Evolution of Grasping Among Anthropoids

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

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). In particular, the hand is and human morphological autapomorphies (Napier, involved in prehension, such as gripping of static foods 1956; Tuttle, 1965; Schultz, 1969; Susman, 1979, 1989; (fruits, leaves) and dynamic foods such as insects or other Marzke et al., 1992; Clark, 1993). The precision grip has prey (frogs, rodents, small antelopes). Some primates been considered the most important hand function of all such as chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchins prehensile movements (Napier, 1980). (Cebus apella) use their hands to manipulate tools, to Our aim is to reconsider this simple model of grasping crack nuts, for example (Boesch & Boesch, 1990; Fraga- evolution in the light of morphometric data from szy et al., 2004), whereas gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) use their numerous species of primates and behavioural consider- hands to extract food from holes (Pouydebat et al., 2005). ations such as areas of contact between the fingers and The evolution of primates (humans included) is linked to the food grasped by extant primates. Therefore, the the development of those behaviours allowing organisms possible presence of a phylogenetic signal in the behavio- to exploit the resources in their environment. A general ural and relevant morphometric characters is investi- model of grasping in primates proposes an evolution from gated and the correlation between morphometric and a ‘power grip’ towards a ‘precision grip’, supposed to behavioural characters is also determined. We also have taken place in hominids; the precision grip has been present models that enable inference of behaviours from suggested to appear with Australopithecus afarensis (Mar- morphological characters, which we use to infer behav- zke, 1997) or with Homo (Napier, 1956, 1960). The power iours in three extinct primates: Proconsul africanus, grip is defined as a grasp with the palm, and is probably a Oreopithecus bambolii and Australopithecus afarensis, three species considered to have divergent grasping abilities. Correspondence: Michel Laurin, Comparative Osteohistology, UMR CNRS Proconsul africanus and Australopithecus afarensis are from 7179, Universite´ Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris 6), Paris, France. Africa, which is probably the cradle of hominoid diver- Tel.: (33) 1 44 27 36 92; e-mail: [email protected] sification (Arnason et al., 2000; Folinsbee & Brooks, ª 2008 THE AUTHORS. J. EVOL. BIOL. 21 (2008) 1732–1743 1732 JOURNAL COMPILATION ª 2008 EUROPEAN SOCIETY FOR EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Evolution of grasping among anthropoids 1733 2007). Oreopithecus bambolii was found in Tuscany, Italy. object by using frame-by-frame analysis in the labora- It is included here because its prehensile behaviour has tory. We obtained a minimum of 90 min of observation been inferred in the literature (Moya´-Sola´ et al., 1999; of grasping behaviour for each chimpanzee, baboon, Susman, 2004). macaque and capuchin, and 180 min for each orang- utan, gorilla and gibbon. Material and methods Frame-by-frame analysis was performed with a Basler camera (Basler, Ahrensburg, Germany), recording 250 images per second. Each prehension technique was Quantification of areas of contact characterized by contacts between one or several lateral Subjects or ventral areas of a minimum of two digits or the The data represented in this study are based on a wide complete palm. From this analysis, we determined five variety of primates observed in captivity (Appendix S1): categories of object prehension. nine capuchins (C. apella), nine macaques (Macaca fuscata), nine baboons (Papio papio), three gibbons Size and nature of the objects (Hylobates lar), seven orang-utans (Pongo pygmaeus), three For all primates except humans, the objects were small gorillas (G. gorilla) and 14 chimpanzees (P. troglodytes). and scattered on the ground; the objects involved We also have observations from nine children, 2–5 years spherical cereals and fruits. In humans, the objects were of age (Homo sapiens), and nine adults (H. sapiens). Data spherical pearls. It was necessary to standardize the for three other species were collected from the literature diameter and the volume in order to calibrate these (Christel, 1993; Christel et al., 1998): black mangabey parameters according to the length of the hand of the (Cercocebus aterrimus), geladas (Theropithecus gelada) and species studied. In this paper, we always presented bonobos (Pan paniscus). These species represent a wide spherical objects to the animals and determined their array of body size, hand morphological traits and diameter. The diameter of the objects was calibrated anthropoid taxa. Indeed, capuchins do not possess an according to the length of the hand of the species. As we opposable thumb and none of the studied primate species knew the length of the hand of the smallest studied except humans has morphological traits usually associ- species (76.2 ± 5.3 mm for capuchin) and the diameter ated with precision grip. of the smallest object (3.0 ± 0.1 mm) grasped by this species, we deduced the diameter of objects for other Protocol of observations species as follows (D = diameter, L = length, all units The observations of grasping of small and large objects in mm): have been made in various groups of animals belonging to zoological gardens in France. All individuals observed D object for species x ¼L hand of the species xÂ3:0=76:2 in any given species belong to a single group and the For example, to calculate the diameter of objects to be hierarchical position of each specimen was established. grasped by chimpanzees, we used the length of the The animals were observed without modification of their chimpanzee’s hand (235.0 mm) and that of the smallest social (within their group) or environmental (e.g. logs, hand (the capuchins’ hand: 76.2 mm) and the diameter rocks, ropes) context to maintain: (i) all behavioural of the smallest object (3.0 mm). In this example, Dxc interactions between the members of the