 2007). The study of skulls is a very significant exercise in morphometry. It gives a clear picture of what truly exists between organisms of different species.
The observations presented in this cluster plot are rational. It gives accurate presentation on the relationship between these apes. It is true that these primates are related to one another (Pickrell, J. 2002). However, the degree of relationship varies from each and every one of them. The observations given are right because they do not provide a misleading data, but offers accurate evaluation which helps in clustering the apes in a right manner.
The same trend is observed amongst the gorillas. Both the adult female, adult male and young female gorillas are clustered together. As organisms from the same species, they are categorized together. They share a lot of features, thus making them be similar to one another as compared to other primates.
In conclusion, I would like to concur that morphometry is a useful study which can be instrumental n understanding the external morphology of organisms. The clustering technique applied in this scenario was equally essential. It made it easier to classify these organisms depending on the level of similarities they displayed. As was observed, apes are related since they are mamas from the primates (Gibbons, A. 2005). Although they may appear different in their physical outlook, they still share a lot of genetic traits.
The same can be extended to human beings who evolved from apes. The study proves the gradual evolution of human beings which took a very long time. After the divergence of primates from other mammals 85 million years ago, it emerged the Hominidae from which the Homo habilis, Homo erectus and the Homo sapiens emerged (Alexander, R. D. 2000).
Alexander, R. D. (2000). "How did humans evolve? Reflections on the uniquely unique species". Museum of Zoology) (1): 1–38.
Gibbons, A. (2005) The First Human: The Race to Discover our Earliest Ancestor. Anchor Books.
Johanson, D. & Wong, K. (2007). Lucy's Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. Three Rivers Press.
McBrearty, S. & Jablonski, N.G. (2005). "First fossil chimpanzee". Nature 437 (7055): 105–8.
Pickrell, J. (2002). "Humans, Chimps Not as Closely Related as Thought?". National Geographic.
Rilling, J. & Insel, T. R. (2009). "The primate neocortex in comparative perspective using magnetic resonance imaging". Journal of Human Evolution 37 (2): 191–223.