DOCSLIB.ORG

Development Team

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development Team Paper No. : 14 Human Origin and Evolution Module : 01 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Development Team Principal Investigator Prof. Anup Kumar Kapoor Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi Dr. Satwanti Kapoor (Retd Professor) Paper Coordinator Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi Ms. Sangeeta Dey & Prof. A.K. Kapoor Content Writer Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi Prof. R.K. Pathak Content Reviewer Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh 1 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology Description of Module Subject Name Anthropology Paper Name Human Origin and Evolution Module Name/Title Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Module Id 01 Contents: 1. Introduction 2. Place of origin of human diversity 3. Probable time of origin of human diversity 4. Human biological diversity: a brief history 4.1 Propliopithecus 4.2 Aegyptopithecus 4.3 Pliopithecus 4.4 Proconsul 4.5 Dryopithecus 4.6 Oreopithecus 4.7 Ramapithecus 4.8 Australopithecus 4.9 Homo habilis 4.10 Homo erectus 4.10.1. Java Man 4.10.2. Pecking man 4.11 Homo sapiens 4.11.1. Heidelberg Man 4.11.2. Neanderthal Man 2 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology 4.11.3. Solo Man 4.11.4. Rhodesian Man 4.11.5. Cro – Magnon Man 5. Homo sapiens sapiens 6. Summary Learning Objectives: To describe Human biological diversity. To understand the progressive evolutionary process. To describe progression changes that occur in biological dimension of man. To know about connecting links that lead to Homo sapiens sapiens. To understand impact of evolution for the biological evolution of man. To explore the importance of diverse human forms and variants. 1. Introduction The course of human phylogeny or the human biological evolution like other mammals can be followed only from the fossil records. Though the fossil records are fragmentary, the paleoanthropologists have been able to piece them together and draw them an almost complete phylogeny of primates and of modern man, Homo sapiens sapiens. The early stages of human biological diversity can only be studies by comparative anatomy of fossils and also by comparative biochemistry of present day humans, apes and other primates. Information on the later stages in human evolution are based on artefacts that include stone tools, pottery, fire – hearths and the fossils of other animals along with human fossils. Human biological diversity can be understand as the gradual process by which the present diversity of plants and animals arose from the earliest and most primitive organisms, which is believed to have been continuing for atleast the past 3000 million years. It is believed that every species was individually created by God in the form in which it exists today and is not capable of undergoing any 3 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology change. This is referred as theory of special creation. Special creation was contradicted by fossil evidence and genetic studies, and the pseudoscientific arguments of creation science cannot stand up to logical examination. It was the generally accepted explanation of origin of the origin of life until the advent of Darwinism. However, Lamarck is the first biologist to publish a theory to explain how one species could have evolved into another. He suggested that changes in an individual are acquired during its lifetime, chiefly by increased use or disuse of organs in response to “a need that continues to make itself felt” and that these changes are inherited by its offspring. Thus the long neck and limbs of a giraffe are explained as having evolved by the animal stretching its neck to browse on the foliage of trees. This is also called as inheritance of acquired characteristics. But it was not until the publication of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species in 1859 that special creation was seriously challenged. Unlike Lamarck, Darwin proposed a feasible mechanism for evolution and comparative anatomy. The modern version of Darwinism which incorporates discoveries in genetics remains the most acceptable theory of evolution. 2. Place of origin of human diversity The fossils of pre-human and ancestral human forms are obtained from widely diverse regions of Africa, Asia and Europe which indicates that man’s centre of origin was probably in Asia and Africa. More precisely human must have been originated from central Asia because the oldest known fossils have been obtained from Asia, China, Java and India (Siwalik hills); the number of domesticated animals and plants is maximum in Asia; A number of migrations of animals have occurred in the past from Asia; Asian culture appears to be the oldest culture; the climatic conditions in Asia and nearby places were most conductive for human evolution and rich fossil beds are discovered from rift valley in East Africa, where Hominid fossils have been found. These areas are – Olduvai Gorge, Lake Victoria and Lake Natrona in Tanzania and Lake Turkana in Kenya. 