group; (ii) all corresponds to the determined diameter of the small constraints in relation to the environment; and (iii) all object for chimpanzees (c). We calculated the following possibility of opportunistic manipulation (Parker & value for objects in chimpanzees: Dxc is equal to 9.0 mm Gibson, 1977). (235.0 mm · 3.0 ⁄ 76.2). We followed the same method All observations of the animals were made for to calculate the diameter of objects for each species 7 months (Pouydebat, 2004). The duration of observa- (Appendix S2). tion for each specimen was standardized following the usual methods suggested in comparative ethology Number of grasps (Lehner, 1996). A preliminary analysis was conducted by A total of 5549 grasps were recorded for the eight studied ‘ad libitum sampling’ (Altmann, 1974) that permits the species (Table 1). The percentage of each prehension individual recognition of all subjects for each species and category was calculated on the basis of the total number the identification of a wide variety of areas of fingers in of grasping observed in each species. contact with the presented objects. During the study, each individual was observed according to the method of Morphometric data ‘focal animal sampling’ (Altmann, 1974). We filmed the Morphometric data were obtained from hand skeletons animals during two sessions of 2 h each for chimpanzees, belonging to the collection of the Muse´um National baboons, capuchins and macaques and six sessions of 2 h d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris). Our sample consisted of 17 each for orang-utans, gorillas and gibbons. Every 15 min, measurements of the hand of 26 taxa (Appendix S3). A sequences of grasping which lasted 5 min were
Recommended publications
  • Human Evolution: a Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H
    PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Human Evolution: A Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H. Smith HUMAN EVOLUTION: A PALEOANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE F.H. Smith Department of Anthropology, Loyola University Chicago, USA Keywords: Human evolution, Miocene apes, Sahelanthropus, australopithecines, Australopithecus afarensis, cladogenesis, robust australopithecines, early Homo, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Australopithecus africanus/Australopithecus garhi, mitochondrial DNA, homology, Neandertals, modern human origins, African Transitional Group. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Reconstructing Biological History: The Relationship of Humans and Apes 3. The Human Fossil Record: Basal Hominins 4. The Earliest Definite Hominins: The Australopithecines 5. Early Australopithecines as Primitive Humans 6. The Australopithecine Radiation 7. Origin and Evolution of the Genus Homo 8. Explaining Early Hominin Evolution: Controversy and the Documentation- Explanation Controversy 9. Early Homo erectus in East Africa and the Initial Radiation of Homo 10. After Homo erectus: The Middle Range of the Evolution of the Genus Homo 11. Neandertals and Late Archaics from Africa and Asia: The Hominin World before Modernity 12. The Origin of Modern Humans 13. Closing Perspective Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary UNESCO – EOLSS The basic course of human biological history is well represented by the existing fossil record, although there is considerable debate on the details of that history. This review details both what is firmly understood (first echelon issues) and what is contentious concerning humanSAMPLE evolution. Most of the coCHAPTERSntention actually concerns the details (second echelon issues) of human evolution rather than the fundamental issues. For example, both anatomical and molecular evidence on living (extant) hominoids (apes and humans) suggests the close relationship of African great apes and humans (hominins). That relationship is demonstrated by the existing hominoid fossil record, including that of early hominins.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Reassessment of the Phylogenetic Relationships of the Late Miocene Apes Hispanopithecus and Rudapithecus Based on Vestibular Morphology
    Reassessment of the phylogenetic relationships of the late Miocene apes Hispanopithecus and Rudapithecus based on vestibular morphology Alessandro Urciuolia,1, Clément Zanollib, Sergio Almécijaa,c,d, Amélie Beaudeta,e,f,g, Jean Dumoncelh, Naoki Morimotoi, Masato Nakatsukasai, Salvador Moyà-Solàa,j,k, David R. Begunl, and David M. Albaa,1 aInstitut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain; bUniv. Bordeaux, CNRS, MCC, PACEA, UMR 5199, F-33600 Pessac, France; cDivision of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024; dNew York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology, New York, NY 10016; eDepartment of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1QH, United Kingdom; fSchool of Geography, Archaeology, and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, WITS 2050, South Africa; gDepartment of Anatomy, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0001, South Africa; hLaboratoire Anthropology and Image Synthesis, UMR 5288 CNRS, Université de Toulouse, 31073 Toulouse, France; iLaboratory of Physical Anthropology, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University, 606 8502 Kyoto, Japan; jInstitució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, 08010 Barcelona, Spain; kUnitat d’Antropologia, Departament de Biologia Animal, Biologia Vegetal i Ecologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain; and lDepartment of Anthropology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 2S2, Canada Edited by Justin S. Sipla, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, and accepted by Editorial Board Member C. O. Lovejoy December 3, 2020 (received for review July 19, 2020) Late Miocene great apes are key to reconstructing the ancestral Dryopithecus and allied forms have long been debated. Until a morphotype from which earliest hominins evolved. Despite con- decade ago, several species of European apes from the middle sensus that the late Miocene dryopith great apes Hispanopithecus and late Miocene were included within this genus (9–16).
