john hawks weblog

paleoanthropology, genetics and evolution

Anthropology 105

  • Laboratory inquiry 3: Forensic case

    Sun, 2013-04-21 20:40 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Identifying the possible remains of a long-lost aviator
    Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan

    Amelia Earhart was a famous aviator and pioneer in flight during the 1920s and 1930s. In 1932 she became the first woman to fly solo nonstop across the Atlantic Ocean, and she set an altitude record for flight in an autogyro in 1931. She was well known for her efforts to increase the role of women pilots and publicize the growing importance of airplanes.

    Earhart attempted an around-the-world flight in 1937, taking a tropical route. One of the final legs of this flight was planned from Lae, New Guinea to Howland Island in the South Pacific Ocean, a total distance of 2550 miles. On July 2, 1937, Earhart took off with her navigator, Fred Noonan, to make this flight. Earhart was known to have reached the vicinity of Howland because of her radio transmissions; the U.S. Navy vessel USS Itasca was tasked with communicating with Earhart and helping guide her to her destination. Her final transmission, at 8:43 am, came after more than an hour of searching for Howland on very low remaining fuel.

    After a 17-day search effort across more than 100,000 square miles of ocean, Earhart was given up for dead. However, many people operating shortwave radio sets across the U.S. claimed to have heard faint transmissions from Earhart during this time. Stories about her possible survival have persisted since that time, and archaeologists and aviation enthusiasts continue to investigate her disappearance.

    One of the most striking stories about Earhart's disappearance is that she may have survived the crash of her plane on another island. The most common island mentioned is the uninhabited Nikumaroro island in present-day Kiribati. A skeleton was recovered on this island by British colonial officials in 1940 and sent to Fiji, from where the remains later disappeared.

    The skeletal remains in this lab were recovered from a private residence on Fiji. One or more of them may have been part of the collection curated by the British government on the island, which were sent away for safekeeping during the Second World War.

    Your task is to determine whether these remains may have belonged to Earhart or Noonan. Earhart was 39 years old at the time of her disappearance and stood approximately 5 feet 8 inches (173 cm) tall. Noonan was 44 and stood approximately five feet 11 inches (180 cm) tall.

    Assess the sex, race, stature and age of these skeletal remains, to the extent possible. Can they be the remains of Earhart or Noonan?

  • Laboratory inquiry 2: Mystery fossil

    Mon, 2013-02-18 16:25 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Laboratory exercise giving instructions on how to approach the mystery fossil problem.

    In this laboratory exercise, you will work to uncover the identity of a hominin fossil.

    The assignment is quite simple: Your TA will give you a fossil cast to work with. Use what you are learning about the morphology of fossil hominins to determine which species or population may have left the evidence you have.

    This exercise will recur each week in labs 5-7 and you will share your analysis of the evidence on the week of lab 8. As you come each week, think about those parts of the fossil record that can be compared to your mystery fossil. Document each species that you encounter. There is a correct answer, and you will be able to determine it from the anatomy in comparison with other specimens in the lab.

  • The scapula and shoulder girdle

    Tue, 2013-02-05 01:07 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Laboratory station explaining the relation of the scapula to locomotor pattern

    The bones that make up the shoulder are the scapula, clavicle and humerus.

    The humerus is the upper arm bone, with a ball-shaped head at the proximal end. The scapula is a flat, triangular bone in humans. The most prominent parts of the scapula are at its lateralmost angle where it articulates with the humerus. Here, the bone bears a shallow, bean-shaped depression called the glenoid fossa. Two projections, the acromial and coracoid processes, extend beyond the glenoid fossa providing attachments for some of the muscles and ligaments of the shoulder and upper arm. The clavicle articulates with the acromial process and extends toward the midline of the torso, with its medial end articulating with the superior part of the sternum.

    Gray's anatomy scapula figure

    What to do: Examine the scapulae of different kinds of primates. You'll find that primates with different locomotor patterns have rather different scapula morphology.

    Monkeys and prosimians that are mainly quadrupeds have relatively long and narrow scapulae. Their shoulders are adapted for forelimb movement anteriorly and posteriorly, but not especially to the side or above the head.

    By contrast, apes and humans have scapulae that are very triangular in shape. The shoulder joint is more mobile in these primates, with the arm able to move freely to the side and above the head.

    The mobility of the scapula is also related to the shape of the trunk. Monkeys have a deep trunk that is relatively narrow from side to side, while apes and humans have a shallower trunk that is wider from side to side.