3. Probable time of origin of human diversity Primates are presumed to have started evolving in Eocene of Tertiary Period between 75 and 60 million years ago or living in forests of Miocene. In late Oligocene, about 25 – 30 million years ago, 4 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology when these evergreen forests were replaced by drier Savannah grasslands, some tree – dwelling primates returned back to the ground and became ancestors of apes and human. Thus, evolution of man and apes started together from some tree – dwelling common ancestors about 25 – 30 million years ago. Humanization or the achievement of human organization or appearance of genus Homo started about 5 million years ago. 4. Human Biological Diversity: A brief History French anatomist, Marcellin Boule presumed that a generalized monkey like creature must have been our hominid ancestor but F. Wood Jones proposed that it would be easier to derive humans from a small – toothed generalized tarsier – like prosimian than explaining the reduction in the size of the teeth during the evolution of man from monkey like apes. https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiRkvS - 7KXUAhXKK48KHdheBEUQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcomoevolucionamosyparadondevamos.blogspot.com %2F&psig=AFQjCNHA5d-C5MNifXuwhhSnyHAlc7b0bg&ust=1496722586492498 5 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology 4.1 Propliopithecus https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8 &ved=0ahUKEwiewIaYi8fVAhXGSBQKHQpzCpQQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Falchet ron.com%2FPropliopithecus-4102709-W&psig=AFQjCNHO549ZwPHmKy0_eajoRngI- jXDRg&ust=1502262777191051 The fossil of first known ape was obtained from Fayam deposits of Egypt. It was described under the name propliopithecus. It lived from about 30 – 35 million years ago in Oligocene. It is represented by the fossil jaws and teeth. No doubt more or less ape – like, these were short statured with monkey – like teeth. Their dental formula is 2, 1, 2, 3. Their incisors teeth were vertical rather than directed forward and molars has 5 cusps each. Swinnerton presumed that the apes have directly evolved from the tarsiers bypassing the monkeys. There are two different concepts of man’s Oligocene ancestry – that Propliopithecus directly gave rise to Ramapithecus; that Propliopithecus gave rise to Dryopithecus which in turn evolved into apes and human. 6 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology 4.2 Aegyptopithecus https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj n0rGkjcfVAhXBpo8KHTg_CBUQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F246079567 109440856%2F&psig=AFQjCNHM5jWSIoPcdv4ph_8h2ZISFbSh7g&ust=1502263356816951 Its fossils were found by E.L. Simon and Richard in 1980 from Cairo. These were similar to Propliopithecus. 4.3 Pliopithecus https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwiT- cCWlMfVAhVJq48KHaT1AwIQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fslideplayer.com%2Fslide%2F7733370%2F& psig=AFQjCNHQpK0KrXA8iUBfSpSSeIFXxC4Jxw&ust=1502265212985672 7 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology Their fossils were obtained from Fayum deposits of Egypt and some other places. These forms existed in Miocene and Pliocene periods. These are considered to be ancestors of gibbons and orang-utans. 4.4 Proconsul https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjns 8yVl8fVAhWIN48KHW9GC00QjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fslideplayer.com%2Fslide%2F7733370%2F&ps ig=AFQjCNHQpK0KrXA8iUBfSpSSeIFXxC4Jxw&ust=1502265212985672 Its fossils were described by Leakey (1930) from east Africa near Victoria Lake in Kenya from Miocene deposits. Its molars had five cusps each. Their face was prognathous. It walked on its four legs. 8 Human Biological Diversity: A brief history Anthropology 4.5 Dryopithecus https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwiK1eCHmMfVAh XDQ48KHaxNBw4QjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fivy_thinks%2Fevolution-of- man-47698969&psig=AFQjCNGzP0dmI4bxngROgqk0WbEFeQ3s6w&ust=1502266253250141 In early Miocene about 25 million years ago, there existed a group of apes, collectively known as Dryopithecus. D. Africanus, formerly known as Procunsul, exhibits close similarity to chimpanzee and is considered to be a common ancestor of man and apes or a direct forerunner of man. Although ape- like, it had arms and legs of the same length and its legs and heels indicate that it must have assumed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Blades), Side Scrapers
    226 • PaleoAnthropology 2008 Figure 5. Tool types assigned to the Tres Ancien Paléolithique and the Lower Paleolithic. blades), side scrapers (single, double, and transverse), In Romanian archaeology, it is used as a synonym for the backed knives (naturally backed and with retouched back), Pebble Culture and is meant to designate Mode I indus- and notches/denticulates (Figure 6). tries, as can be inferred from the typology of the material (see Figure 5). Discussion A very difficult issue is learning what meaning under- tErMINoLOGY lies the term Lower Paleolithic itself. In order to clarify this This is a topic that is still very unclear for the Lower Pa- problem, one must look back a few decades, when there leolithic record of Romania. Inconsistencies regarding the was a belief that the cultures that postdate the Pebble Cul- terms are mentioned here. ture were the Abbevillian, Acheulian and Clactonian, all emerging from Pebble Culture industries. After the cul- tres Ancien Paléolithique (tAP) tural meaning of the Abbevillian and the Clactonian were This term refers, sensu Bonifay (Bonifay and Vandermeer- challenged, in Romanian archaeology the framing of this sch 1991), to industries that were prior to the emergence period became more cautious. There was no explicit shift of developed Acheulian bifaces and Levallois technology. defended in publications, but gradually the two terms fell Figure 6. Tool types assigned to the Premousterian. Lower Paleolithic of Romania • 227 out of use in defining distinct industries and became just supposed to be either Clactonian or Premousterian. Some- a typological and a technical description, respectively. At times, due to the particular morphology of the piece, ad- the same time, the existence of the Acheulian north of the ditional interpretations were made regarding the piece’s Danube was no longer claimed, but the term still was used various presumed functions, such as cutting, crushing and in classification of bifaces.