    [Show full text]
  • A Unique Middle Miocene European Hominoid and the Origins of the Great Ape and Human Clade Salvador Moya` -Sola` A,1, David M
    A unique Middle Miocene European hominoid and the origins of the great ape and human clade Salvador Moya` -Sola` a,1, David M. Albab,c, Sergio Alme´ cijac, Isaac Casanovas-Vilarc, Meike Ko¨ hlera, Soledad De Esteban-Trivignoc, Josep M. Roblesc,d, Jordi Galindoc, and Josep Fortunyc aInstitucio´Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avanc¸ats at Institut Catala`de Paleontologia (ICP) and Unitat d’Antropologia Biolo`gica (Dipartimento de Biologia Animal, Biologia Vegetal, i Ecologia), Universitat Auto`noma de Barcelona, Edifici ICP, Campus de Bellaterra s/n, 08193 Cerdanyola del Valle`s, Barcelona, Spain; bDipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Universita`degli Studi di Firenze, Via G. La Pira 4, 50121 Florence, Italy; cInstitut Catala`de Paleontologia, Universitat Auto`noma de Barcelona, Edifici ICP, Campus de Bellaterra s/n, 08193 Cerdanyola del Valle`s, Barcelona, Spain; and dFOSSILIA Serveis Paleontolo`gics i Geolo`gics, S.L. c/ Jaume I nu´m 87, 1er 5a, 08470 Sant Celoni, Barcelona, Spain Edited by David Pilbeam, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved March 4, 2009 (received for review November 20, 2008) The great ape and human clade (Primates: Hominidae) currently sediments by the diggers and bulldozers. After 6 years of includes orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans. fieldwork, 150 fossiliferous localities have been sampled from the When, where, and from which taxon hominids evolved are among 300-m-thick local stratigraphic series of ACM, which spans an the most exciting questions yet to be resolved. Within the Afro- interval of 1 million years (Ϸ12.5–11.3 Ma, Late Aragonian, pithecidae, the Kenyapithecinae (Kenyapithecini ؉ Equatorini) Middle Miocene).
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Inferences in Fossil Apes (Primates, Hominoidea): Does Encephalization Reflect Intelligence?