  • Group life in primates

    Mon, 2013-02-04 00:48 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A discussion of some factors affecting group size and dynamics in primates

    Primates form different kinds of groups. While there is variation within every species, each species has its own typical range of group sizes. Primate groups also vary in their structures. The structure of a group involves details about what kinds of individuals live in a group together. The group structure includes the number of adult males compared to females, called the sex ratio. It also includes the pattern of interactions among individuals, such as whether the entire group spends all its time together, or whether different individuals break into smaller parties for substantial amounts of time. The size and structure of groups have an adaptive role --- some kinds of groups are better suited to certain ecological or social contexts than others.

    Group size and structure are products of adaptation.

    The size and structure of groups in a species is a product of selection on individuals. Individuals always have choices: they can stay in a group, or they can leave; they can permit others to join their group or they can confront newcomers aggressively; they can join together to form a new group, or they can go it alone. Some choices will be more adaptive than others, and individuals who make the right choices about what kind of group to live in will tend to survive or reproduce more. This is how group sizes and structures evolve.

    In an evolutionary context, the kinds of groups found in different primate species are products of their ecology and social interactions. Typical group sizes can vary greatly among even closely related species or primates. The typical social group in orangutans, for example, consists of a single mother and her offspring. In contrast, chimpanzees --- who are relatively close in body size and diet to orangutans --- live in complex communities averaging over fifty individuals. The differences between these species' social groups must be explained by differences in their habitat, movement, mating system, and history. By studying primate groups, primatologists attempt to understand how these factors result in certain kinds of groups but not others.

    Predation

    Most primates are small to medium-sized mammals, and they are vulnerable to many kinds of predators. Carnivores, including leopards and hyenas in the Old World, and jaguars in the Americas pose a serious threat, even to large primates. Other natural predators include hawks and eagles, snakes, humans and other primates. Indeed, other primates are the most significant predators of some species. For example, chimpanzees are the most common predator of red colobus monkeys, as described below.

    Small primates who live in exposed habitat are most vulnerable to predation.

    Most monkeys suffer high rates of predation by carnivores and other predators, but these rates are highest for those species that live in relatively open, exposed habitats. In vervet monkeys, which live in relatively open savanna, predators account for up to 70 percent of deaths (Cheney and Wrangham 1986). Baboons are much larger primates than vervet monkeys, but the rate of predation on savanna baboons is very high as well. At these levels, predation exerts a strong selective force on these populations.

    For these primates, large groups tend to minimize predation risk. A large group of primates has more eyes, and is therefore more likely to notice the approach of a predator. Another strategy to resist predators is for individuals to raise a cry or alarm when they see a predator approach. Alarm calls can be a benefit to such groups, but an individual raising an alarm also raises its own risk --- predators will notice its noisy alarm. But in larger groups, a sudden scatter of alarmed primates competes for attention with the alarm call itself. In large groups, individuals can spend less time scanning for predators, meaning that they can devote more time to foraging. Likewise, the collective action of some individuals may deter predators from attacking. The mere presence of a collection of large male baboons may deter a not-so-hungry jackal, when a lone female and infant would be more likely to suffer attack.

    Movement and food patches

    Some kinds of habitat are much harder to move through than others. Terrestrial primates can move very quickly on the ground. But if they are on the ground far from a tree, they can be highly exposed to terrestrial and aerial predators. Small primates may be highly mobile through dense forest, because they can move quickly from tree to tree. Large primates must move more deliberately through trees, since not every branch can easily support their weight.

    Primates who cannot move easily or quickly may be limited in group size.

    Size and difficulty of movement may partially underlie the differences in group size between chimpanzees and orangutans. Chimpanzees can move effectively across the forest floor, and this terrestrial movement is their major way of traveling from place to place. In this way, they can maintain relatively large groups, as sets of individuals can forage or patrol over relatively long distances and still return regularly to other group members. In contrast, much of the forest habitat of orangutans has a swampy or closed forest floor through which it is very difficult to move. In some parts of the orangutan range, tigers add to the danger of the forest floor. As a result, orangutans spend the overwhelming majority of their time in the forest canopy, where movement is slow but safer (Knott 2001).

    Another element of ecology interacts with movement costs to affect group size: the distribution of food. Foraging for food is one of the major activities that primates conduct every day. Whether a group of primates is large or small, every individual must eat. For a group of primates that finds a huge tree with ripe fruit, life is relatively easy --- they can stay there and eat as long as they are not driven off by competitors or predators. If such large patches of food are common enough, the primates can stay in a large group and move from one patch to another. But nature does not only consist of large patches of ripe fruit and other primate foods. Sometimes fruits ripen a few at a time, so any tree can only feed a few primates. The availability of food can also vary from season to season, so that sometimes there may be plenty of food to eat, but at other times there is little.

