Evolutionary Anthropology最新文献

While human adaptability is regarded as a classical topic in anthropology, recent work provides new insight into metabolic adaptations to cold climates and the role of phenotypic plasticity in human evolution. A growing body of literature demonstrates that adults retain brown adipose tissue (BAT) which may play a role in non-shivering thermogenesis. In this narrative review, we apply the timescales of adaptation framework in order to explore the adaptive significance of human BAT. Human variation in BAT is shaped by multiple adaptive modes (i.e., allostasis, acclimatization, developmental adaptation, epigenetic inheritance, and genetic adaptation), and together the adaptive modes act as an integrated system. We hypothesize that plasticity in BAT facilitated the successful expansion of human populations into circumpolar regions, allowing for selection of genetic adaptations to cold climates to take place. Future research rooted in human energetics and biocultural perspectives is essential for understanding BAT's adaptive and health significance.

In 1963, Niko Tinbergen published his foundational manuscript identifying the four questions we ask in animal behavior—how does the behavior emerge across the lifespan (development); how does it work (mechanism); how and why did it evolve (evolution); and why is it adaptive (function). Tinbergen clarified that these ‘levels of analysis’ are complementary, not competing, thereby avoiding many fruitless scientific debates. However, the relationships among the four levels was never established. Here, we propose ‘leveling’ Tinbergen's questions to a single temporal timescale divided into causes (encompassing mechanism, development, and evolution) and consequences (encompassing function). Scientific advances now seamlessly link evolution, development, and mechanism into a continuum of ‘causes’. The cause–consequence distinction separates the processes that precede (and lead to) a behavior, from the processes that come after (and result from) a behavior. Even for past behaviors, the functional outcomes are (historical) consequences of the causes that preceded them.

Recent developments in the field of palaeoanthropology necessitate the suppression of two hominin taxa and the introduction of a new species of hominins to help resolve the current nebulous state of Middle Pleistocene (Chibanian) hominin taxonomy. In particular, the poorly defined and variably understood hominin taxa Homo heidelbergensis (both sensu stricto and sensu lato) and Homo rhodesiensis need to be abandoned as they fail to reflect the full range of hominin variability in the Middle Pleistocene. Instead, we propose: (1) introduction of a new taxon, Homo bodoensis sp. nov., as an early Middle Pleistocene ancestor of the Homo sapiens lineage, with a pan-African distribution that extends into the eastern Mediterranean (Southeast Europe and the Levant); (2) that many of the fossils from Western Europe (e.g. Sima de los Huesos) currently assigned to H. heidelbergensis s.s. be reassigned to Homo neanderthalensis to reflect the early appearance of Neanderthal derived traits in the Middle Pleistocene in the region; and (3) that the Middle Pleistocene Asian fossils, particularly from China, likely represent a different lineage altogether.

The age of the earliest recovered fossil evidence of a hominin taxon is all too often equated with that taxon's origination. However, the earliest known fossil record nearly always postdates, sometimes by a substantial period of time, the true origination of a taxon. Here we evaluate the first appearance records of the earliest potential hominins (Sahelanthropus, Ardipithecus, Orrorin), as well as of the genera Australopithecus, Homo, and Paranthropus, to illustrate the considerable uncertainty regarding the actual timing of origin of these taxa. By placing confidence intervals on the first appearance records of early hominin taxa, we can better evaluate patterns of hominin diversity, turnover, and potential correlations with climatic and environmental changes.

Grit is implicated in several biological phenomena—it wears teeth, it fractures teeth, it drives tooth evolution, it elicits complex manual manipulations—any one of which could be described as a central topic in evolutionary anthropology. But what is grit? We hardly know because we tend to privilege the consequences of grit (it is abrasive) over its formal features, all but ignoring crucial variables such as mineral composition, material properties, and particle geometry (size, angularity), not to mention natural variation in the habitats of primates and their food surfaces. Few topics have animated so much debate and invited such cool indifference at the same time. Our goal here is to shine a light on grit, to put a philosophical lens on the nature of our discourse, and to call attention to large empirical voids that should be filled and folded into our understanding of primate natural history and evolution.