    JASs Invited Reviews Journal of Anthropological Sciences Vol. 88 (2010), pp. 11-48 Cognitive inferences in fossil apes (Primates, Hominoidea): does encephalization reflect intelligence? David M. Alba Institut Català de Paleontologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Edifici ICP, Campus de la UAB s/n, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Barcelona (Spain); Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università degli Studi di Firenze. Via G. La Pira 4, 50121 Firenze (Italy); e-mail: [email protected] Summary – Paleobiological inferences on general cognitive abilities (intelligence) in fossil hominoids strongly rely on relative brain size or encephalization, computed by means of allometric residuals, quotients or constants. This has been criticized on the basis that it presumably fails to reflect the higher intelligence of great apes, and absolute brain size has been favored instead. Many problems of encephalization metrics stem from the decrease of allometric slopes towards lower taxonomic level, thus making it difficult to determine at what level encephalization metrics have biological meaning. Here, the hypothesis that encephalization can be used as a good neuroanatomical proxy for intelligence is tested at two different taxonomic levels. A significant correlation is found between intelligence and encephalization only at a lower taxonomic level, i.e. on the basis of a low allometric slope, irrespective of whether species data or independent contrasts are employed. This indicates that higher-level slopes, resulting from encephalization grade shifts between subgroups (including hylobatids vs. great apes), do not reflect functional equivalence, whereas lower-level metrics can be employed as a paleobiological proxy for intelligence. Thus, in accordance to intelligence rankings, lower-level metrics indicate that great apes are more encephalized than both monkeys and hylobatids.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life History of Ardipithecus Ramidus: a Heterochronic Model of Sexual and Social Maturation
    Early origins of human sexual and social maturation Gary Clark, Maciej Henneberg ANTHROPOLOGICAL REVIEW • Vol. 78 (2), 109–132 (2015) The life history of Ardipithecus ramidus: a heterochronic model of sexual and social maturation Gary Clark, Maciej Henneberg Biological Anthropology and Comparative Anatomy Unit University of Adelaide Medical School, Australia ABSTRACT: In this paper we analyse the ontogeny of craniofacial growth in Ardipithecus ramidus in the context of its possible social and environmental determinants. We sought to test the hypothesis that this form of early hominin evolved a specific adult craniofacial morphology via heterochronic dissociation of growth trajectories. We suggest the lack of sexual dimorphism in craniofacial morphology provides evidence for a suite of adult behavioral adaptations, and consequently an ontogeny, unlike any other species of extant ape. The lack of sexually dimorphic craniofacial morphology suggests A. ramidus males adopted reproductive strategies that did not require male on male conflict. Male investment in the maternal metabolic budget and/or paternal investment in offspring may have been reproductive strategies adopted by males. Such strategies would account for the absence of innate morphological armoury in males. Consequently, A. rami- dus would have most likely had sub-adult periods of socialisation unlike that of any extant ape. We also argue that A.ramidus and chimpanzee craniofacial morphology are apomorphic, each representing a derived condition relative to that of the common ancestor, with A. ramidus developing its orthognatic condition via paedomoporhosis, and chimpanzees evolving increased prognathism via peramorphosis. In contrast we suggest cranial volume and life history trajectories may be synapomorphic traits that both species inher- ited and retained form a putative common ancestral condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Primates, Mammalia) from Anatolia
    A NEW SPECIES OF TORTONIAN ANTHROPOID (PRIMATES, MAMMALIA) FROM ANATOLIA İbrahim TEKKAYA Mineral Research and Exploration Institute of Turkey SUMMARY. — We discovered in 1973—during a paleontological research in the continental Series of the Middle Miocene of Turkey—a fossil mandible of an Anthropoid which is significant for Turkey and Eurasia. The mandible was found at Hırsızderesi, near the town of Çandır (Kalecik), in Ankara Province. We examined the specimen and consider that from the anthropological point of view it has both Anthropoid and Homo characteristics. Since both primitive and advanced characteristics were observed in this specimen, we assigned this mandible to a new species of Sivapithecııs genera and called it Sivapithecus alpani.1 INTRODUCTION The Mammalian biozone of Çandır is one of the most important discoveries resulting from the paleontological investigations of the last years. For this reason it is hoped that the representatives of the continental Mammalian fauna in this Series will solve many problems regarding the Cenozoic of Turkey and the migration of Mammalian fauna from Asia to Europe. This Mammalian fauna was first discovered in 1968 by the Turkish-German teams of investi- gators. That year a small excavation was made., and again in 1969 the same group made a second small excavation at the same locality. The last investigation was made in 1973, in the area between Kale- cik-Çandır-Çankırı by the Turkish Vertebrate Paleontology Group of the M.T.A. Institute. This most recent work uncovered valuable evidence of Mammalian fossils which were studied and are now exhibited in the Natural History Museum, M.T.A.