    The availability of food limits group size. If patches of food are small, then individuals within a large group may compete intensely for each bite. Being in a large group is a serious cost when resources are slim. This kind of limit to group size also affects orangutans. Orangutans eat a large amount of ripe fruit, but once they find a patch the amount of ripe fruit is usually relatively small for such a large-bodied primate (Terborgh and van Schaik 1987). Larger groups are generally impossible to maintain --- the orangutans would just go hungry unless they could find their own food sources, and it is too costly to move quickly between small patches of fruit. Indeed, in some forests where food is more plentiful, orangutans do tend to spend more time in groups of multiple individuals (Delgado and van Schaik 2000).

  • Primate mating patterns

    Mon, 2013-02-04 00:38 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Primate groups are shaped by the pattern of mating competition and interactions

    Ecology, diet, competition, and ease of movement all affect the size of primate groups. The structure of primate groups is primarily affected by the mating system. There are several elements of primate mating systems. In most species, individuals of either one sex or the other disperse from their natal group --- the one they were born in --- when they reach adulthood. This dispersal affects the structure of the groups by breaking some kinds of relationships and preserving others.

    For example, in primate species where maturing females transfer to a new group, males are often left within the group where they are born. This means that males can form relationships as juveniles that last their entire lives. The long-lasting male coalitions in chimpanzees are a side-effect of female dispersal, conditioned by large group sizes and other social factors. In contrast, male savanna baboons transfer to new groups when they reach adulthood. In baboon groups, the female associations are highly structured by kin relations, since mothers and daughters live in the same group as adults.

    Mating conflicts

    Mating is essential to reproduction, and is the contest through which individuals pass their genes into future generations. From an evolutionary perspective, individuals do whatever they can to promote their own chances to reproduce. Sometimes, individuals can promote their own reproduction by inhibiting the chances of others. In other instances, it may be in their best interest to cooperate with other individuals, or to bide their time waiting for higher-ranking individuals to die or lose status.

    The most basic conflict of interest in mating is between males and females. Because of their biological role in carrying and providing nutrition for their offspring, both before and after birth, females must make a large investment in reproduction. Considering the large cost of reproduction, an adaptive mating strategy for a female is to mate with the male whose genes will contribute to the best possible offspring. For this reason, females are typically choosy about which males they will mate with. This element of female choice can give rise to sexual selection, in which males are advantaged by the possession of features that females value.

    In contrast, males may have extreme levels of competition for mates. A single male may be able, through fighting, threat, or intimidation, to prevent other males from having mating access to females, or even to expel all other adult males from the group. If he is successful, the reproductive opportunities for such a male are tremendous. On the other hand, the opportunities of other males fall to zero. This places a tremendous genetic payoff on social competition for mating.

    The intensity and form of mating competition vary from species to species. Some kinds of primates have a sparse diet that is simply unable to sustain the caloric requirements of huge male body sizes. Other primates or may modify the conditions of combat through coordination of activity with other individuals, emphasis on advertising the risks of combat rather than pursuing combat itself, or other means.

    Sexual dimorphism is a difference in size or form between males and females.

    Males and females within a species often differ in size or morphology. For example, male primates almost always have larger canine teeth than females. The canine teeth are important in male mating competition --- males can display their canines as a threat to other males, and at an extreme they can injure or kill other males with these teeth. One indication of the importance of the canines in displays is that they tend to be more dimorphic in species that are active during the day, as opposed to nocturnal species (Leutenegger and Cheverud 1982).

    Sexual dimorphism in body size is very pronounced in many primate species. For example, orangutan males average around twice the body mass of females. The body mass dimorphism is even more extreme for gorillas than for orangutans. Many different factors influence the body size dimorphism in a primate species (Hedrick and Temeles 1989). One of these is mating competition between males --- intense male competition increases the value of male body size. Another factor can be food competition between the sexes --- when males are larger, they may be able to dominate a larger share of valued food resources. Additionally, males can take on important reproductive roles beyond mating, such as protecting young juveniles from predation or infanticide.

    Territorial primate groups maintain their home ranges against incursions by other groups or individuals.

    Mating competition in many primates involves territoriality, when males defend a home range against incursions from other males. Primate groups may be territorial as a result of a single male's action, or the coordinated activity of multiple males. For example, Males of some primate species dominate access to females by preventing other males from coming into their home range. These primate males are said to be territorial. Even small social groups, like the monogamous male-female pairs of gibbons, may be highly territorial. But chimpanzees provide one of the strongest instances of territoriality among primates. Groups of male chimpanzees walk the approximate perimeter of their territory, engaging in violent conflicts with any members of neighboring groups they might encounter (Wrangham 1999). As observed by Jane Goodall (1986) at Gombe in Tanzania, the males of one group of chimpanzees killed all of the adult males and several females and juveniles in a neighboring group over the course of several months.

