A4 1022 - Copy

docx

School

University of Minnesota-Twin Cities *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1022

Subject

Anthropology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ConstableSteel3613

Anth 1022, Introduction to Physical Anthropology Online Course Dr. Paul Roach paul.roach@century.edu Assignment 4 : Relating to the third week’s assigned reading: Boyd & Silk chapters 10, 11, 12 & 13 1. (200-250 words) From chapter 10: Look at Figure 10.37 of our text. This is a phylogeny of extinct hominins. Please define phylogeny with a sentence, and then go on to explain what is being represented in this image. What do the connections between black bars represent? How about the question marks? Be sure to mention the evolutionary processes represented by those dividing lines where one bar divides into two or more. Hint: allopatric process is the most likely (chpt. 4). Contemplate the phylogeny as an expansive genealogical chart meticulously crafted for ancient human- like entities. Upon scrutinizing Figure 10.37, it becomes apparent that the black bars intricately connecting discrete points function as symbolic bridges between my ancestral counterparts. The bifurcation of a black bar into two or more entities elucidates pivotal instances in evolutionary history where these beings diverged, giving rise to distinct groups or species—effectively marking critical junctures in our ancestral narrative. The incorporation of question marks within the diagram serves to communicate inherent uncertainties, signifying potential lacunae in our comprehension, most likely stemming from incomplete fossil records or other knowledge gaps. This deliberate notation underscores the cautious approach to interpreting certain aspects of our ancient lineage. Remarkably, the delineated lines within the illustrative schema may encapsulate allopatric processes, denoting a phenomenon wherein my ancient progenitors underwent differentiation into discrete groups owing to geographical isolation. This paradigm draws a parallel with familial members dispersed across diverse cities, gradually adopting distinct cultural practices over successive generations. Consequently, these diverging lines may be emblematic of the evolutionary trajectory of my ancient relatives, fanning out into distinct groups facilitated by geographic separation. This theoretical framework, frequently invoked by scientists, offers insights into the conceptualization of new species formation, particularly in scenarios where populations become isolated and undergo distinct evolutionary trajectories. 2. (200-250) From chapter 10: Describe with as much detail as you can in 200 words the anatomical evidence that strongly suggests Australopithecines and Paranthropines had different diets. The anatomical evidence pointing to distinct dietary adaptations between Australopithecines and Paranthropines is multifaceted and provides insights into their ecological niches. Australopithecines, such as Australopithecus afarensis, exhibited dental and craniodental features indicative of a diet primarily consisting of mixed foods, including fruits, leaves, and potentially some hard or tough items. Their teeth were relatively unspecialized, with a combination of features suitable for both soft and hard food consumption. On the other hand, Paranthropines, exemplified by Paranthropus robustus and Paranthropus boisei, displayed robust craniodental adaptations suggestive of a more specialized and robust feeding apparatus. Their skull structures featured large, flat faces, broad cheekbones, and

massive jaws with enlarged molars and premolars. These morphological characteristics are well-suited for heavy chewing and grinding, suggesting a diet that included tough, fibrous vegetation or possibly hard objects, like seeds or nuts. The powerful jaw musculature and large, thickly enameled teeth in Paranthropines align with the mechanical demands of processing harder and more abrasive foods. In summary, the detailed anatomical evidence, including dental morphology and craniodental adaptations, strongly implies that Australopithecines and Paranthropines had different diets. Australopithecines displayed a more generalized dental pattern indicative of a mixed diet, while Paranthropines exhibited robust craniodental features consistent with a diet emphasizing the consumption of tougher, more mechanically challenging foods. These distinctions highlight the diverse dietary strategies employed by early hominins to adapt to their respective environments. 3. (200-300) From chapter 11: Most animals don’t divide subsistence labor between males and females. Why did our Stone Age ancestors evolve to have distinct men’s and women’s food-gathering activities and skills? What evidence supports this from modern foraging people? Our Stone Age ancestors had a clever strategy for getting food—they divided the job between men and women. This split of tasks, known as the sexual division of labor, meant that men and women had different roles in providing food for their community. Men usually took on activities that required strength, like hunting big animals, while women focused on gathering plants and taking care of the little ones. This team approach was like a well-thought-out plan to efficiently get a variety of foods. Hunting brought in a big, energy-packed food source, and gathering ensured a steady supply of plant-based foods. Even in today's world, we can see this division of tasks in some groups that still hunt and gather for their meals. For instance, among the !Kung San people in the Kalahari Desert, men often go hunting, using their strength and stamina, while women excel at gathering plant foods. This way of sharing responsibilities ensures that everyone gets a good mix of food, highlighting how our ancestors were pretty clever in organizing their work to make sure everyone had enough to eat. This division of labor played a key role in their survival and thriving as a community. 4. (100-150) From chapter 11: Why do humans have prolonged juvenile periods? Humans have long childhoods because our brains need a lot of time to grow and learn. Unlike many animals, when we're born, our brains are not fully developed. This extra time helps our brains get smarter by learning new things during childhood and adolescence. Also, we live in groups with complex social rules, and having a long childhood gives us time to learn how to get along with others and understand these rules. It's like a school where we learn about friendships, cooperation, and how to behave in our communities. Plus, we have a lot of things to learn from our parents and elders, like traditions and important skills. So, having a prolonged childhood helps us grow smarter, be good at getting along with others, and pass on important knowledge from one generation to the next. 5. (250-300) From chapter 11:

How did our early hominin ancestors first acquire the meat that became an increasingly necessary part of their diet according to the taphonomic evidence? Our early ancestors, being pretty smart, had a unique way of securing meat—they often relied on finding and consuming animals that were already deceased. Rather than being the main hunters, they took on the role of opportunistic scavengers, making the most of meat from animals that predators or natural processes had already taken down. This understanding comes from the study of old bones and tools. When scientists dig into these remnants, they discover telltale signs of scavenging, such as marks from animals' teeth and bones showing evidence of being broken open to access the delicious marrow. What's fascinating is that the tools our ancestors had weren't exactly top-notch for hunting. This observation supports the notion that, in the early stages, they were more inclined toward scavenging, seizing the opportunity presented by what was already available. It's like they were making the best of what nature provided. As time progressed and things changed, especially with improvements in tools, our ancestors likely became more adept at actively hunting for meat. Yet, initially, they were likely more scavengers than hunters when it came to obtaining meat. This scavenging strategy was a clever approach for our early ancestors to ensure a steady food supply for survival in their challenging environments. 6. (200-300) From any one of the three chapters: After reading chapters 10, 11, & 12, go to the internet and explore news reports about discoveries made by paleoanthropologists after January 2021 that will require an update to be made to one of these chapters by the authors. Choose one, describe it (the primate fossil/hominin fossil/tool/analysis), and tell me which section of these chapters it would alter and how. Include a bibliographic reference to the article you are citing (any standard reference style ok—MLA, APA, Chicago, AAA, etc.). http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/fossils_ruins/early_humans/ is a good place to look. 7. (150-200 words) From chapter 13: Upper Paleolithic peoples [ Homo sapiens ] were better able to cope with their environment than the Neanderthals were. How so, and what are some of the main reasons for this? Some people think that Homo sapiens, who lived in the Upper Paleolithic period, were better at dealing with their surroundings than Neanderthals. One reason is that Homo sapiens were good at creating and using different tools, making things like blades that helped with hunting and getting resources. They also had bigger social groups, and this could mean they shared knowledge and skills better, like how to make tools or hunt together. Homo sapiens might have been better at communicating using symbols or possibly even language, helping them work together in larger groups. They were also found in various places, adapting to different environments, which could show they were good at dealing with different kinds of places and climates. However, it's important to know that not everyone agrees on this, and some people think Neanderthals were skilled and adapted to their environments in their own ways.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

8. (200-300 words) From chapter 13: Summarize how genetic data contributes to our growing understanding of what has happened to Homo sapiens in the last 200,000 years. Examining our genes is like peering into a historical record that unfolds the narrative of Homo sapiens over the past 200,000 years, offering profound insights into our journey. The analysis of genetic data serves as a valuable tool, allowing scientists to unravel the intricate patterns of genetic variations, migrations, and interactions among human populations. Through this exploration, we gain a deeper understanding of how early human groups moved, settled, and adapted to diverse environments. Genetic studies delve into ancestral connections, shedding light on relationships and revealing moments of interbreeding with other hominin species, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. These genetic markers provide a chronological map, elucidating key events like migrations out of Africa and the timing of significant population movements. Moreover, genetic data contributes to our comprehension of the impact of natural selection on various human traits, unraveling the genetic foundations of adaptations that allowed Homo sapiens to thrive in different surroundings. By harmonizing genetic information with archaeological and anthropological findings, researchers construct a more nuanced and comprehensive story of Homo sapiens' evolutionary odyssey. This interdisciplinary approach, integrating genetic data with material evidence, helps paint a vivid picture of our ancestral past, contributing to our evolving understanding of the rich tapestry of human history over the last 200,000 years.

A4 1022 - Copy

Related Documents