DOCSLIB.ORG

Unit 4 Resource

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Unit 4 Resource UUnitnit 4 RResourcesesources History of Biological Diversity A GLENCOE PROGRAM BIOLOGY biologygmh.com Check out the following features on your Online Learning Center: Study Tools Extensions Virtual Labs Microscopy Links • Interactive Tables Periodic Table Links • Interactive Time Line Career Links • Animated illustrations Web Links • National Geographic Visualizing animations WebQuest Projects Self-Check Quizzes Science Fair Ideas Chapter Tests Internet BioLabs Standardized Test Practice Vocabulary PuzzleMaker For Teachers Interactive Tutor Teacher Forum Multilingual Science Glossary Teaching Today, and much more! Study to Go Online Student Edition Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of Copyright © by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce the material contained herein on the condition that such material be reproduced only for classroom use; be provided to students, teachers, and families without charge; and be used solely in conjunction with the Glencoe Biology program. Any other reproduction, for use or sale, is prohibited without prior written permission of the publisher. Send all inquiries to: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill 8787 Orion Place Columbus, OH 43240-4027 ISBN 13: 978-0-07-874608-6 ISBN 10: 0-07-874608-6 Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 045 11 10 09 08 07 06 Teacher Approval Initials Date of Approval Student Lab Safety Form Student Name: Date: Lab Title: In order to show your teacher that you understand the safety concerns of this lab, the following questions must be answered after the teacher explains the information to you. You must have your teacher initial this form before you can proceed with the lab. 1. How would you describe what you will be doing during this lab? 2. What are the safety concerns associated with this lab (as explained by your teacher)? • • • • • 3. What additional safety concerns or questions do you have? Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of Adapted from Gerlovich, et al. (2004). The Total Science Safety System CD, JaKel, Inc. Used with Permission. 1 Table of Reproducible Pages Contents Chapter 14 The History of Life Diagnostic Test . 4 Launch Lab . 5 MiniLab . 6 BioLab . 7 Real-World Biology . 9 Enrichment . 11 Concept Mapping . 12 Study Guide (English) . 13 Study Guide (Spanish) . 17 Section Quick Check 1 . 21 Section Quick Check 2 . 22 Chapter Test A . 23 Chapter Test B . 26 Chapter Test C . 29 Student Recording Sheet . 33 Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of 3 Name Date Class Diagnostic CHAPTER 14 Test The History of Life Before reading Chapter 14, predict answers to questions about the chapter content based on what you already know. Circle the letter of the correct answer, and then explain your reasoning. 1. Marcos and his friends have seen a movie that inaccurately portrays the conditions of early Earth as it existed approximately 4.5 billion years ago. Marcos enjoys learning about the history of Earth, and he explains to his friends the current ideas scientists have about what Earth looked liked approximately 4.5 billion years ago. Which would Marcos include in his explanation? A. A thick atmosphere of toxic gases surrounded a thin layer of Earth’s crust. B. An ocean filled with microbes and organic materials covered Earth. C. The continents supported primitive forests and animals such as dinosaurs. D. The planet was only molten rock with no crust or atmospheric gases. Explain. 2. Candice and her family decide to tour the natural museum of history in their city. Candice is interested in fossils. Which is an example of a fossil Candice might see at the museum? A. a mummified cat from ancient Egypt B. cave drawings painted by prehistoric humans C. dinosaur footprints in a slab of rock The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of D. prehistoric seeds from a dinosaur’s stomach Explain. 3. Rashida must write an essay about how life first evolved on Earth as part of an entrance exam to participate in a summer science camp. Which are examples of the information she should include in her essay? (Select two answers.) A. Ancestors of eukaryotic cells lived together in some association with prokaryotic cells. B. Early Earth conditions were the same as present-day conditions C. Earth’s life forms originated from cells brought to Earth by meteorites from space. D. Life evolved slowly over many millions of years. Explain. 4 The History of Life CHAPTER 14 Unit 4 Name Date Class CHAPTER 14 LaunchLab What can skeletal remains reveal? Fossils are all that remain of extinct organisms. Paleontologists study fossils to under- stand how organisms looked and behaved when they lived on Earth. In this lab, you will infer an organism’s characteristics based on skeletal remains. Procedure 4. Based on skeletal remains alone, list the ani- 1. Read and complete the lab safety form. mal’s physical and behavioral characteristics. 2. Choose an unidentified animal from the list 5. Learn the identity of your animal from your provided by your teacher. teacher. Now make a new list of characteristics. 