    Kinds of groups in primates

    Group size, dispersal, and mating competition all contribute to the proportion of males and females found in any given group. Sometimes a single male and female form a group; sometimes a single male and multiple females; sometimes multiple males and females; and occasionally a single female and multiple males.

    Monogamous, or pair-bonded, species have long-lasting mating relationships between a single male and a single female.

    Gibbons tend to form long-lasting associations between a single adult male and a single adult female. These pair-bonded primates occupy territories that they defend against incursions from other individuals. Both males and females make long vocalizations, called songs, to establish their shared territory. They often vocalize together in duets, although in different contexts based on whether threats come from males or female intruders (Geissmann 2000, Mitani 1987). These groups of a single adult male and female and their offspring are called monogamous groups.

    Polygynous groups have a single dominant male and multiple females.

    In many kinds of primates, a single male may dominate a group with multiple females. This is a polygynous group --- a multifemale, single-male group. Polygyny results from strong mating competition among males. Only if a single adult male can repel other males from the group can he reap the powerful reward of mating with many females.

    A well-known species with polygynous groups is the gorilla. Gorilla groups generally have one adult male, up to eight or more females, and their dependent offspring. Solitary males live outside of these polygynous groups and sometimes manage extragroup matings with females. These groups are maintained by strong mating competition --- a dominant male in a group repels other males by threats, intimidation, or violence.

    Even so, there is variability in gorilla societies. In mountain gorillas, multimale groups are common (Robbins 1999). In such groups, the dominant males have a majority of matings, and often harass subordinate males that attempt to mate. But subordinates do have many mating opportunities, demonstrating a social flexibility among gorillas.

    Polyandrous groups have a single dominant female and multiple males.

    Marmosets and tamarins, called callitrichids, are the smallest of the New World monkeys. These monkeys are among the few primates for which twin births --- and sometimes triplets --- are common. This means that females tend to have high energetic requirements in pregnancy, lactation, and caring for young. Callitrichids therefore face unique challenges compared to other primates.

    One way that these monkeys adapt to caring for more young is that older offspring of a female may stay with her for a longer time instead of quickly going off on their own. These older offspring help to watch and sometimes provide food for their younger siblings (Bales et al. 2000).

    Another behavioral adaptation is for a single female to mate with and coexist with multiple males. This kind of mating system is called polyandry. Mating with multiple males reduces the paternity certainty of the males --- a male cannot know if a female conceived her offspring with him or another male. As long as mating opportunities are limited, males may cooperate in a group with a single female on the chance of having offspring with her. These males help to provide food and defense for the young juveniles in polyandrous groups. Polyandry is not universal among callitrichids; it is adopted more when resources and mating opportunities are rare (Goldizen 1988).

    Fission-fusion societies are large multimale, multifemale communities that spend much of their time divided into smaller units that combine in different combinations.

    Some primates coexist in large groups numbering 50 individuals or more. A group this large is always a multimale group --- there is no way for a single male to deter other males from twenty or more adult females. But multiple males sometimes coordinate their behavior to deter neighboring groups. A large multimale group may occupy and defend a large territory, especially where movement costs are relatively low.

    Large primates who live in large groups have a problem: there are very few food patches large enough to feed them all. So even though a large multimale, multifemale group may occupy a substantial territory, it may not be possible for them to feed together much of the time. Chimpanzees live in such large multimale, multifemale groups. Even though members of the group share a dominance hierarchy, social interactions, and relationships, they spend much of their time apart. Smaller groups of individuals --- sometimes a single female and her young, sometimes male-female pairs, and sometimes small groups of either sex --- split apart in order to forage for food. These small groups recombine and split in different combinations, and sometimes all of them come together, especially when food is plentiful. This kind of social organization is called a fission-fusion society. Individuals divide into small foraging groups and come back together into the full community for social interactions.

  • Laboratory inquiry 1: Outgroup

    Mon, 2013-02-04 00:10 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory station giving information about the skeleton of the mongoose lemur

    Your task in the first laboratory inquiry assignment is to develop a hypothesis about the anatomy of the common ancestor of two species of anthropoid primates. To accomplish this, you will need to consider the anatomy of an outgroup, in this case a species outside the anthropoids.

    In the previous laboratory, you were able to examine a skull of a prosimian primate as an outgroup. That can work very well as a way to compare the anatomy and number of teeth and other features of the cranium. But to compare postcranial anatomy you will need to have a complete skeleton of a prosimian primate.