    [Show full text]
  • The Basques of Lapurdi, Zuberoa, and Lower Navarre Their History and Their Traditions
    Center for Basque Studies Basque Classics Series, No. 6 The Basques of Lapurdi, Zuberoa, and Lower Navarre Their History and Their Traditions by Philippe Veyrin Translated by Andrew Brown Center for Basque Studies University of Nevada, Reno Reno, Nevada This book was published with generous financial support obtained by the Association of Friends of the Center for Basque Studies from the Provincial Government of Bizkaia. Basque Classics Series, No. 6 Series Editors: William A. Douglass, Gregorio Monreal, and Pello Salaburu Center for Basque Studies University of Nevada, Reno Reno, Nevada 89557 http://basque.unr.edu Copyright © 2011 by the Center for Basque Studies All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Cover and series design © 2011 by Jose Luis Agote Cover illustration: Xiberoko maskaradak (Maskaradak of Zuberoa), drawing by Paul-Adolph Kaufman, 1906 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Veyrin, Philippe, 1900-1962. [Basques de Labourd, de Soule et de Basse Navarre. English] The Basques of Lapurdi, Zuberoa, and Lower Navarre : their history and their traditions / by Philippe Veyrin ; with an introduction by Sandra Ott ; translated by Andrew Brown. p. cm. Translation of: Les Basques, de Labourd, de Soule et de Basse Navarre Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: “Classic book on the Basques of Iparralde (French Basque Country) originally published in 1942, treating Basque history and culture in the region”--Provided by publisher. ISBN 978-1-877802-99-7 (hardcover) 1. Pays Basque (France)--Description and travel. 2. Pays Basque (France)-- History. I. Title. DC611.B313V513 2011 944’.716--dc22 2011001810 Contents List of Illustrations..................................................... vii Note on Basque Orthography.........................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • C H a P T E R VII Comparison of Stone Age Cultures the Cultural
    158 CHAPTER VII Comparison of Stone Age Cultures The cultural horizons ami pleistocene sequences of the Upper Son Valley are compared with the other regions to know their positions in the development of Stone Age Cultures* However, ft must not be forgotten that the industries of various regions were more or less in­ fluenced by the local factors: the environment, geology f topography, vegetation, climate and animals; hence some vsriitions are bound to occur in them* The comparison is first made with industries within India and then with those outside India. i) Within India • Punjab Potwar The Potwar region, which lies between the Indus and Jhebm, including the Salt Range, was examined by Oe Terra and Pater son. The latter has recently published a revised 2 stuiy of the cultural horizons. 1. De Terra, H., and Paterson, T.T., 1939, Studies on the Ice Age in India and Associated Human Culture, pp.252-312 2. Paterson, T.T., and Drummond, H.J.H., 1962, Soan,the Palaeolithic of Pakistan. These scholars had successfully located six terraces (Including TD) in the Sohan Valley: "nowhere else in the Potwar is the leistocene history so well recorded as along the So&n Hiver and its tributaries.w The terraces TD and TI placed in the Second Glacial and Second Inter- glacial, respectively fall in the Middle Pleistocene, terraces ? and 3 originated in Third Glacial and Inter- glaual period. Th succeeding terrace viz., T4 has bean connected with the Fourth Glacial period. The last terrace - T5 - belongs to Post-glacLal and Holacene time. The oldest artifacts are located in the Boulder Con­ glomerate and are placed in the earliest Middle Pleisto­ cene or Lower Pleistocene.