    [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]
  • FYI's Compiled.Cwk
    3.987 - Human Origins and Evolution Spring 2006 List of FYI’s - e-mailed “handouts” and communications The following items were circulated to students before or after lectures as background and/or follow-up information on questions and points raised in specific lectures. Lecture 6 FYI #1 Oreopithecus Lecture 8 FYI #2 Tooth formation rates Lecture 11 FYI #4 The gluteus maximus Lecture 8 FYI #5 On the diet of australopithecines Lecture 12 FYI #6 On early stone tool use Lecture 17 FYI #7 Headstrong hominids Lecture 17 FYI #9 Tan-Tan Acheulian figurine Lecture 17 FYI #10 Schoningen spear Lecture 15 FYI #11 The role of cooking in human evolution Lecture 21 FYI #12 Early sapiens mtDNA in Australia Lecture 21 FYI #13 Possible Neandertal/sapiens hybrid? Lecture 20 FYI #14 Neandertal mobility patterns Lecture 22 FYI #17 One last mystery at Dolni Vestonice -------------------------- FYI #1 - Oreopithecus Date: 3/2/06 I threatened you with some spam about Oreopithecus, a Miocene, possibly bipedal, ape. Well here it is. As I mentioned one of the really interesting recent discoveries is that there may have been another genus of now extinct apes which independently developed bipedalism. The candidate is Oreopithecus a 9 to 7 million year old genus of European ape, however, your textbook authors don't provide any real discussion of this evidence or this possibility. The genus Oreopithecus has been recognized for over 130 years, it being one of the first fossil apes to be discovered and described. Below are several references and abstracts of relatively recent papers which have reanalyzed the Oreopithecus remains and have somewhat controversially proposed that Oreopithecus was a habitual biped.
    [Show full text]
  • Harrison CV June 2021
    June 1, 2021 Terry Harrison CURRICULUM VITAE CONTACT INFORMATION * Center for the Study of Human Origins Department of Anthropology 25 Waverly Place New York University New York, NY 10003-6790, USA 8 [email protected] ) 212-998-8581 WEB LINKS http://as.nyu.edu/faculty/terry-harrison.html https://wp.nyu.edu/csho/people/faculty/terry_harrison/ https://nyu.academia.edu/TerryHarrison http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4224-0152 zoobank.org:author:43DA2256-CF4D-476F-8EA8-FBCE96317505 ACADEMIC BACKGROUND Graduate: 1978–1982: Doctor of Philosophy. Department of Anthropology, University College London, London. Doctoral dissertation: Small-bodied Apes from the Miocene of East Africa. 1981–1982: Postgraduate Certificate of Education. Institute of Education, London University, London. Awarded with Distinction. Undergraduate: 1975–1978: Bachelor of Science. Department of Anthropology, University College London, London. First Class Honours. POSITIONS 2014- Silver Professor, Department of Anthropology, New York University. 2003- Director, Center for the Study of Human Origins, New York University. 1995- Professor, Department of Anthropology, New York University. 2010-2016 Chair, Department of Anthropology, New York University. 1995-2010 Associate Chair, Department of Anthropology, New York University. 1990-1995 Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, New York University. 1984-1990 Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, New York University. HONORS & AWARDS 1977 Rosa Morison Memorial Medal and Prize, University College London. 1978 Daryll Forde Award, University College London. 1989 Golden Dozen Award for excellence in teaching, New York University. 1996 Golden Dozen Award for excellence in teaching, New York University. 2002 Distinguished Teacher Award, New York University. 2006 Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science.
    [Show full text]
  • Origins of the African Hominoids: an Assessment of the Palaeobiogeographical Evidence
    C. R. Palevol 3 (2004) 323–340 Human Paleontology and Prehistory (Paleoanthropology) Origins of the African hominoids: an assessment of the palaeobiogeographical evidence Susanne M. Cote Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Peabody Museum, 11 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Received 29 September 2003; accepted after revision 29 March 2004 Written on invitation of the Editorial Board Abstract The origin of the African hominoid clade is a matter of current debate, with one hypothesis proposing that chimpanzees, humans, and gorillas originated in tropical Africa, while another suggests they originated in Eurasia. Support for the latter hypothesis includes biogeographical patterns inferred from the fossil record and proposed Miocene hominoid phylogenetic relationships. The absence of fossil apes from the African Late Miocene has been used as evidence that crown hominoids were not present in Africa during this period. An alternative explanation for the paucity of these hominoids is that biases in collection and preservation have affected the African Miocene fossil record. A survey of currently known African Later Miocene sites and their faunas shows that these sites generally do not contain hominoids because of small sample sizes, poor preservation, or inappropriate habitat sampling. These preservation biases have important implications for evaluating the origins of the Homininae. To cite this article: S.M. Cote, C. R. Palevol 3 (2004). © 2004 Académie des sciences. Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved. Résumé Les origines des hominoïdes africains : évaluation des faits paléobiogéographiques. L’origine géographique du clade des hominoïdes africains est couramment débattue, les hypothèses suggérant d’une part l’Afrique tropicale, d’autre part l’Eurasie, pour l’origine des gorilles, des chimpanzés et des humains.
    [Show full text]