    Unfortunately, we don't have one in the laboratory. Instead, we'll consider some features of the skeleton of the mongoose lemur here:

    Lemur skeleton illustration

    The mongoose lemur has a body between 30 and 45 centimeters long, with a long tail. Its natural habitat is in northern Madagascar, and it also can be found today in the Comoros Islands.

    As you can see from the picture, the mongoose lemur's skeleton has arms and legs nearly the same length, with its legs just a bit longer than the arms.

    The skeleton has 12 thoracic vertebrae and 7 lumbar vertebrae. It also has a long tail.

    The mongoose lemur's scapula is relatively long and narrow. This is contrast to a human scapula, which is triangular in shape with a very broad superior border.

    As you formulate a hypothesis about the anatomy of the common ancestor of your anthropoid species, this information will assist you.

    Study terms: 
  • How do primates move around?

    Fri, 2013-02-01 09:29 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    Exploring the way that primate locomotion influences body plan and behavior.

    The diversification of the first primates from other early mammals took place partly because the ancestors of the primates came to inhabit a unique environment --- the trees. These early primates developed many features to allow them to move quickly in this arboreal habitat. Early primates evolved the ability to direct and focus both eyes on objects, called binocular vision, which allowed them to accurately judge distances to branches and other objects. They also developed grasping hands and feet, with opposable digits --- thumbs and big toes. The fingertips were broader in these early primates, to apply greater grip strength to branches, and instead of claws primates developed wide nails. All of these features helped primates to succeed as arboreal specialists.

    • Primate adaptations to arboreal environments include binocular vision, opposable digits, enlarged fingertips and nails.

    Many primates today continue this arboreal existence, spending large proportions of their time off the ground and in the trees. Moving in an arboreal environment has the obvious risk of falling out of the tree if everything does not go exactly right. Yet primates are virtual trapeze artists, masters of the arboreal environment. Smaller monkeys and lemurs can rush headlong from branch to branch, seemingly mindless of any risk of falling, because of their unrivaled arboreal skills. These primates bridge immense gaps by leaping from one tree to another, limited only by the acceleration of gravity. Even large primates like chimpanzees and orangutans can rapidly scale trees and move effectively from one tree to another. These arboreal skills are made possible by a large suite of adaptations, many of which originated very early in primate evolution.

    But even though all primates are climbers, some of them have developed more specialized adaptations to other kinds of movement, or locomotion. These specialized forms of movement are adapted to different kinds of environments. Some primates are excellent at moving terrestrially, on the ground. Others are good at climbing tall vertical trunks and branches, or at swinging from one branch to another. Species who use these special forms of locomotion have consequences in their skeletons and muscle configurations.

    Vertical clinging and leaping

    Many prosimians, including tarsiers and many lemurs, use a form of locomotion called vertical clinging and leaping. These kinds of primates live in habitats where they climb relatively small tree trunks or bamboo. Sometimes they leap between these vertical supports. Other times, especially for the larger lemurs like sifakas, they leap along the ground. Their legs are relatively long compared to their arms, so that terrestrial movement can be more effective by leaping than by running on all fours.

    This form of locomotion gives their bodies a very distinctive shape --- especially tarsiers, who are masters of this pattern. Tarsier legs are longer than their bodies and forelimbs put together, and they especially have very long foot bones. The name for these bones are tarsals, giving these unique little primates their name.

    Below-branch locomotion

    Some monkeys and all apes are adapted more to hanging beneath branches than running atop them. This suspensory style of locomotion is essential for larger arboreal primates, which can move above only the largest branches. Hanging below branches enables large primates to climb into the forest canopy, often on smaller branches than could support them from above.

    A skeletal adaptation to suspension includes relatively long arms with very mobile shoulder joints. In contrast to quadrupedal monkeys, whose arms are limited in their range of motion, apes can move their arms through nearly a complete 360 degree circle. Also, apes' trunks are relatively flat from front to back, with the shoulders mostly alongside rather than in front of the spine. Putting the arms at the side requires long and strong collarbones --- called clavicles --- that serve as a strut supporting the shoulder musculature. Also, apes have extremely long fingers, useful for hooking onto branches quickly. Their thumbs are quite small, as they do not usually grip with their thumbs onto branches while hanging from them.

    • Brachiation is arm-over-arm swinging.

    Sometimes apes swing arm over arm from one branch to the next, a locomotor pattern called brachiation. Gibbons and siamangs are a brachiation specialists, but all living hominoids have the skeletal anatomy to enable them to brachiate. Brachiation conserves the energy of forward movement by treating the body as a swinging pendulum. This is a very efficient way to travel for medium-sized primates, combining energetic conservation with speed, and working with gravity instead of against it.

    • Quadrumanous locomotion uses all four hands and feet to move among branches.

