Evolution of life history and behavior in Hominidae: Towards phylogenetic reconstruction of the chimpanzee–human last common ancestor

Duda, Pavel; Zrzavý, Jan

doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.07.009

Cited by 69 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 214 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Parsimony and the comparative approach suggest that hominins were engaged in tool use behaviours prior to the appearance of the first stone tools, with this most likely being linked to the extraction and processing of food resources Marchant and McGrew, 2005;Hernandez-Aguillar et al, 2007;Duda and Zrzavý, 2013). As such, the first stone tool use is also likely to have been during the acquisition and processing of food resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating interrelationships between Lower Palaeolithic stone tool effectiveness and tool user biometric variation: implications for technological and evolutionary changes

Key

Lycett

2016

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

with cutting efficiency using both flakes and handaxes over extended periods of use and in multiple types of cutting task. Results indicate that (1) both handaxe and flake cutting efficiency is significantly related with biometric variation of individual tool-users, (2) relationships between biometric parameters and efficiency are consistent across extended durations but vary dependent upon task-type conditions, (3) manipulative strength is the most significant biometric trait in terms of predicting flake efficiency, while (4) hand size is the strongest predictor of handaxe cutting efficiency. These results demonstrate the long-term impact that stone tool use likely had on the evolution of hominin biometric variation during the Lower Palaeolithic, while also highlighting the variable influence of different tool use contexts.Most notably, results indicate that the onset of the Acheulean may have been dependent, a priori, upon hand dimensions that are close to the modern human range, and that prior to the appearance of this anatomy, handaxe use would have been an impractical (i.e. inefficient) tool use behaviour compared to the use of flakes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating interrelationships between Lower Palaeolithic stone tool effectiveness and tool user biometric variation: implications for technological and evolutionary changes

Key

Lycett

2016

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gorillas are interesting species for studies of social organization because they represent an important model for understanding the evolution of human behaviour [29–32]. Gorillas are also interesting because both sexes may disperse or remain philopatric, thereby playing a direct role in shaping their group compositions [33–35].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mothers may shape the variations in social organization among gorillas

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When mothers continue to support their offspring beyond infancy, they can influence the fitness of those offspring, the strength of social relationships within their groups, and the life-history traits of their species. Using up to 30 years of demographic data from 58 groups of gorillas in two study sites, this study extends such findings by showing that mothers may also contribute to differences in social organization between closely related species. Female mountain gorillas remained with their sons for significantly longer than western gorillas, which may explain why male philopatry and multimale groups are more common among mountain gorillas. The presence of the putative father and other familiar males did not vary significantly between species, and we found only limited support for the socio-ecological theory that the distribution of adult males is influenced by the distribution of females. Within each gorilla species, variations in those distributions may also reflect the different stages in the typical life cycle of a group. Collectively, our results highlight the potentially far-reaching consequences of maternal support that extends beyond infancy, and they illustrate the opportunity to incorporate additional factors into phylogenetic analyses of variations in social organization, including studies of human evolution.

show abstract

“…Gorillas, for example, do not engage in vertebrate predation, and bonobos and chimpanzees differ in this activity as well (Hohmann and Fruth 2008). Pertinent to the current discussion, some early hominid anatomical features that do resemble those of apes are more similar to Gorilla than to Pan (Haile-Selassie et al 2010; see also Duda and Zrzavý 2013), but the main point is that genetic relationships, at least in hominoids, tell us surprisingly little about broad ecological or behavioral characters.…”

Section: The Chimpanzee Referential Model For Diet In the Last Commonmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…As with any other aspect of early hominid ecology or behavior, bonobo and/or chimpanzee feeding behavior should not be construed as a default proxy for those of the Pan - Homo LCA or early hominids (Latimer et al 1981; Cachel 2006; Sayers and Lovejoy 2008; Suwa et al 2009; Duda and Zrzavý 2013). Hominid anatomy and physiology may impose considerably different constraints on foraging strategy than those that limit these behaviors in chimpanzees.…”

Section: Early Hominids: the Fossil And Chemical Evidence Of General mentioning

confidence: 99%

Blood, Bulbs, and Bunodonts: On Evolutionary Ecology and the Diets ofArdipithecus,Australopithecus, and EarlyHomo

Sayers¹,

Lovejoy²

2014

The Quarterly Review of Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beginning with Darwin, some have argued that predation on other vertebrates dates to the earliest stages of hominid evolution, and can explain many uniquely human anatomical and behavioral characters. Other recent workers have focused instead on scavenging, or particular plant foods. Foraging theory suggests that inclusion of any food is influenced by its profitability and distribution within the consumer’s habitat. The morphology and likely cognitive abilities of Ardipithecus, Australopithecus, and early Homo suggest that while hunting and scavenging occurred, their profitability generally would have been considerably lower than in extant primates and/or modern human hunter-gatherers. On the other hand, early hominid diet modelers should not focus solely on plant foods, as this overlooks standard functional interpretations of the early hominid dentition, their remarkable demographic success, and the wide range of available food types within their likely day ranges. Any dietary model focusing too narrowly on any one food type or foraging strategy must be viewed with caution. We argue that early hominid diet can best be elucidated by consideration of their entire habitat-specific resource base, and by quantifying the potential profitability and abundance of likely available foods.

show abstract

Evolution of life history and behavior in Hominidae: Towards phylogenetic reconstruction of the chimpanzee–human last common ancestor

Cited by 69 publications

References 214 publications

Investigating interrelationships between Lower Palaeolithic stone tool effectiveness and tool user biometric variation: implications for technological and evolutionary changes

Investigating interrelationships between Lower Palaeolithic stone tool effectiveness and tool user biometric variation: implications for technological and evolutionary changes

Mothers may shape the variations in social organization among gorillas

Blood, Bulbs, and Bunodonts: On Evolutionary Ecology and the Diets ofArdipithecus,Australopithecus, and EarlyHomo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About