3. Imagine that the animal you selected has been extinct for millions of years. Study skeletal parts, teeth, diagrams, and photos provided. Data and Observations Analysis 1. Compare the two lists. Do fossils limit what paleontologists can infer about an extinct organism? Explain. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of 2. Conclude Based on your observations, what general characteristics can be inferred about most animals based on fossilized remains? Unit 4 CHAPTER 14 The History of Life 5 Name Date Class CHAPTER 14 MiniLab Correlate Rock Layers Using Fossils How can paleontologists establish relative age? Scientists use fossils from many locations to piece together the sequence of Earth’s rock layers. This is the process of correlation. Procedure 4. Make a sketch of the cross section, and label each 1. Read and complete the lab safety form. layer and any materials contained within it. 2. Your teacher will assign you to a group and will 5. Collect copies of sketches from the other groups give your group a container with layers of mate- and use them to determine the sequence of all rial embedded with fossils. the layers the class has studied. 3. Carefully remove each layer, noting any embedded materials. Data and Observations Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of Analysis 1. Describe the materials in each cross section. What patterns did you observe? 2. Explain how your analysis would be different if different layers contained the same materials. What if some of the layers didn’t overlap? Suggest a way to gather additional data that might resolve these issues. 6 The History of Life CHAPTER 14 Unit 4 Name Date Class CHAPTER 14 BioLab Is spontaneous generation possible? Background: In the mid-1800s, Louis Pasteur conducted an experiment that showed that living organisms come from other living organisms—not from nonliving material. Pasteur’s classic experiment, which disproved the notion of spontaneous generation, laid an essential foundation for modern biology by supporting the concept of biogen- esis. In this lab, you will carry out an experiment based on Pasteur’s work. Question: How can the idea of spontaneous generation be disproved? Materials rubber stopper (2) beef broth bunsen burner (2) Erlenmeyer flask (2) 5 cm of plastic tubing ring stand (2) 30 cm of plastic tubing string Safety Precautions Procedure 7. Bend the tubing on Flask B until it forms a 1. Read and complete the lab safety form. U-shape. The bottom of the U should be near 2. Study the description of Louis Pasteur’s classic the base of the flask. Tie the end of the tubing to experiment that disproved spontaneous the ring stand to hold the U-shape. generation. 8. Boil the broth in each flask for 30 min. 3. Design and construct a data table to record 9. After the equipment and broth cool, move the changes in color, smell, and the presence of apparatuses to an area of the lab where they will sediments. not be disturbed. 4. Label the flasks A and B. Flask A will be capped 10. Observe the flasks over the next two weeks. with a stopper holding a 5-cm piece of tubing. Record your observations in your data table. Flask B will be capped with a stopper holding a 11. Cleanup and Disposal Dispose of beef broth 30-cm piece of tubing. according to your teacher’s instructions. Clean 5. Place 50 mL of beef broth in each flask. Cap and return all equipment to the appropriate each flask with the appropriate stopper. location. 6. Put each flask on a ring stand over a bunsen burner. Data and Observations Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of Unit 4 CHAPTER 14 The History of Life 7 BioLab, Is spontaneous generation possible? continued Analyze and Conclude 1. Describe the experimental procedure you followed. How does it compare to the steps followed by Louis Pasteur? 2. Compare your findings to Pasteur’s findings. 3. Describe why it is important for scientists to verify one another’s data. 4. Think Critically Explain how Pasteur’s findings disprove spontaneous generation. Copyright © Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Fossil Discovery Illuminates the Lives of the Earliest Primates 24 February 2021
    New fossil discovery illuminates the lives of the earliest primates 24 February 2021 Royal Society Open Science. "This discovery is exciting because it represents the oldest dated occurrence of archaic primates in the fossil record," Chester said. "It adds to our understanding of how the earliest primates separated themselves from their competitors following the demise of the dinosaurs." Chester and Gregory Wilson Mantilla, Burke Museum Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology and University of Washington biology professor, were co-leads on this study, where the team analyzed fossilized teeth found in the Hell Creek area of northeastern Montana. The fossils, now part of the collections at the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, are estimated to be 65.9 Shortly after the extinction of the dinosaurs, the earliest million years old, about 105,000 to 139,000 years known archaic primates, such as the newly described after the mass extinction event. species Purgatorius mckeeveri shown in the foreground, quickly set themselves apart from their competition -- like Based on the age of the fossils, the team estimates the archaic ungulate mammal on the forest floor -- by that the ancestor of all primates (the group specializing in an omnivorous diet including fruit found including plesiadapiforms and today's primates up in the trees. Credit: Andrey Atuchin such as lemurs, monkeys, and apes) likely emerged by the Late Cretaceous—and lived alongside large dinosaurs. Stephen Chester, an assistant professor of anthropology and paleontologist at the Graduate Center, CUNY and Brooklyn College, was part of a team of 10 researchers from across the United States who analyzed several fossils of Purgatorius, the oldest genus in a group of the earliest-known primates called plesiadapiforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Grasping Among Anthropoids
    doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01582.x Evolution of grasping among anthropoids E. POUYDEBAT,* M. LAURIN, P. GORCE* & V. BELSà *Handibio, Universite´ du Sud Toulon-Var, La Garde, France Comparative Osteohistology, UMR CNRS 7179, Universite´ Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris 6), Paris, France àUMR 7179, MNHN, Paris, France Keywords: Abstract behaviour; The prevailing hypothesis about grasping in primates stipulates an evolution grasping; from power towards precision grips in hominids. The evolution of grasping is hominids; far more complex, as shown by analysis of new morphometric and behavio- palaeobiology; ural data. The latter concern the modes of food grasping in 11 species (one phylogeny; platyrrhine, nine catarrhines and humans). We show that precision grip and precision grip; thumb-lateral behaviours are linked to carpus and thumb length, whereas primates; power grasping is linked to second and third digit length. No phylogenetic variance partitioning with PVR. signal was found in the behavioural characters when using squared-change parsimony and phylogenetic eigenvector regression, but such a signal was found in morphometric characters. Our findings shed new light on previously proposed models of the evolution of grasping. Inference models suggest that Australopithecus, Oreopithecus and Proconsul used a precision grip. very old behaviour, as it occurs in anurans, crocodilians, Introduction squamates and several therian mammals (Gray, 1997; Grasping behaviour is a key activity in primates to obtain Iwaniuk & Whishaw, 2000). On the contrary, the food. The hand is used in numerous activities of manip- precision grip, in which an object is held between the ulation and locomotion and is linked to several func- distal surfaces of the thumb and the index finger, is tional adaptations (Godinot & Beard, 1993; Begun et al., usually viewed as a derived function, linked to tool use 1997; Godinot et al., 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenomic Evidence of Adaptive Evolution in the Ancestry of Humans
    Phylogenomic evidence of adaptive evolution in the ancestry of humans Morris Goodmana,b,1 and Kirstin N. Sternera aCenter for Molecular Medicine and Genetics and bDepartment of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201 In Charles Darwin’s tree model for life’s evolution, natural selection nomic studies of human evolution. We then highlight the concepts adaptively modifies newly arisen species as they branch apart from that motivate our own efforts and discuss how phylogenomic evi- their common ancestor. In accord with this Darwinian concept, the dence has enhanced our understanding of adaptive evolution in the phylogenomic approach to elucidating adaptive evolution in genes ancestry of modern humans. and genomes in the ancestry of modern humans requires a well supported and well sampled phylogeny that accurately places Darwin’s Views humans and other primates and mammals with respect to one In The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (5), Charles another. For more than a century, first from the comparative immu- Darwin suggested that Africa was the birthplace for humankind. nological work of Nuttall on blood sera and now from comparative The following five passages encapsulate for us Darwin’s thinking genomic studies, molecular findings have demonstrated the close about the place of humans in primate phylogeny and about the kinship of humans to chimpanzees. The close genetic correspond- uniqueness of modern humans. ence of chimpanzees to humans and the relative shortness of our evolutionary separation suggest that most distinctive features of If the anthropomorphous apes be admitted to form a natural subgroup, then as man agrees with them, not only in all those the modern human phenotype had already evolved during our characters which he possesses in common with the whole Cata- ancestry with chimpanzees.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Life 347 DO NOT EDIT--Changes Must Be Made Through “File Info” Correctionkey=A