    Large-bodied hominoids brachate less than gibbons. Branches of sufficient size to support the entire weight of a large ape are rarely located close enough to brachiate between them. Also, the pendular motion is less efficient for larger primates, because their arms just cannot be as long in proportion to the size of their bodies. Instead, when in the trees, the living great apes grip branches with three or four of their hands and feet at once. This allows large apes to support their weight on relatively small branches in the canopy. The masters of this kind of locomotion are orangutans, who move through the forest canopy moving one hand or foot at a time to a new support branch. This kind of locomotion, as if an animal was using four hands equally, is called quadrumanous locomotion.

    Knuckle-walking and fist-walking

    • Knuckle-walking allows quadrupedal walking in chimpanzees and gorillas, whose hands are adapted to suspension.

    Chimpanzees and gorillas, when they are on the ground, walk quadrupedally using the proximal finger joints of their hands instead of the palms of their hands. They use this style of locomotion, called knuckle-walking, because of their unique forelimbs. These apes have long forelimbs relative to their hindlimbs, and their hands are very long with strong tendons for curling the long fingers into a powerful hook. These hands are very well adapted to suspension in the trees, but they are not capable of being extended with the palms toward the ground, which is the way most other primates walk quadrupedally. So instead of walking palm-down, they use their knuckles.

    A few skeletal features of living chimpanzees and gorillas appear to be adaptations to knuckle-walking. Because the arms are held in a locked position while supporting the body, unlike the somewhat flexed position usual in quadrupeds, the proximal end of the ulna is more U-shaped, built for supporting the humerus mainly from below. Likewise, the joints of the hands are more limited in motion, and relatively incapable of being extended backward at the wrist and knuckles. It is not clear whether these unique anatomical consequences of knuckle-walking evolved in parallel in chimpanzees and gorillas, or whether they represent homologies inherited from a knuckle-walking common ancestor of gorillas, chimpanzees, and humans.

    Although many orangutans spend little time on the ground in their natural habitat, they can walk quadrupedally. But unlike chimpanzees and gorillas, orangutans do not walk on their knuckles when they are on the ground. Instead, they curl their hands inward, walking on the outside of their fists. This fist-walking accomplishes the same goal as knuckle-walking --- it allows walking on all fours without facing the palms of the hands toward the ground.

  • Laboratory inquiry 1: Reconstructing ancestral primates

    Tue, 2013-01-22 00:41 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    An inquiry-based laboratory exercise developing tree thinking and testing homology

    Note: This page will change, as your inquiry assignment progresses. Keep checking back here.

    Humans, living apes and monkeys are grouped together as anthropoid primates. The anthropoids share a common ancestor that lived sometime more than 55 million years ago. Paleontologists have found fossils of ancient anthropoids that lived very near that ancestor, and also ancient anthropoids that were related to tarsiers, the next closest branch of the primate phylogeny.

    Among the anthropoids, Old World monkeys (cercopithecoids) and hominoids are closer relatives, and New World monkeys (ceboids) are more distantly related. In other words, cercopithecoids and hominoids form a group that descends from a common ancestor within the anthropoids. We call this group the catarrhine primates.

    In this inquiry-based laboratory project, you will use evidence from two recent primates to infer the probable anatomy of their common ancestor. Together with your laboratory group, you will be assigned two recent primates. Every group will receive a different pair of primates. Some of these will be New World monkeys, some will be Old World monkeys, and some will be hominoids -- that is, apes or humans. The pairs of primates will have one thing in common: their true common ancestors were ancient anthropoid primates.

    How can scientists reconstruct the anatomy of a common ancestor, if they haven't necessarily discovered fossils of that species?

    Every inference about an ancestor is a hypothesis. If we see that two descendants of the ancestor are similar in their anatomy, we can begin with the hypothesis that the ancestor was also the same as those two descendants. For example, humans and squirrel monkeys (a New World primate) both have fingernails instead of claws. We can hypothesize that our common ancestor also had fingernails.

    We test this hypothesis in several ways. We can look at other descendants of the same ancestor. Our common ancestor with squirrel monkeys was the same species as the common ancestor of gorillas and squirrel monkeys, and the same as the common ancestor of baboons (an Old World monkey) and howler monkeys (a New World monkey). Not only humans and squirrel monkeys but also gorillas, chimpanzees, baboons, macaques, guenons, langurs, howler monkeys, spider monkeys, and all other monkeys and apes have fingernails. It seems very unlikely that all these species would have evolved fingernails by coincidence or in parallel with each other. The hypothesis that they inherited fingernails from their common ancestor seems very well supported by this evidence.