    [Show full text]
  • A CRITICAL EVALUATION of the LOWER-MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD of the CHALK UPLANDS of NORTHWEST EUROPE Lesley
    A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE LOWER-MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD OF THE CHALK UPLANDS OF NORTHWEST EUROPE The Chilterns, Pegsdon, Bedfordshire (photograph L. Blundell) Lesley Blundell UCL Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD September 2019 2 I, Lesley Blundell, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed: 3 4 Abstract Our understanding of early human behaviour has always been and continues to be predicated on an archaeological record unevenly distributed in space and time. More than 80% of British Lower-Middle Palaeolithic findspots were discovered during the late 19th/early 20th centuries, the majority from lowland fluvial contexts. Within the British planning process and some academic research, the resultant findspot distributions are taken at face value, with insufficient consideration of possible bias resulting from variables operating on their creation. This leads to areas of landscape outside the river valleys being considered to have only limited archaeological potential. This thesis was conceived as an attempt to analyse the findspot data of the Lower-Middle Palaeolithic record of the Chalk uplands of southeast Britain and northern France within a framework complex enough to allow bias in the formation of findspot distribution patterns and artefact preservation/discovery opportunities to be identified and scrutinised more closely. Taking a dynamic, landscape = record approach, this research explores the potential influence of geomorphology, 19th/early 20th century industrialisation and antiquarian collecting on the creation of the Lower- Middle Palaeolithic record through the opportunities created for artefact preservation and release.
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Ecology and Adaptation with an Emphasis on Hominoid Evolution
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-1997 Aspects of Ecology and Adaptation with an Emphasis on hominoid Evolution Clare Katharine Stott University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Stott, Clare Katharine, "Aspects of Ecology and Adaptation with an Emphasis on hominoid Evolution. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1997. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4234 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Clare Katharine Stott entitled "Aspects of Ecology and Adaptation with an Emphasis on hominoid Evolution." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Andrew Kramer, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Richard Jantz, Lyle Konigsberg Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Clare K. Stott entitled "Aspects of Ecology and Adaptation with an Emphasis on Hominoid Evolution".
    [Show full text]
  • Linnaean Taxonomic Classification Nomenclature All Biologists Use a Single Naming System That Essentially Follows the Practice O
    Linnaean Taxonomic Classification Nomenclature All biologists use a single naming system that essentially follows the practice of Linnaeus. Taxa are always given Latin names (or Latinized ones). This is a label and not a definition. (Homo sapiens – wise man) The name of a species always consists of two words – the genus (generic) name followed by the species (specific) name. Grammatically, the genus is a noun and the species is adjective or another noun in opposition. The genus name is always capitalized and italicized. The species name is italicized only. If you used the genus name already you may use the first letter followed by a period. Homo sapiens, H. sapiens In the rare cases where a subgenus name is used it is capitalized, italicized and put in parentheses after the genus. Australopithecus (Paranthropus) robustus If a subspecies name is used it comes at the end and is italicized only. E.G. Homo sapiens sapiens Categories above the genus level are capitalized but not italicized. They generally have endings that show the level of classification. ini for tribe (Infraorder), oidea for superfamily, idae for family. Above the superfamily the only rule is that the name must be Latin or Latinized. The Latin names are often anglicized by dropping the ending and it is not normally capitalized. Hominidae – hominid. Technically the full name of the taxon should include the name of its inventor and the date but this is only done if the discussion is concerning the taxonomy of the name. Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758 Ideally, a taxon should have only one name, but some have been given more than one and there is a disagreement over which one has priority or which one is better.
