Bio Anth Week 11
Bio Anth Week 11 Anth 1001
Popular in Biological Anthropology
Popular in anthropology, evolution, sphr
This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Jaimee Kidd on Wednesday April 13, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Anth 1001 at George Washington University taught by Shannon C. McFarlin in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 11 views. For similar materials see Biological Anthropology in anthropology, evolution, sphr at George Washington University.
Reviews for Bio Anth Week 11
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/13/16
Emergence of Genus Homo • Increase in brain size and capacity for tool making • Decrease in prognathism, and post canine tooth size • Increase in body size ◦ All of these characteristics, suite of characteristics, are associated with the flexibility of homos in general \ • The first“type fossils” of Homo habilis ◦ East & South Africa (2.4-1.4 mya) ◦ Early hominin fossil localities ▪ Early Homo fossils have been found at a number of sites in East and South Africa • Why Homo habilis ◦ Found at Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania ◦ Found with flaked stone tools ▪ habilis referring to “handy man" ◦ Slightly larger brain • Early Homo ◦ Larger cranial capacity—associated with a rounder capacity as well ◦ Slight reduction in size of the cheek teeth; more parabolic dental arcade; thinner enamel ◦ Reduced prognathism, more gracile cranium ◦ BUT, similar in body size to australopiths ◦ * Associated with stone tools ◦ Australopithecus or Homo? Researchers are continuing to study and debate as to whether this species is more related to Australopithecus of Homo genus ▪ Anatomically, they are more similar to Australopithecus ▪ But classification as Homo has been classically supported by their ability to use and make stone tools (first tool-making species) ▪ Now, evidence that other non-Homo species may have used tools ▪ Is Australopithecus habilis a more accurate classification? ◦ One species or two? ▪ H. habilis ▪ 2.4-1.4 mya ▪ absolutely smaller brain size, 612 cc ▪ Broader upper-face than midface ▪ Smaller molars ▪ Less robust mandible ▪ More australopith-like limb proportions ▪ H. rudolfensis ▪ 2.4-1.6 mya ▪ Absolutely larger brain size, 775 cc ▪ Australopith-like broad midface ▪ Relatively larger molar teeth ▪ Well-developed mandible for chewing muscles ◦ Oldowan Tool Industry ▪ Early Stone Age/Lower Paleolithic; 2.6 mya-200 Ka) ▪ Cores: lumps of stone from which pieces are removed ▪ Flakes: small fragments removed from cores ▪ Hammerstones: rounded stone used to remove flakes ▪ What were they used for? ▪ Access the carcasses of animals to obtain meat ▪ Break bones to obtain marrow ▪ Secondary uses ▪ Plant processing (USOs) ▪ Woodworking ◦ Other Early Evidence of Tool Use? ▪ Swartkrans, South Africa (1.8-1 mya) ▪ Digging tools made of bone and horn cores ▪ USOs? ▪ Termites ▪ Evidence ofr selectivity ▪ Patanthropus or Homo? ▪ Bouri, Ethipia (~2.5 mya) ▪ Percussion & cutmarks on bone ▪ No tools found ▪ Australopithecus garhi ◦ Earliest Evidence of Tool Use? ▪ Dikika, Ethiopia (3.39 mya) ▪ Cutmarked bones ▪ Flesh removal? ▪ Marrow access? ▪ Not found in association with hominids or tools ▪ But, provides evidence for stone tool assisted meat consumption before Homo ◦ How “human” were the first tool makers? ▪ Shared with chimps ▪ Nut cracking ▪ Stone tool use ▪ Ston transport (<2km) ▪ Stone selectivity ▪ Small game hunting ▪ Unique Hominin Traits ▪ Stone transport >10km ▪ Stone tool manufacture ▪ Using tools to make tools (woodworking) ▪ Plant processing (USOs) ▪ Large game acquisition, carcass processing ◦ Earlier hominins may have used tools that do not have any trace in the fossil record —> wood or other organic materials ◦ Hunters or Scavengers? ▪ Hominids probably practiced both hunting and scavenging ▪ Opportunistic omnivores—incorporating a variety of plant foods, insects, and meat • Homo naledi ◦ South Africa—Age Unknown ◦ Homo Features ▪ Similar in body size to a small modern human ▪ Humanesque Skull ▪ The general shape of the skull is advanced, though the branches is less than half of a modern human's ▪ Versatile Hands ▪ palms, wrists, and thumbs are humanlike, suggesting tool use ▪ Long Legs ▪ leg bones are long and slender and have the strong muscle attachments characteristics of a modern bipedal gait ▪ Humanlike feet ▪ except for the slightly curved toes feet are nearly indistinguishable from ours with arches that suggest an efficient long-distance stride ◦ Australopithecine features ▪ Primitive shoulders ▪ positioned in a way that would have helped with climbing and hanging ▪ Flared pelvis ▪ Curved fingers
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'