    We can also look at species that are more distantly related. Such species give an outgroup for our phylogenetic comparisons. Lemurs, tarsiers, and lorises all have fingernails also -- although lemurs and lorises have instead a single claw, called a grooming claw on one finger. It appears from the evidence that not only the common ancestor of all anthropoids, but also the common ancestor of

    Looking at an outgroup is especially important in cases where two living descendants of the same ancestral species are different from each other. Macaques have a tail. Humans don't. Did our common ancestor -- the ancestor of the catarrhines -- have a tail or not? Looking at just catarrhine species doesn't help us determine whether human ancestors lost a tail or instead macaque ancestors gained one. All living apes lack tails, all living Old World monkeys at least have some tail. But a look at an outgroup helps enormously. New World monkeys have tails, as do lemurs and tarsiers. These outgroups suggest that the ancestors of catarrhines had a tail and that the ancestors of the apes lost their tails.

    For this inquiry, you will consider two major areas of anatomy. In week 2 of the laboratory, you will examine teeth. The number and anatomy of teeth vary among anthropoids, and you will develop and test a hypothesis about the number and anatomy of teeth in the common ancestor of your two primates.

    In week 3 of the laboratory, you will examine body plan, including the number and types of vertebrae and the anatomy of the forelimb. You will develop and test a hypothesis about the body plan in the common ancestor of your two primates.

    You will develop these hypotheses and work as part of a laboratory group. In week 4 of the lab, you will present your findings. One of the best aspects of this inquiry is that different groups may arrive at different hypotheses, depending on which species of recent primates they have examined. As you come together with other groups to discuss your findings, be prepared to compare the evidence from different groups to see whether it confirms or rejects your hypotheses about the common ancestor.

  • A quick start on anatomical directions

    Mon, 2013-01-21 23:57 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory station helping to orient on directions in anatomy

    When talking about bones and teeth, we will need to use several terms to orient ourselves. Some of the terms are obvious, like right and left. Other intuitive terms can fail us, however. For example, we could use higher and lower to refer to parts of our arms, but these terms will be confusing if we lift our arms over our heads. Even left and right can cause confusion: sometimes we need to talk about the left surface of our right arm, for instance. For reasons like these, anthropologists use terms with specific anatomical meanings to talk about the
    positions of bones and features on them.

    Humans are special compared to many vertebrates in having a vertebral axis that runs roughly up and down, at least while we are standing up. For this reason, a long tradition in human anatomy uses these terms:

    Superior: Higher. The nose is superior to the mouth.

    Inferior: Lower. The nostrils are most visible on the inferior aspect of the nose.

    These terms are always used when referring to directions on the head. For the postcranial skeleton, we may also use cranial and caudal, which orient along the axis of the spine. For animals that don't carry their spine in an upright or vertical position, cranial and caudal will always denote the same directions.

    The vertebral axis is only one direction, and our bodies have two additional directions: front to back, and side to side. The terms for the front to back direction are:

    Anterior: Toward the front. The nose is on the anterior side of the head.

    Posterior: Toward the rear. The posterior side of the head is frequently covered in hair.

    Dorsal: In humans, toward the back of the torso. The shoulder blades are dorsal to the ribs.

    Ventral: In humans, toward the front of the torso. The navel is on the ventral aspect of the body.

    In humans, dorsal and ventral are mostly synonymous with posterior and anterior, and the latter terms are often used. In animals with habitual postures that are different than ours, dorsal and ventral retain an anatomical meaning that is unchanged and thus prevent confusion.

    Left and right are absolute terms instead of relative terms. These terms separate one half of the body from the other. The right arm will always be the right arm, and the right lung is right even though it is not as far right as the right arm.

    To refer to the position of a feature relative to another, the following terms are used:

    Medial: Closer to the midline, or dividing line between right and left halves, of the body. The neck is medial to the shoulder.

    Lateral: Farther from the midline. The eye is lateral to the nose.

    The limbs are special cases, because they can move a great deal relative to the spine. For the limbs, anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral are all relative terms used in reference to a particular limb position, called the anatomical position. For humans, the arms are in anatomical position when hanging at the sides of the body, palms forward, and the legs are in anatomical position in a normal standing posture, feet side by side. This means that the pinky side of the wrist is medial, and the thumb side is lateral. Superior and inferior are not used for the limbs at all. These terms are replaced by:

    Proximal: Closer to the point of attachment with the torso. In other words, closer to the shoulder or the hip. The elbow is proximal to the wrist.

    Distal: Farther from the point of attachment. The ankle is distal to the knee.

    Figure illustrating anatomical directions

    These terms can be somewhat confusing to learn, but they prevent a great deal of confusion in referring to bones and their features. The most common ones
    in this course will be anterior, posterior, superior, inferior, medial, lateral, proximal, and distal. Teeth and the hands and feet each have a few special directional terms, which will be introduced along with these anatomical areas.

