14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Modern Human versus Neandertal Evolutionary Distinctiveness

      Current Anthropology
      University of Chicago Press

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references80

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Body mass and encephalization in Pleistocene Homo.

          Many dramatic changes in morphology within the genus Homo have occurred over the past 2 million years or more, including large increases in absolute brain size and decreases in postcanine dental size and skeletal robusticity. Body mass, as the 'size' variable against which other morphological features are usually judged, has been important for assessing these changes. Yet past body mass estimates for Pleistocene Homo have varied greatly, sometimes by as much as 50% for the same individuals. Here we show that two independent methods of body-mass estimation yield concordant results when applied to Pleistocene Homo specimens. On the basis of an analysis of 163 individuals, body mass in Pleistocene Homo averaged significantly (about 10%) larger than a representative sample of living humans. Relative to body mass, brain mass in late archaic H. sapiens (Neanderthals) was slightly smaller than in early 'anatomically modern' humans, but the major increase in encephalization within Homo occurred earlier during the Middle Pleistocene (600-150 thousand years before present (kyr BP)), preceded by a long period of stasis extending through the Early Pleistocene (1,800 kyr BP).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Who's afraid of the big bad Wolff?: "Wolff's law" and bone functional adaptation.

            "Wolff's law" is a concept that has sometimes been misrepresented, and frequently misunderstood, in the anthropological literature. Although it was originally formulated in a strict mathematical sense that has since been discredited, the more general concept of "bone functional adaptation" to mechanical loading (a designation that should probably replace "Wolff's law") is supported by much experimental and observational data. Objections raised to earlier studies of bone functional adaptation have largely been addressed by more recent and better-controlled studies. While the bone morphological response to mechanical strains is reduced in adults relative to juveniles, claims that adult morphology reflects only juvenile loadings are greatly exaggerated. Similarly, while there are important genetic influences on bone development and on the nature of bone's response to mechanical loading, variations in loadings themselves are equally if not more important in determining variations in morphology, especially in comparisons between closely related individuals or species. The correspondence between bone strain patterns and bone structure is variable, depending on skeletal location and the general mechanical environment (e.g., distal vs. proximal limb elements, cursorial vs. noncursorial animals), so that mechanical/behavioral inferences based on structure alone should be limited to corresponding skeletal regions and animals with similar basic mechanical designs. Within such comparisons, traditional geometric parameters (such as second moments of area and section moduli) still give the best available estimates of in vivo mechanical competence. Thus, when employed with appropriate caution, these features may be used to reconstruct mechanical loadings and behavioral differences within and between past populations. Copyright 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The Human Genus

              B. Wood (1999)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Current Anthropology
                Current Anthropology
                University of Chicago Press
                0011-3204
                1537-5382
                August 2006
                August 2006
                : 47
                : 4
                : 597-620
                Article
                10.1086/504165
                a7df3ecf-d668-47d2-9ad1-830ecac11979
                © 2006
                Product
                Self URI (article page): http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/504165

                Comments

                Comment on this article