    DO NOT EDIT--Changes must be made through “File info” CorrectionKey=A The History CHAPTER 12 of Life BIg IdEa Scientists use many types of data collection and experimentation to form hypotheses and theories about how life formed on Earth. 12.1 The Fossil Record 12.2 The geologic Time Scale 12.3 Origin of Life 9d 12.4 Early Single-Celled Organisms 7F, 7g, 11C data analysis CalcuLaTINg axes IntervaLS 2g 12.5 Radiation of Multicellular Life 7E 12.6 Primate Evolution Online BiOlOgy HMDScience.com ONLINE Labs ■■ Video Lab Model of Rock Strata ■■ Radioactive Decay ■■ QuickLab Geologic Clock ■■ Stride Inferences ■■ Understanding Geologic Time ■■ Comparing Indexes Among Primates ■■ Virtual Lab Comparing Hominoid Skulls (t) ©Silkeborg Denmark Museum, 346 Unit 4: Evolution DO NOT EDIT--Changes must be made through “File info” CorrectionKey=A Q What can fossils teach us about the past? This man, known only as Tollund Man, died about 2200 years ago in what is now Denmark. Details such as his skin and hair were preserved by the acid of the bog in which he was found. A bog is a type of wetland that accumulates peat, the deposits of dead plant material. older remains from bogs can add information to the fossil record, which tends to consist mostly of hard shells, teeth, and bones. RE a d IN g T o o L b o x This reading tool can help you learn the material in the following pages. uSINg LaNGUAGE YOuR TuRN describing Time Certain words and phrases can help Read the sentences below, and write the specific time you get an idea of a past event’s time frame (when it markers.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Primates
    Early Primates Arboreal theory Primates became primates by adapting to life in trees Enhanced sight (depth perception) Monkey Business: Grasping hands and feet Visual predation hypothesis Evolution of Primates Binocular vision, grasping hands and feet, and reduced claws developed because they facilitated the capture of insects. Early primates first adapted to life in the bushy forest undergrowth and low tree branches. McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Early Cenozoic Primates The earliest primates date to the first part of the Cenozoic Prosimians: “lower primates” (65-54 m.y.a.). Lemurs, loris, bushbabies, tarsiers The Eocene (54-38 m.y.a.) was the epoch of prosimians with at least 60 different genera in two families. Anthropoids: “higher primates” The omomyid family lived in North America, Europe, and New World Monkeys: marmosets, tamarins, spider monkeys Asia and may be ancestral to all anthropoids. Old World Monkeys: baboons, macaques, mandrills The adapid family was ancestral to the lemur-loris line. Homonoids: Gibbons, Pongids (Apes) and Hominids (Humans and related forms). McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Prosimians New World Monkeys tarsier lemur McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Old World Monkeys Hominoids Lesser Apes Panids, Pongids(Great Apes) Dumb Apes (Gibbons) (Gorilla, Chimps, Orangutan) (George Bush) McGraw-Hill © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextualising Primate Origins – an Ecomorphological Framework
    This is the accepted version of the following article: Soligo C, Smaers JB (2016). Contextualising primate origins – an ecomorphological framework. Journal of Anatomy 228: 608–629, which has been published in final form at [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joa.12441/abstract]. This article may be used for non- commercial purposes in accordance with the Wiley Self-Archiving Policy [http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-820227.html ]. Contextualising primate origins – An ecomorphological framework Authors: Christophe Soligo1 Jeroen B Smaers2 1 Department of Anthropology, University College London, 14 Taviton Street, London WC1 0BW, UK 2 Department of Anthropology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794- 4364, USA Abstract Ecomorphology–the characterisation of the adaptive relationship between an organism’s morphology and its ecological role–has long been central to theories of the origin and early evolution of the primate order. This is exemplified by two of the most influential theories of primate origins: Matt Cartmill’s Visual Predation Hypothesis, and Bob Sussman’s Angiosperm Co-Evolution Hypothesis. However, the study of primate origins is constrained by the absence of data directly documenting the events under investigation, and has to rely instead on a fragmentary fossil record and the methodological assumptions inherent in phylogenetic comparative analyses of extant species. These constraints introduce particular challenges for inferring the ecomorphology of primate origins, since morphology and environmental context must first be inferred, before the relationship between the two can be considered. Fossils can be integrated in comparative analyses and observations of extant model species and laboratory experiments of form-function relationships are critical for the functional interpretation of the morphology of extinct species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Link Educator’S Guide
