Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"A unique, beautifully illustrated exploration of our fascination with our closest primate relatives, and the development of primatology as a discipline. This insightful work is a compact but wide-ranging survey of humankind's relationship to the great apes (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans), from antiquity to the present. Replete with fascinating historical details and anecdotes, it traces twists and turns in our construction of primate knowledge over five hundred years. Chris Herzfeld outlines the development of primatology and its key players and events, including well-known long-term field studies, notably the pioneering work by women such as Jane Goodall, Dian Fossey, and Birutâe Galdikas. Herzfeld seeks to heighten our understanding of great apes and the many ways they are like us. The reader will encounter apes living in human families, painting apes, apes who use American Sign Language, and chimpanzees who travelled in space. A philosopher and historian specializing in primatology, Herzfeld offers thought-provoking insights about our perceptions of apes, as well as the boundary between \"human\" and \"ape\" and what it means to be either.\" -- Publisher's description

Ten thousands of bone fragments were recovered from the Ma’anshan Paleolithic site, of which 4358 pieces can be identified to skeletal elements or species. In this research, the bone assemblages are quantified based on elements of MNI, MNE, and MAU. Then bone surface modifications and skeletal element profiles of the bone assemblages are studied to understand shlepping behaviors and reveal the technique of disarticulating and defleshing the animals’ bodies, etc. Based on the analyses of bone assemblages and the comparative study with the ethnoarchaeological as well as experimental data, it is assumed that later hominids at the site made fuller use of the game animals than the earlier hominids. Incorporating the lines of evidence from chronological dating, paleoenvironment, and polished bone tools between the two cultural layers, here we propose three hypotheses suggesting that the changes of environment, the migrations of the hominids from the North, or the demographic pulses may cause such a behavioral difference. However, it is yet to be determined which hypothesis can better explain the changes.

This work examines the cognitive capacity of great apes in order to better understand early man and the importance of memory in the evolutionary process. It synthesizes research from comparative cognition, neuroscience, primatology as well as lithic archaeology, reviewing findings on the cognitive ability of great apes to recognize the physical properties of an object and then determine the most effective way in which to manipulate it as a tool to achieve a specific goal. The authors argue that apes (Hominoidea) lack the human cognitive ability of imagining how to blend reality, which requires drawing on memory in order to envisage alternative future situations, and thereby modifying behavior determined by procedural memory.

Evidence for carcass access times and levels of early hominid mobility is synthesized using studies of carnivore ethology and theories of interspecific competition to arrive at tentative conclusions about the organization of Plio-Pleistocene hominid foraging groups. The model presented suggests that group foraging tactics, in combination with high mobility, are central to successful confrontational scavenging (interference competition), whereas individual foraging tactics and high mobility are central to successful nonconfrontational scavenging (exploitative competition). In contrast, group or individual foraging tactics and low mobility characterize the acquisition of fresh carcasses in low-competition contexts. Individual foraging tactics and low mobility are employed in response to extreme competition over marginal resources. Preliminary tests with data from Bed I Olduvai Gorge and Koobi Fora suggest that Plio-Pleistocene hominids, like other large-bodied predators, employed flexible foraging tactics involving changes in group size and levels of mobility to gain access to carcasses in both low- and high-competition contexts.

The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Europe witnessed the replacement and partial absorption of local Neanderthal populations by Homo sapiens populations of African origin 1 . However, this process probably varied across regions and its details remain largely unknown. In particular, the duration of chronological overlap between the two groups is much debated, as are the implications of this overlap for the nature of the biological and cultural interactions between Neanderthals and H. sapiens . Here we report the discovery and direct dating of human remains found in association with Initial Upper Palaeolithic artefacts 2 , from excavations at Bacho Kiro Cave (Bulgaria). Morphological analysis of a tooth and mitochondrial DNA from several hominin bone fragments, identified through proteomic screening, assign these finds to H. sapiens and link the expansion of Initial Upper Palaeolithic technologies with the spread of H. sapiens into the mid-latitudes of Eurasia before 45 thousand years ago 3 . The excavations yielded a wealth of bone artefacts, including pendants manufactured from cave bear teeth that are reminiscent of those later produced by the last Neanderthals of western Europe 4 – 6 . These finds are consistent with models based on the arrival of multiple waves of H. sapiens into Europe coming into contact with declining Neanderthal populations 7 , 8 . Direct dates for human remains found in association with Initial Upper Palaeolithic artefacts at Bacho Kiro Cave (Bulgaria) demonstrate the presence of Homo sapiens in the mid-latitudes of Europe before 45 thousand years ago.

Present-day hunter-gatherers (HGs) live in multilevel social groups essential to sustain a population structure characterized by limited levels of within-band relatedness and inbreeding. When these wider social networks evolved among HGs is unknown. To investigate whether the contemporary HG strategy was already present in the Upper Paleolithic, we used complete genome sequences from Sunghir, a site dated to ~34,000 years before the present, containing multiple anatomically modern human individuals. We show that individuals at Sunghir derive from a population of small effective size, with limited kinship and levels of inbreeding similar to HG populations. Our findings suggest that Upper Paleolithic social organization was similar to that of living HGs, with limited relatedness within residential groups embedded in a larger mating network.

The genus Homo had considerably smaller cheek teeth, chewing muscles and jaws than earlier hominins; here, the introduction of raw but processed meat, from which energy could more easily be extracted, is shown to have possibly been responsible for this change. Food processing in the Palaeolithic era The arrival of Homo erectus almost two million years ago introduced hominins with dramatically smaller teeth than anything that went before, implying a reduced capacity for processing the amount of food required to sustain a large animal. It is often claimed that the development of cooking allowed for tooth reduction, but cooking didn't become common until about 500,000 years ago. What happened in the interim? Katherine Zink and Daniel Lieberman tested the effects of eating meat — and of simple food preparation techniques — on masticatory effort and oral fracture efficiency. Their findings suggest that the introduction of raw yet eminently chewable meat could have made the difference — together with the use of stone tools to pound the less digestible but starch-rich storable plant materials. The origins of the genus Homo are murky, but by H. erectus , bigger brains and bodies had evolved that, along with larger foraging ranges, would have increased the daily energetic requirements of hominins 1 , 2 . Yet H. erectus differs from earlier hominins in having relatively smaller teeth, reduced chewing muscles, weaker maximum bite force capabilities, and a relatively smaller gut 3 , 4 , 5 . This paradoxical combination of increased energy demands along with decreased masticatory and digestive capacities is hypothesized to have been made possible by adding meat to the diet 6 , 7 , 8 , by mechanically processing food using stone tools 7 , 9 , 10 , or by cooking 11 , 12 . Cooking, however, was apparently uncommon until 500,000 years ago 13 , 14 , and the effects of carnivory and Palaeolithic processing techniques on mastication are unknown. Here we report experiments that tested how Lower Palaeolithic processing technologies affect chewing force production and efficacy in humans consuming meat and underground storage organs (USOs). We find that if meat comprised one-third of the diet, the number of chewing cycles per year would have declined by nearly 2 million (a 13% reduction) and total masticatory force required would have declined by 15%. Furthermore, by simply slicing meat and pounding USOs, hominins would have improved their ability to chew meat into smaller particles by 41%, reduced the number of chews per year by another 5%, and decreased masticatory force requirements by an additional 12%. Although cooking has important benefits, it appears that selection for smaller masticatory features in Homo would have been initially made possible by the combination of using stone tools and eating meat.