Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SACC-L] Student Question

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Petto
    And furthermore, if we are correct about the fact that the push to bipedalism came as climate change transformed the landscape in eastern and southern Africa
    Message 1 of 5 , Nov 10, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      And furthermore, if we are correct about the fact that the push to
      bipedalism came as climate change transformed the landscape in eastern
      and southern Africa ... squeezing some ape descendants into less and
      less forested biomes, then those orthograde striders would tend to be
      found in those regions that has undergone those environmental
      transformations. The other apes seem to have retreated with the forest.

      So, to the extent that early hominins were adapting to life in a less
      heavily forested environment, one would expect to find their remains in
      those places that were less heavily forested at the time.

      It is interesting to note that some of the really early candidates for
      hominin ancestors that are found earlier (closer to 6 mya) are both more
      "chimpy" in their form and most likely to be associated with more
      heavily forested environments than we typically see with, for example,
      Australopithecus. They are also less clearly bipedal (remains are
      awfully fragmentary and some of the inferences quite hopeful and likely
      to be true under only the most fortuitous circumstances), even though
      there are other hints in the remains that suggest that some of the
      derived features associated with hominins are present.

      So, it is a combination of the ancient distribution, taphonomy at death
      and burial, and current conditions (including funding preferences) for
      discovery and recovery.

      So, in one sense we ARE finding most of the earliest hominin fossils in
      east and south Africa because that is where we are looking. It is like
      looking in the North American badlands for dinosaurs: you are bound to
      find them. But there is also the fact that all the research and recovery
      in these regions have indicated to us what kinds of ancient habitats
      were attractive to these ancestors and where examples of those might be
      found and be relatively accessible (as Bob pointed out).

      Anj

      On 11/10/2011 14:58, Bob Muckle wrote:
      >
      > Besides the probability of poorer preservation, also consider that
      > there would likely be far less localities with sediments laid down
      > millions of years ago in West Africa, now being exposed. Most of the
      > well-known fossil localities in East Africa are within the Great Rift
      > Valley, where erosion keep exposing fossils with relatively little
      > effort. Another reason is that people tend to look where people have
      > found fossils before, for the simple reason that there is a better
      > probability of finding things. And what funding agency would want to
      > provide funds for someone looking in West Africa when the chance of
      > success is almost non-existent. The good news is that although
      > researchers still tend to flock to the well-known localities of
      > Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and South Africa, in the last few decades
      > some researchers have been able to get funding to look in others areas
      > such as Chad, which has produced important discoveries. Also, there is
      > likely to be increasing competi tion for funding from those
      > researchers now looking for early humans (ie. pre- H. erectus) outside
      > of Africa.
      >
      > Bob
      >
      > >>> Nikki Ives <ikkinh@... <mailto:ikkinh%40yahoo.com>>
      > 11/10/2011 12:05 PM >>>
      > Hi All -
      >
      > A student in my physical anthropology class asked me this question and
      > I'm not quite sure of the answer. Can anyone out there help me out?
      >
      > Student question: I was just curious to know why there aren't any
      > documented fossil finds
      > from West Africa. Unless I missed it in the textbook, it seems that
      > majority of the African discoveries are from the North, East and South.
      > Is there any theory or hypothesis surrounding this?
      >
      > Thanks,
      >
      > Nikki
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >

      --

      -----------------------------
      Andrew J Petto, PhD
      Senior Lecturer
      Department of Biological Sciences
      University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
      PO Box 413
      Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
      CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
      Telephone: 414-229-6784
      FAX: 414-229-3926
      https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm

      *************
      Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
      https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
      *************



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Nikki Ives
      Thanks, Bob!  Now I ll sound like I m really smart and totally know what what I m talking about to my students :-) Nikki ... increasing competition for
      Message 2 of 5 , Nov 11, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, Bob!  Now I'll sound like I'm really smart and totally know what what I'm talking about to my students :-)

        Nikki




        >________________________________
        >From: Bob Muckle <bmuckle@...>
        >To: "SACC-L@yahoogroups.com" <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com>
        >Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 3:58 PM
        >Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Student Question
        >
        >

        >Besides the probability of poorer preservation, also consider that there would likely be far less localities with sediments laid down millions of years ago in West Africa, now being exposed. Most of the well-known fossil localities in East Africa are within the Great Rift Valley, where erosion keep exposing fossils with relatively little effort. Another reason is that people tend to look where people have found fossils before, for the simple reason that there is a better probability of finding things. And what funding agency would want to provide funds for someone looking in West Africa when the chance of success is almost non-existent. The good news is that although researchers still tend to flock to the well-known localities of Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and South Africa, in the last few decades some researchers have been able to get funding to look in others areas such as Chad, which has produced important discoveries. Also, there is likely to be
        increasing competition for funding from those researchers now looking for early humans (ie. pre- H. erectus) outside of Africa.
        >
        >Bob
        >
        >>>> Nikki Ives <ikkinh@...> 11/10/2011 12:05 PM >>>
        >Hi All -
        >
        >A student in my physical anthropology class asked me this question and I'm not quite sure of the answer. Can anyone out there help me out?
        >
        >Student question: I was just curious to know why there aren't any documented fossil finds
        >from West Africa. Unless I missed it in the textbook, it seems that
        >majority of the African discoveries are from the North, East and South.
        >Is there any theory or hypothesis surrounding this?
        >
        >Thanks,
        >
        >Nikki
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.