    The Link Educator’s Guide History™, together with the University of Oslo and the Senckenberg Research Institute, has announced the groundbreaking finding of a 47 million year old fossil that will revolutionize the way humans understand our link to other primates. Dr. Jorn Hurum at the University of Oslo was stunned when he discovered this amazingly intact fossil at a fair in Germany. After an examination, he confirmed that the remains of this primate are an extremely well-preserved and rare find. Knowing that this fossil, nicknamed Ida, could hold answers to the connections between humans and other primates, he quickly assembled a world-class team to carefully study the specimen. The Link follows Dr. Hurum and his team as they peel back the layers of time, revealing astonishing new information about early primates and the path to humankind by studying this remarkable 95% intact fossil. Throughout the world, scientists and archeologists are constantly searching for traces of evidence that will help explain the origins of humankind. In the 1970s, scientists pinned down the connection between apes and humans through a 3.2 million year old fossil they named Lucy. But critical questions remain about how and when humans and apes transformed from other primate species. Now, the discovery of Ida will turn much of what we know about the links between humans and primates on its head, giving us insights into the evolutionary process 44 million years before Lucy walked the Earth. Similar to a lemur, Ida has characteristics of a transitional species, tying her monkey-like species to the primates which followed her.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prime Movers in Hominid Encephalization One of the Common Misconceptions Concerning the Evolutionary Process Is That It Implies Progress
    The Prime Movers in Hominid Encephalization One of the common misconceptions concerning the evolutionary process is that it implies progress. People with such a mistaken view of evolution may believe that fish are evolving into amphibians, reptiles are evolving into mammals, and apes will inevitably achieve human status some day. The belief that traits evolve in order to achieve a future goal is referred to as the teleological error. When someone argues that birds evolved feathered wings in order to fly or that humans evolved complex brains in order to use tools they are committing the teleological error. The teleological error is a logical fallacy because it implies that future events cause past events. To understand how birds evolved bodies capable of flight, it is necessary to examine the process as a series of events unconnected to any future outcomes. Feathers were originally modified scales that provided an improved insulating capacity for warm-blooded animals. The low density of these modified scales and certain incidental aerodynamic properties they possessed made them useful in facilitating gliding behavior. Outstretched forelimbs covered with feathers were more advantageous to gliding than those covered with scales. Flight powered by feathered wings developed in birds as a result of natural selection on gliding behavior. The teleological error is even more likely to be committed when the origins of human capacities are examined. Claiming that our ancestors began walking upright in order that they could use tools is typical example of this error. In fact, the tendency to make the teleological error can be said to be a natural by-product of the evolved mental capacities of the human animal.
    [Show full text]
  • Snub-Nosed Monkey Rhinopithecus Strykeri
    Evolutionary History of the Odd-Nosed Monkeys and the Phylogenetic Position of the Newly Described Myanmar Snub-Nosed Monkey Rhinopithecus strykeri Rasmus Liedigk1, Mouyu Yang1,2, Nina G. Jablonski3, Frank Momberg4, Thomas Geissmann5, Ngwe Lwin6, Tony Htin Hla6, Zhijin Liu1,7, Bruce Wong7, Li Ming7, Long Yongcheng8, Ya-Ping Zhang9, Tilo Nadler10, Dietmar Zinner11, Christian Roos1,12* 1 Primate Genetics Laboratory, German Primate Center, Go¨ttingen, Germany, 2 Fanjingshan National Nature Reserve, Jiangkou, Guizhou Province, China, 3 Department of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, United States of America, 4 Fauna and Flora International (FFI), Myanmar Programme, Yangon, Myanmar, 5 Anthropological Institute, University Zu¨rich-Irchel, Zu¨rich, Switzerland, 6 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Association (BANCA), Yangon, Myanmar, 7 Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 8 The Nature Conservancy, Kunming, China, 9 Kunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, China, 10 Frankfurt Zoological Society, Endangered Primate Rescue Center, Cuc Phuong National Park, Ninh Binh Province, Vietnam, 11 Cognitive Ethology Laboratory, German Primate Center, Go¨ttingen, Germany, 12 Gene Bank of Primates, German Primate Center, Go¨ttingen, Germany Abstract Odd-nosed monkeys represent one of the two major groups of Asian colobines. Our knowledge about this primate group is still limited as it is highlighted by the recent discovery of a new species in Northern Myanmar. Although a common origin of the group is now widely accepted, the phylogenetic relationships among its genera and species, and the biogeographic processes leading to their current distribution are largely unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip D. Gingerich Margaret Schoeninger the Fossil Record