    [Show full text]
  • The Modern Man: a Revision of His Definition and a New Estimation of His Emergence Date
    9 International Journal of Modern Anthropology Int. J. Mod. Anthrop. 1 : 1-110 (2008) Available online at www.ata.org.tn Original Synthetic Article The modern man: a revision of his definition and a new estimation of his emergence date Hassen Chaabani Hassen Chaabani was born the 07 / 09 / 1947 in Tunis (Tunisia). He is Full Professor and research unit Director at Monastir University. He is the Founder and the President of the Tunisian Association of Anthropology. He is the Founder and the Editor in-Chef of the International Journal of Modern Anthropology. Specialist in Human Genetics, Biological Anthropology and some cultural and religious subjects, he wrote many articles and books. Laboratoire de Génétique Humaine et d'Anthropologie, Faculté de Pharmacie, 5000 Monastir, Tunisia. E.mail: [email protected] Abstract - In spite of important anthropological data stored up to date, the recent human evolution is still a subject of great controversy. Here I present a revision of the definition of modern man and an attempt to estimate the date of his emergence. The anatomical feature criterion cannot be considered as a rigorous criterion for identified modern human fossils from those of earlier Homo peoples. This identification could be carried out indirectly from analysis of cultural products and, if possible, directly by ancient DNA analysis. During the last 20,000 years period, Homo peoples have shown a first real cultural progress, which reflects their possession of the superior level of potential intellectual aptitude that marks the definition of modern man. On the basis of this definition, in agreement with several anthropological basic data, I consider that the real modern man, Homo sapiens sapiens, emerged at about 20,000 years ago.
    [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]
  • The Dates of the Discovery of the First Peking Man Fossil Teeth
    The Dates of the Discovery of the First Peking Man Fossil Teeth Qian WANG,LiSUN, and Jan Ove R. EBBESTAD ABSTRACT Four teeth of Peking Man from Zhoukoudian, excavated by Otto Zdansky in 1921 and 1923 and currently housed in the Museum of Evolution at Uppsala University, are among the most treasured finds in palaeoanthropology, not only because of their scientific value but also for their important historical and cultural significance. It is generally acknowledged that the first fossil evidence of Peking Man was two teeth unearthed by Zdansky during his excavations at Zhoukoudian in 1921 and 1923. However, the exact dates and details of their collection and identification have been documented inconsistently in the literature. We reexamine this matter and find that, due to incompleteness and ambiguity of early documentation of the discovery of the first Peking Man teeth, the facts surrounding their collection and identification remain uncertain. Had Zdansky documented and revealed his findings on the earliest occasion, the early history of Zhoukoudian and discoveries of first Peking Man fossils would have been more precisely known and the development of the field of palaeoanthropology in early twentieth century China would have been different. KEYWORDS: Peking Man, Zhoukoudian, tooth, Uppsala University. INTRODUCTION FOUR FOSSIL TEETH IDENTIFIED AS COMING FROM PEKING MAN were excavated by palaeontologist Otto Zdansky in 1921 and 1923 from Zhoukoudian deposits. They have been housed in the Museum of Evolution at Uppsala University in Sweden ever since. These four teeth are among the most treasured finds in palaeoanthropology, not only because of their scientific value but also for their historical and cultural significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Closest Relatives of Primates Earliest True Primates Share
    Closest relatives of Primates Earliest true primates share: • Archonta • Inner ear morphology – Scandentia (tree shrews) • Postorbital bar, orbital convergence – Dermoptera (flying lemurs) • Large brain case with large orbits – Chiroptera (bats) • Modifications of the elbow • Plesiadapiformes • Elongation of the heel, opposable thumb – Paleocene radiation of unusual critters and nails (instead of claws) – Replaced by rodents – Put in and out of Primate order Eocene Oligocene • Lots of fossils from N America and Europe; little • Continents mostly in present positions from Africa or Asia; • S America and Australia separate from • Prosimians anatomically and likely behaviorally Antarctica • Adapoids and Omomyoids, ecologically diverse; • Best site is Fayum, Egypt 28-32 my very similar early so likely monophyly Lemurs, Lorises • Adapoids like higher primates with large size, • , early anthropoid primates diurnality, frugivory and folivory (feet like lemurs) • Propliopithecus and Aegyptopithecus • Omomyoids more similar to galagos but • Dental apes but New World monkey bodies increase in size and folivorous late • Late Oligocene settling of S. America by • Where are prosimians lately? anthropoid primates Relationships based on fossils and Monkey Evolution molecular evidence • Hominoid and cercopithecoid apomorphies • New World Monkeys (Platyrrhini) show up in Oligocene, primitive versions by Miocene and at 20 and 18 my thereafter look very much like modern forms • Gibbons and Siamangs at 17 my • Old World Monkeys (Catarrhini) show up in Miocene (after apes); Victoriapithecus and then • Orang utans at 12 my split between colobines and cercopithecines; lots of evolutionary change late and lots of • Gorillas at 9 my convergences make systematics challenging • Pan troglodytes and Pan paniscus at 6 my • Also absence of fossils from many lineages • Very successful lately; out competing most apes • Putting chimp vs.
    [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]