2. Finding our place

2019 ◽  
pp. 7-23
Author(s):  
Bernard Wood
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Biology ◽  
Human Evolution ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Origins ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common

When did the process of using reason to try and understand human origins begin, and how did it develop? When was the scientific method first applied to the study of human evolution? ‘Finding our place’ begins by reviewing the history of how first philosophers and then scientists came to realize that modern humans are part of the natural world. It then explains why, using advances in molecular biology, scientists think chimpanzees and bonobos are more closely related to modern humans than they are to gorillas, and why they think the common ancestor of the chimpanzee/bonobo and modern human clades lived between six and eight million years ago.

Alternative models of Pleistocene biocultural evolution: a response to Foley

Antiquity ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 63 (238) ◽  
pp. 153-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. A. Clark
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Human Origins ◽  
Single Source ◽  
Recent Discussion ◽  
Garden Of Eden ◽  
Biocultural Evolution ◽  
History Of ◽  
Origins Research

Human origins research has had a long history of vigorous debate. Recent discussion has been no exception, the more so perhaps as the strands of evidence — anthropological, archaeological, and now molecular-biological — are sufficiently diverse that not many can be well placed to deal fairly with them all. Here issue is taken with Foley's cladistic view of human evolution, and with the ‘Garden of Eden’ hypothesis of a single source in Africa for modern human populations.

scholarly journals The evolutionary history of human spindle genes includes back-and-forth gene flow with Neandertals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Peyrégne ◽  
Janet Kelso ◽  
Benjamin Marco Peter ◽  
Svante Pääbo
Keyword(s):  
Gene Flow ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Ancestral Gene ◽  
Cytoskeletal Structure ◽  
Spindle Apparatus ◽  
History Of ◽  
Segregation Of Chromosomes

Proteins associated with the spindle apparatus, a cytoskeletal structure that ensures the proper segregation of chromosomes during cell division, experienced an unusual number of amino acid substitutions in modern humans after the split from the ancestors of Neandertals and Denisovans. Here, we analyze the history of these substitutions and show that some of the genes in which they occur may have been targets of positive selection. We also find that the two changes in the kinetochore scaffold 1 (KNL1) protein, previously believed to be specific to modern humans, were present in some Neandertals. We show that the KNL1 gene of these Neandertals shared a common ancestor with present-day Africans about 200,000 years ago due to gene flow from the ancestors (or relatives) of modern humans into Neandertals. Subsequently, some non-Africans inherited this modern human-like gene variant from Neandertals, but none inherited the ancestral gene variants. These results add to the growing evidence of early contacts between modern humans and archaic groups in Eurasia and illustrate the intricate relationships among these groups.

scholarly journals The Most Recent Common Ancestor of Modern Humans was Born in Eurasia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
vicente cabrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
Genome Sequencing ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Recent Common Ancestor ◽  
Whole Genome ◽  
African Origin ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Most Recent Common Ancestor ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Vision

Ancient DNA has given a new vision to the recent history of human evolution. However, by always relying on the information provided by whole genome sequencing, some relevant relationships between modern humans and its archaic relatives have been misinterpreted by hybridization and recombination causes. In contrast, the congruent phylogeny, obtained from non-recombinant uniparental markers, indicates that humans and Neanderthals are sister subspecies, and that the most recent common ancestor of modern humans was not of African origin but Eurasian.

Has Australia backdated the Human Revolution?

Antiquity ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 73 (282) ◽  
pp. 876-879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Stringer
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Origins ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Modern Human Origins ◽  
South Wales

Australia has usually played a supporting role in the story of human evolution — regarded as a place at the edge of the inhabited world where modern humans arrived relatively late and then remained largely isolated from subsequent developments. However, new dates for a human burial at Mungo, New South Wales (Thorne et al. 1999) may not only force revision of views about the peopling of Australia, but also have a wider impact on ideas about modern human origins.

scholarly journals Something old, something borrowed: Admixture and adaptation in human evolution

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Dannemann ◽  
Fernando Racimo
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
Ancient Dna ◽  
Gene Pool ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Genetic Material ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Functional Assays ◽  
Over Time

Almost a decade ago, the sequencing of ancient DNA from archaic humans - Neanderthals and Denisovans - revealed that modern and archaic humans interbred at least twice during the Pleistocene. The field of human paleogenomics has now turned its attention towards understanding the nature of this genetic legacy in the gene pool of present-day humans. What exactly did modern humans obtain from interbreeding with Neanderthals and Denisovans? Were introgressed genetic material beneficial, neutral or maladaptive? Can differences in phenotypes among present-day human populations be explained by archaic human introgression? These questions are of prime importance for our understanding of recent human evolution, but will require careful computational modeling and extensive functional assays before they can be answered in full. Here, we review the recent literature characterizing introgressed DNA and the likely biological consequences for their modern human carriers. We focus particularly on archaic human haplotypes that were beneficial to modern humans as they expanded across the globe, and on ways to understand how populations harboring these haplotypes evolved over time.

scholarly journals Something old, something borrowed: Admixture and adaptation in human evolution

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Dannemann ◽  
Fernando Racimo
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
Ancient Dna ◽  
Gene Pool ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Genetic Material ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Functional Assays ◽  
Over Time

