Evolutionary Anthropology最新文献

The cultural reproduction of lithic technology, long an implicit assumption of archaeological theories, has garnered increasing attention over the past decades. Major debates ranging from the origins of the human culture capacity to the interpretation of spatiotemporal patterning now make explicit reference to social learning mechanisms and cultural evolutionary dynamics. This burgeoning literature has produced important insights and methodological innovations. However, this rapid growth has sometimes led to confusion and controversy due to an under-examination of underlying theoretical and methodological assumptions. The time is thus ripe for a critical assessment of progress in the study of the cultural reproduction of lithic technology. Here we review recent work addressing the evolutionary origins of human culture and the meaning of artifact variation at both intrasite and intersite levels. We propose that further progress will require a more extended and context-specific evolutionary approach to address the complexity of real-world cultural reproduction.

Hominin footprints have not traditionally played prominent roles in paleoanthropological studies, aside from the famous 3.66 Ma footprints discovered at Laetoli, Tanzania in the late 1970s. This contrasts with the importance of trace fossils (ichnology) in the broader field of paleontology. Lack of attention to hominin footprints can probably be explained by perceptions that these are exceptionally rare and “curiosities” rather than sources of data that yield insights on par with skeletal fossils or artifacts. In recent years, however, discoveries of hominin footprints have surged in frequency, shining important new light on anatomy, locomotion, behaviors, and environments from a wide variety of times and places. Here, we discuss why these data are often overlooked and consider whether they are as “rare” as previously assumed. We review new ways footprint data are being used to address questions about hominin paleobiology, and we outline key opportunities for future research in hominin ichnology.

This paper investigates how reticulate evolution contributes to a better understanding of human sociocultural evolution in general, and community formation in particular. Reticulate evolution is evolution as it occurs by means of symbiosis, symbiogenesis, lateral gene transfer, infective heredity, and hybridization. From these mechanisms and processes, we mainly zoom in on symbiosis and we investigate how it underlies the rise of (1) human, plant, animal, and machine interactions typical of agriculture, animal husbandry, farming, and industrialization; (2) diet-microbiome relationships; and (3) host-virome and other pathogen interactions that underlie human health and disease. We demonstrate that reticulate evolution necessitates an understanding of behavioral and cultural evolution at a community level, where reticulate causal processes underlie the rise of synergistic organizational traits.

Why is culture the way it is? Here I argue that a major force shaping culture is subjective (cultural) selection, or the selective retention of cultural variants that people subjectively perceive as satisfying their goals. I show that people evaluate behaviors and beliefs according to how useful they are, especially for achieving goals. As they adopt and pass on those variants that seem best, they iteratively craft culture into increasingly effective-seeming forms. I argue that this process drives the development of many cumulatively complex cultural products, including effective technology, magic and ritual, aesthetic traditions, and institutions. I show that it can explain cultural dependencies, such as how certain beliefs create corresponding new practices, and I outline how it interacts with other cultural evolutionary processes. Cultural practices everywhere, from spears to shamanism, develop because people subjectively evaluate them to be effective means of satisfying regular goals.

Parallel evolution—where different populations evolve similar traits in response to similar environments—has been a topic of growing interest to biologists and biological anthropologists for decades. Parallel evolution occurs in human populations thanks to myriad biological and cultural mechanisms that permit humans to survive and thrive in diverse environments worldwide. Because humans shape and are shaped by their environments, biocultural approaches that emphasize the interconnections between biology and culture are key to understanding parallel evolution in human populations as well as the nuances of human biological variation and adaptation. In this review, we discuss how biocultural theory has been and can be applied to studies of parallel evolution and adaptation more broadly. We illustrate this through four examples of parallel evolution in humans: malaria resistance, lactase persistence, cold tolerance, and high-altitude adaptation.

In our original paper, we proposed a new species, Homo bodoensis, to replace the problematical taxa Homo heidelbergensis and Homo rhodesiensis, with the goal of streamlining communication about human evolution in the Chibanian. We received two independent responses. Given their substantial overlap, we provide one combined reply. In this response: (1) we are encouraged that the primary proposal in our paper, to discontinue the use of H. heidelbergensis (as a junior synonym to Homo neanderthalensis) due to its' nomenclatural problems, is acknowledged. (2) we provide additional clarification about the rules governing taxonomic nomenclature as outlined by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and join the growing calls for a revision to these rules. (3) we discuss further why H. rhodesiensis should be abandoned, particularly in light of the current sensitivity to using culturally inappropriate names. We conclude that H. bodoensis is a better solution than the proposed alternatives.