    Philip D. Gingerich The Fossil Record and Primate Phylogeny Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan, Fossils provide the only direct evidence of the evolutionary history Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, of primates. A method of phylogeny reconstruction is outlined which U.S.A. is based on an evaluation ofphenetic resemblances of fossils interpreted in their stratigraphiccontext. This stratopheneti¢ approach to phylogeny involves three successive steps: (1) organization of fossils strati- Margaret Schoeninger graphically, (2) phenetie linking of similar forms from adjacent Department of Anthropology, stratigraphic intervals, (3) critical testing--Is the density and The University of Michigan, continuity of the fossil record sufficient to support the proposed Ann Arbor, Michigan 40109, linkings?--Does the proposed phylogeny make sense cladistically?-- U.S.A. Does it make sense paleogeographicaUy? Evaluation of the known fossil record of primates, following the stratophenetic approach outlined here, has suggested that micro- syopoids are primitive primates and that fossil tarsioids and ples-. iadapoids form a closely linked group. Early anthropoids link most closely with Eocene adapoids, supporting an adapoid origin of Anthropoidea. Large gaps remain in the fossil record of lemuroid and lorisoid primates: they may have been derived from an Adapis- like Eocene genus, or they may possibly have evolved independently of other primates since the late Cretaceous or the Paleocene. This question is closely related to the problem of whether living Tarsius or modern lemurs and lorises are more closely related to the living higher primates. The fossil record and the paleogeography of Central America suggest that platyrrhines eyolved from an early anthropoid stock and may have entered South America from Asia via North America at about the end of the Eocene.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson 26.3 • Lesson Overview • Lesson Notes 765 Unifying Concepts and Processes I, II, III, IV, V
    lesson Mammals Members of the traditional class Mammalia include about 5000 species that range in size from mice to whales. Characteristics unique to mammals include mammary glands in females, which pro- Getting Started duce milk to nourish young, and hair. Mammals also breathe air, have four- chambered hearts, and regulate their internal body temperature. Primate Evolution DOL•60–DOL•64 Objectives The First Mammals True mammals first appeared during the late 26.3.1 Identify the characteristics that all primates Triassic Period, about 220 million years ago. They were very small and resembled modern tree shrews, like the one in Figure 26–13. While share. 26.3 dinosaurs ruled, mammals remained generally small and were proba- THINK ABOuT IT Carolus Linnaeus placed our species, Homo sapiens, Key Questions 26.3.2 Describe the major evolutionary groups of bly active mostly at night. New fossils and DNA analyses suggest, how- in an order he named Primates, which means “first” in Latin. But what What characteristics do all primates. ever, that the first members of modern mammalian groups, including are primates “first” in? When primates appeared, there was little to dis- primates share? primates, rodents, and hoofed mammals, evolved during this period. tinguish them from other mammals, aside from an increased ability to 26.3.3 Describe the adaptations that enabled later After the great dinosaur extinction at the end of the Cretaceous Period, What are the major hominine species to walk upright. use their eyes and front limbs together. As primates evolved, however, evolutionary groups of primates? about 65 million years ago, mammals underwent a long adaptive several other characteristics became distinctive.
    [Show full text]
  • Primate and Human Evolution Susan Cachel New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 469 Pp
    Primate and Human Evolution Susan Cachel New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 469 pp. (hardback), $130. ISBN-13: 9780521829427. Reviewed by STEPHEN LYCETT Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, University of Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge CB2 1QH, UNITED KINGDOM; [email protected] rimate and Human Evolution is an ambitious and broad- speciation in papionins also is discussed, although Cachel Psweeping attempt to set the issue of human evolution notes that as a general model of primate speciation (includ- firmly within the context of its catarrhine substrate, while ing hominins) such evidence tends to be contradictory to at the same time arguing that humans and their closest fos- data originating from comparison with other mammals, sil relatives are remarkably different from other primates. which suggests that parapatric speciation is more frequent- It is this essential tension that Cachel aims to explore. ly seen in mammals smaller than baboons. The second part From its title it would be easy to assume that this is a of this chapter deals with the topical issue of extinction in textbook for undergraduates. As Cachel, however, warns extant primates. Primates have the highest proportion of in the opening sentences of her preface, it is not intended endangered species amongst mammals, and Cachel draws as such, nor should be seen as a textbook. Perhaps to em- several sobering observations regarding the probable fate phasize the point still further, the opening paragraphs of of extant primates and fragmentation of their habitats. The Chapter 1 (The Primate Order) dispense with certain “con- chapter also discusses how issues such as habitat special- ventions” that a textbook format might otherwise have fol- ization, and diet and body size differentially affect extinc- lowed.
    [Show full text]