  • A quick start to the skeleton

    Mon, 2013-01-21 23:29 -- John Hawks
    Synopsis: 
    A laboratory station giving a short introduction to the bones and major parts of the skeleton

    In this course, you will be working extensively with skeletal anatomy. The skeleton provides the primary evidence about our evolutionary history. Skeletal evidence is a limited source of information about biology, but soft tissue evidence is fragile and does not persist long even in curated museum contexts. So a disproportionate fraction of our knowledge about anatomical variation comes from the skeleton.

    Fortunately anthropologists have been very clever in finding evidence that connects skeletal anatomy to behavior and other aspects of biology. Nowadays bone and teeth provide some of the strongest evidence about diet, development and health of ancient human and primate populations. We are even getting new genetic evidence from bone and teeth, including the complete genomes of archaic humans.

    Knowing the skeleton is an essential skill in biological anthropology. Most students will enter this class with a basic knowledge of the bones of the skeleton, and this lab station should help remind you about the parts you probably already know.

    Basic divisions of the skeleton

    The skull, or cranium sits atop the spine. The rest of the skeleton, everything from the neck down, is called the postcranium, or postcranial skeleton

    The skull itself is a complicated structure made up of 26 cranial bones plus the mandible. Except for the mandible, these bones mostly are fused together so that they do not move. The joints between most of the cranial bones are borders where the bones knit together, called sutures. You will learn most of the major bones of the cranium in this class. For now, be sure to remember the mandible.

    The teeth are rooted in the mandible and the bones of the face, called the maxillary bones, or maxillae. The teeth are the only part of the skeletal system that come into direct contact with the environment. They are not bone, but are instead made up of hard calcified tissues called dentin and enamel. The teeth are small but contain a vastly outsized fraction of information because of their long persistence in the fossil record as well as their close relationship to development and diet.

    The postcranial skeleton can be roughly divided into the appendicular skeleton, which includes the arms, legs, hands and feet, and the axial skeleton, which includes everything else.

    The long bones

    The major bones of the arm and leg are called the long bones. These are variations on a common theme: A long shaft with two ends, each of which forms a movable joint, or articulation with another bone or structure. The long bones are all paired bones, meaning that each individual has both a left and right. The anatomy of the each bone enables us to identify whether it came from the right or left side of the skeleton.

    The bones of the leg include the femur, tibia and fibula. The femur is the thigh bone, the tibia is the shin bone, and the fibula is a thin bone at the outside of the leg, mainly noticeable because it forms the outside of the ankle joint.

    The bones of the arm are the humerus, ulna and radius. The humerus is in the upper arm, the radius and ulna are the lower arm bones. These two bones rotate around each other, and are mostly obvious at the wrist and elbow joint. The ulna is the bone that is most prominent on the back of the elbow. The radius is the lower arm bone that lies nearer the thumb, the ulna is nearer the pinky side of the hand.

    The axial skeleton

    The spinal column makes up the connection between upper and lower parts of the skeleton. It is made up of 24 vertebrae in most people. Twelve of the vertebrae connect to twelve pairs of ribs. These numbers vary within humans, and between humans and other kinds of primates, and that variation will be the subject of a lab.

    Each shoulder girdle is composed of the scapula, or shoulder blade, and that clavicle, or collar bone. At the front of the chest is a flat bone called the sternum that connects ribs by means of the costal cartilages.

    Finally, at the lower end of the axial skeleton is the pelvis. This structure is composed of three bones, the sacrum at the base of the spine, and the left and right os coxae or innominate bones. The pelvis is also the subject of an entire lab in this course.

    Practice

    That quick introduction will help to orient you toward the skeleton. Remember that each of the bones can be found within your own body, and for the most part you can feel them from the outside. In total, the human skeleton has more than 206 bones -- more because there are minor bones within tendons that vary in number in different people. Humans are variable, as you will discover during the course of this semester, and not everyone has the same numbers of bones or the exact same arrangement.

Pages

Subscribe to Anthropology 105

Neandertals

For years, I've worked on their bones. Now I'm working on their genes. Read more about the science studying these ancient people.

Denisova

From a finger bone of an ancient human came the record of a completely unexpected population. My lab is working on the science of the Denisova genome.

Acceleration

The advent of agriculture caused natural selection to speed up greatly in humans. We're uncovering some of the ways that populations have rapidly changed during the last 10,000 years.

Malapa

Just outside Johannesburg, the Malapa site is producing some of the most exciting finds in human evolution. This site is the headquarters of the Malapa Soft Tissue Project.