Almost a decade ago, the sequencing of ancient DNA from archaic humans - Neanderthals and Denisovans - revealed that modern and archaic humans interbred at least twice during the Pleistocene. The field of human paleogenomics has now turned its attention towards understanding the nature of this genetic legacy in the gene pool of present-day humans. What exactly did modern humans obtain from interbreeding with Neanderthals and Denisovans? Were introgressed genetic material beneficial, neutral or maladaptive? Can differences in phenotypes among present-day human populations be explained by archaic human introgression? These questions are of prime importance for our understanding of recent human evolution, but will require careful computational modeling and extensive functional assays before they can be answered in full. Here, we review the recent literature characterizing introgressed DNA and the likely biological consequences for their modern human carriers. We focus particularly on archaic human haplotypes that were beneficial to modern humans as they expanded across the globe, and on ways to understand how populations harboring these haplotypes evolved over time.

scholarly journals TEACHING THE NATURE OF SCIENCE THROUGH STORYTELLING: SOME EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM A GRADE 9 CLASSROOM

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannis Hadzigeorgiou
Keyword(s):  
Nature Of Science ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Cultural Dimension ◽  
Creative Activity ◽  
Explicit Teaching ◽  
History Of ◽  
Understanding Of Science

The instructional question of how to teach ideas about the nature of science effectively has been a challenge, but, according to the literature, explicit teaching appears to be the best way. However, the use of narratives, which incorporate actual events from the history of science, can also help illustrate the human and the larger socio-cultural context in which scientific knowledge was developed. Such context facilitates students’ understanding of science as a human endeavour, which is characterized by successes and failures as well as problems and struggles. It makes them aware of the fact that scientific knowledge is tied to human hopes, expectations, passions, and ambitions. Moreover, the use of narratives can help students understand such ideas as: scientific knowledge, while durable, is tentative and subject to revision, people of both sexes and from many countries have contributed to the development of science, science is a creative activity, science has a socio-cultural dimension, and also that there is not a standard scientific method, as scientists use a variety of approaches to explain the natural world. A recent empirical study provides evidence that such ideas can indeed be understood by 9th graders.

scholarly journals The life history of Ardipithecus ramidus: a heterochronic model of sexual and social maturation

2015 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Clark ◽  
Maciej Henneberg
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Reproductive Strategies ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Craniofacial Morphology ◽  
Growth Trajectories ◽  
Sexually Dimorphic ◽  
Paternal Investment ◽  
Behavioral Adaptations ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common

Abstract In this paper we analyse the ontogeny of craniofacial growth in Ardipithecus ramidus in the context of its possible social and environmental determinants. We sought to test the hypothesis that this form of early hominin evolved a specific adult craniofacial morphology via heterochronic dissociation of growth trajectories. We suggest the lack of sexual dimorphism in craniofacial morphology provides evidence for a suite of adult behavioral adaptations, and consequently an ontogeny, unlike any other species of extant ape. The lack of sexually dimorphic craniofacial morphology suggests A. ramidus males adopted reproductive strategies that did not require male on male conflict. Male investment in the maternal metabolic budget and/or paternal investment in offspring may have been reproductive strategies adopted by males. Such strategies would account for the absence of innate morphological armoury in males. Consequently, A. ramidus would have most likely had sub-adult periods of socialisation unlike that of any extant ape. We also argue that A.ramidus and chimpanzee craniofacial morphology are apomorphic, each representing a derived condition relative to that of the common ancestor, with A. ramidus developing its orthognatic condition via paedomoporhosis, and chimpanzees evolving increased prognathism via peramorphosis. In contrast we suggest cranial volume and life history trajectories may be synapomorphic traits that both species inherited and retained form a putative common ancestral condition. Our analysis also provides support for the hypothesis that an intensification of maternal care was central to the process of hominization.

scholarly journals The Role of Genetic Drift in Shaping Modern Human Cranial Evolution: A Test Using Microevolutionary Modeling

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather F. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Bone ◽  
Genetic Drift ◽  
Geographic Distance ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Neutral Evolution ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Cranial Variation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Mandibular Morphology ◽  
And Migration

The means by which various microevolutionary processes have acted in the past to produce patterns of cranial variation that characterize modern humans is not thoroughly understood. Applying a microevolutionary framework, within- and among-population variance/covariance (V/CV) structure was compared for several functional and developmental modules of the skull across a worldwide sample of modern humans. V/CV patterns in the basicranium, temporal bone, and face are proportional within and among groups, which is consistent with a hypothesis of neutral evolution; however, mandibular morphology deviated from this pattern. Degree of intergroup similarity in facial, temporal bone, and mandibular morphology is significantly correlated with geographic distance; however, much of the variance remains unexplained. These findings provide insight into the evolutionary history of modern human cranial variation by identifying signatures of genetic drift, gene flow, and migration and set the stage for inferences regarding selective pressures that early humans encountered since their initial migrations around the world.

Bridging Darwin's Origin of Species & Wegener's Origin of Continents and Oceans:

2016 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Sousa
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Teaching Strategy ◽  
Origin Of Species ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Research And Education ◽  
Evolution By Natural Selection ◽  
Biology Research

The common ancestor and evolution by natural selection, concepts introduced by Charles Darwin, constitute the central core of biology research and education. However, students generally struggle to understand these concepts and commonly form misconceptions about them. To help teachers select the most revelant portions of Darwin's work, I suggest some sentences from On the Origin of Species and briefly discuss their implications. I also suggest a teaching strategy that uses history of science and curriculum crosscutting concepts (cause and effect) that constitute the framework to explain the evolutionary history of ratites (flightless birds) as described by Darwin, starting in the Jurassic, with the breakup of Gondwanaland, as first described by Alfred Wegener in The Origin of Continents and Oceans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document